Did NY city begin a program without a curriculum and goals that would clearly indicate teacher qualifications for job placement? The authors are on the right track and they have a strong foot hold in decades, if not centuries, of the best of the brightest asking the question, "What kind of milieu should an under 5 yr old child have in a school setting?" HeadStart failed to more seriously address this question. As a result the program become more of a cultural-political one rather than an educational one. I've been in scores of HeadStart classrooms and too many teachers are more like nagging nannies, to be blunt, than well trained teachers. Teachers should first be trained, then be evaluated for minimum competency and potential to develop, and only then hired or not hired. The mayor will have to decide if he is going to be a classical idealistic do-gooder or a serious planner, one who wants to accomplish the goals of liberal minded educators while not repeating failures of the past.Like HeadStart, once a program becomes "institutionalized" it can go on infinitum without an honest regard for effectiveness. This is a great opportunity to forge a collaboration between academic resources and front line application. No ivory tower thinkers allowed;and, no political-cultural driven agenda allowed. There are some great resources in academia that understand practical application. Is the mayor's office curious enough to tap into them?
sorry Cj, your statements are ridiculous. First of all, 'stupidity' is not the issue. The issue is that states attempting to restrict voting make it hard for many people to apply for their IDs. They require documents people often don't have (like original birth certificates), or require in-person application but have limited hours of operation. Some states have closed offices, making it difficult for rural residents to get to an office. Next -- ask a college student how difficult it's becoming for them to vote. Finally, please name the whack-jobs and Marxists who are on the bench. Name names, then cite your sources as to why they are 'whack-jobs and Marxists.'
@Vandalfan: except none of those things have happened, except in your fevered imagination.Got a mangled application in the mail? go on line or pick one up at the library or post office, or call the Board of Elections to get a new one.None of your excuses explain poor turnout. The idea that eager voters are chasing down changing polling places is absolutely laughable. (My polling place has changed ONCE in 40 years, moving approximately 1/2 mile down the street.)
"Had we gone jaw to jaw with Putin over Ukraine, rather than building the case for sanctions, the world would be far messier. But in finally learning how to use the tools of his office, Obama unbound is a president primed to make his mark."Just saying stuff. Oh well.There was no caution in the "policy" towards Crimea and Ukraine, everyone knew there would be no "jaw to jaw" so why we pursued the "policy" we did still has no rational answer I have seen. The lefties harp on what the NYT ignores, fascists are big in Ukraine, Jew hating nazi loving fascists. When Putin took Crimea and then escalated in Ukraine, not doing what everyone knew would not be done also does not qualify as caution. And assuming the world is more secure because Putin is now smarting is worse than stupid.Second, who but Obama is to blame for not using the tools of his office? One thing progressives and confederate republicans have in common is their wish that Obama had used the tools of his office. His bizarre insistence on changing the culture while actually alienating allies and enemies still has no rational explanation.If Obama now does what many begged he do, great, but the obstacle he has overcome is himself, for which it takes soviet level spinning to give him extra credit. And, include in his accomplishments as a unilateral actor, the furthering of the national security state, with no defense against, but the embrace of, the growing big brothers of secret government and Wall Street.