OCTOBER 10, 2019

NEWS AND VIEWS

I’M GLAD HE’S GETTING BACK IN THE SADDLE AGAIN. THOSE HEART OPERATIONS SOUND SCARY TO ME – PUTTING A WIRE THROUGH A VEIN AND PUSHING IT THROUGH TO THE HEART. THOSE WHO HAVE HAD IT DONE THAT I’VE KNOWN SAY THEY IMMEDIATELY FELT BETTER WHEN THE PLAQUE THAT LINES THE ARTERY IS COMPRESSED SO THAT FREE BLOOD FLOW IS RESTORED. I EXPECT HIM TO DO WELL IN THE FUTURE.

Sanders plans to resume campaigning ‘as soon as possible’
Politics Oct 10, 2019 12:46 PM EDT
By —
Will Weissert, Associated Press

PHOTOGRAPH -- Democratic 2020 U.S. presidential candidate and U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) arrives for a campaign stop in Hooksett, New Hampshire, U.S., September 30, 2019. REUTERS/Brian Snyder - RC172B96E9F0

WASHINGTON (AP) — Bernie Sanders says he’s “getting my endurance back” and “getting stronger every day” after last week’s heart attack, while promising to return to the presidential campaign trail “as soon as possible.”

“I am feeling great,” the 78-year-old Vermont senator said in a 7-minute video posted online Thursday.

He said that, while lying in a hospital bed in Las Vegas, “I thought about a lot of things, needless to say,” including “what would have happened” if he didn’t have health insurance through his job as a senator and Medicare.

Sanders insisted that “made me feel even more strongly the need for us to continue our efforts to end this dysfunctional and cruel health care system.”

“Understand the enormous opposition that we’re facing from the drug companies and the insurance companies,” he said of his promises to provide universal health insurance, if elected, through his proposed “Medicare for All” plan. “We are going to win this struggle. History is on our side.”

Sanders also said he thought, “Yeah, I’ve had a rough week. I’ve suffered adversity and that’s true and I don’t wish anybody to have a heart attack and get scared the way that our family did.” But he added that many people are dealing “with a lot more pain than I am” including homelessness, working multiple jobs but not making enough money to pay the bills or forgoing college because of fears about being overwhelmed by debt.


“We’re going to be out there on the campaign trail,” Sanders said, providing no details except that he would attend next week’s debate in Ohio.

His wife, Jane O’Meara Sanders, has said he would stay in Vermont recuperating until then.

The self-described democratic socialist was hospitalized after experiencing chest discomfort while campaigning in Nevada last week. His staff initially said the stents were inserted for a blocked artery, revealing only two days later that he had had a heart attack.

Sanders took his message directly to supporters in the video after saying he “misspoke” when he previously suggested he may slow his campaigning pace after his health scare. Sanders backtracked in a Wednesday interview with NBC News just a day after indicating that health could force him to change “the nature” of his campaign and perhaps to not do so many events per day — in the short term, at least.

One of his national co-chairs, Nina Turner, seemed to back up that original sentiment, though, saying in a Tuesday interview with The Associated Press that the campaign was examining where and how to make changes to reflect concerns about Sanders’ health.

The focus on Sanders’ health comes as age plays a significant role in the 2020 presidential campaign. Should Sanders win the Democratic presidential nomination, he would be the oldest person ever elected. So would his 76-year-old Democratic rival, former Vice President Joe Biden.



HILLARY WAS DEAD RIGHT ABOUT SOMETHING WHICH AT THE TIME I THINK SHE CAUGHT SOME HEAT FOR SAYING, THAT WE ARE FACING “A VAST RIGHT-WING CONSPIRACY!” I WILL ADD ONE THING, THAT IT IS ALSO A VAST CRIMINAL MOB-BOSS CONSPIRACY WITH INTERNATIONAL CRIMINALS AND IN MULTIPLE PLACES AROUND THE GLOBE -- WHEREVER THE MONEY IS. TRUMP IS ABOUT POWER, YES, AND WOMEN, BUT ABOVE ALL HE IS ABOUT MONEY. I THINK, TOO, THAT HE ENJOYS THE CRIMINALITY IN THE GAMES THAT HE PLAYS TO GET IT. MERELY GETTING RICHER IS NOT A SUFFICIENT THRILL FOR HIM. I AM SAD THAT I EVER LEARNED ANYTHING ABOUT HIM.

Support for Trump impeachment inquiry rises, new poll shows
Politics Oct 10, 2019 2:00 PM EDT
By — Laura Santhanam

More than half of Americans say they support the impeachment inquiry launched by the House of Representatives against President Donald Trump. And nearly as many are ready to see him impeached and removed from office, according to a new poll from the PBS NewsHour, NPR and Marist.

These latest poll findings are consistent with a trend in rising public support for impeachment proceedings into Trump’s use of the powers of the presidency. The House launched an impeachment inquiry against Trump in September following a July phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, where Trump asked the Ukrainian leader to dig up incriminating information on the family of former Vice President Joe Biden, who could be Trump’s political rival during the 2020 presidential election.

Fifty-two percent of Americans said they supported the House of Representatives’ impeachment inquiry, and 49 percent of U.S. adults said he should be impeached. When asked what should happen after he is impeached, 48 percent of Americans said Trump should be removed from office.

These poll findings are consistent with a trend in rising public support for impeachment proceedings into Trump’s use of the powers of the presidency.

The American public has had to absorb a lot of rapidly developing news in recent weeks. On Sept. 13, reports first emerged of a whistleblower complaint. Within days, it was revealed that the complaint was centered around the July call between Trump and Zelensky.

By Sept. 24, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., launched an impeachment inquiry against Trump. Since then, the Trump administration released a memo that compiled notes from the call, and the whistleblower’s complaint was released.

According to the poll, most Americans say it is unacceptable for a president to ask a foreign leader to investigate political opponents — sixty-eight percent of respondents said such a request is not permissible. That includes 94 percent of Democrats, 64 percent of independents and 40 percent of Republicans polled. Meanwhile, 26 percent of U.S. adults found the behavior acceptable.

While Trump has called the complaint against him “a terrible thing for our country,” and said that it’s important to know who the whistleblower is, 59 percent of U.S. adults want to protect that person’s identity. Another 38 percent of Americans want to reveal whoever reported Trump’s behavior, according to the poll. More broadly, the public is split over whether Trump’s leadership as president has strengthened or weakened national security. Forty-seven percent of U.S. adults say he has worsened the nation’s safeguards, while 43 percent say he has improved them, and 10 percent have no idea.

One thing rubbing the public the wrong way, especially among independent and moderate voters, is that there is “greater public recognition that Trump’s behavior is outside the boundaries,” conservative strategist Rick Wilson told the PBS NewsHour. “This is an example of Trump directly trying to benefit himself by using the power of government.”

“This is an example of Trump directly trying to benefit himself by using the power of government.”

The new poll is similar to others released in recent days. According to a Washington Post-Schar School poll released Monday, 58 percent of Americans agreed with Congress’ decision to launch the impeachment inquiry. And on Wednesday, Fox News released a poll that showed 51 percent of registered voters said Trump should be impeached and removed from office.

Historians have reflected on similar moments in presidential politics, and pollsters have looked for shifts in public support before, during and after the few times in U.S. history when a president was impeached. But much of what the nation sees now is “uncharted terrain,” said Barbara Carvalho, who directs the Marist Poll.

Throughout his entire impeachment proceedings, former President Bill Clinton sustained job approval ratings at or above 60 percent, according to Gallup polling. But Trump has not enjoyed such an advantage, according to Marist’s historic data since February 2017. His approval numbers have hovered from the low-30s to the mid-40s. In this latest poll, 42 percent of U.S. adults said they approved of Trump’s job performance as president.

Even with such high criticism of the Trump administration, Americans trust lawmakers on Capitol Hill even less, according to the PBS NewsHour, NPR and Marist poll. Fewer than a third of Americans said they trusted Congress, while 40 percent of U.S. adults said they trusted the White House a great deal or a good amount. That is still significantly more than the 29 percent of Americans who say they trust the media. That erosion of trust in the nation’s institutions could affect the way people interpret the impeachment proceedings and any outcomes from them, Carvalho said.

The institutions that guided the country through earlier impeachments “are not really trusted,” she said. That applies not only to the White House but also to Congress and the media, and that lack of trust fuels further division to historic levels, Carvalho said.

“I’m not sure the past is going to be our guide on this one.”
“I’m not sure the past is going to be our guide on this one,” she said.

People, especially Democrats who want to discuss policy and not just Trump’s conduct, are concerned the impeachment inquiry into Trump could overwhelm policy debate, and fuel feelings of disconnect between politics and public concerns. Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright said Congress needs to take its time to gather information during the inquiry while “also passing legislation that people are hungry for.”

But the impeachment proceedings likely will drain Congress’ ability to do that, according to 50 percent of U.S. adults who responded to this latest poll. Another 42 percent of Americans believe Congress will still be able to press forward with lawmaking despite what promises to be a long political ride.

On Oct. 15, Democratic presidential candidates head to their fourth debate in Westerville, Ohio. When they take the stage, they will face an electorate that is split over whether or not they think impeachment should be up for discussion.

READ MORE: Americans split on support for Trump impeachment inquiry

In this latest poll, 51 percent of U.S. registered voters said the candidates should not talk about impeachment during the debate, while 45 percent of voters said they should. Even Democrats were reserved in their support of hearing the candidates talk about impeachment during the debate with 57 percent saying they should, joined by 43 percent of independents and 29 percent of Republicans.

Looking beyond the debate and toward the 2020 election, half of Americans feel the nation is prepared to secure the nation’s electoral processes, while less than half were not so certain.

“What happens now — one way or another — is going to be a chapter in the American history books,” said Jeff Engel, who directs the Center for Presidential History at Southern Methodist University in Dallas.

“I believe his intent was malicious, and he was using his power in office to gain an advantage.”

While on a grocery run for her sister in Tampa, Florida, Megan Heath told PBS NewsHour she “wouldn’t put it past the Bidens that they did anything” in the Ukraine. But under the circumstances, Heath, a politically independent 33-year-old who runs a marketing company in Boulder, Colorado, said Trump could have launched such an investigation at any time. For Heath, Trump’s timing mattered and thinks that his call with the Ukrainian leader was personally and politically motivated. That is why she thinks he needs to be impeached and removed from office.

“I believe his intent was malicious,” she said, “and he was using his power in office to gain an advantage.” [sic][This whole sentence is a duplication from Jeff Engel’s statement above.]

The impeachment inquiry is “a big political waste of time and money because they will never be able to impeach” Trump, said James Ruben Dye, 49, a home renovator and self-described Trump Republican in Tupelo, Mississippi. Dye supports the president, and he said he keeps a copy of one of Trump’s books in his truck, his voice bouncing off of walls in a house he was gutting.

“If you dig enough dirt on politicians, you could do that to any of them.”

He views the proceedings as a power grab to gain political control rather than working to improve the economy or health care nationwide. He thinks no politician is without fault or flaws, saying, “If you dig enough dirt on politicians, you could do that to any of them.”

PBS NewsHour, NPR and Marist conducted a survey Oct. 3-8 that polled 1,123 U.S. adults with a margin of error of 3.4 percentage points and 926 registered voters with a margin of error of 3.8 percentage points.

Photograph -- Left: U.S. President Donald Trump answers questions from reporters during an event to sign executive orders on "transparency in federal guidance and enforcement" in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in Washington, U.S., October 9, 2019. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

Related
How do congressional subpoenas work?
By Candice Norwood

By — Laura Santhanam
Laura Santhanam is the Data Producer for the PBS NewsHour. Follow @LauraSanthanam



THIS IS A TREND THAT I AM GLAD TO SEE, BECAUSE STANDARDIZED TESTS ARE JUST THAT – EMULSIFIED AND REPLICATED VERSIONS OF WHAT IS IMAGINED TO BE “STANDARD” KNOWLEDGE AND THEREFORE WILL BE REPRESENTED IN THEIR TEST QUESTIONS; BUT NO STUDENT COMES THROUGH THE K-12 MENTAL PROCESSING SYSTEM WITH AN EQUALLY EMULSIFIED MIND, AND WE MUSTN’T TOSS THEM ALL INTO THE ROTTEN AND BRUISED APPLES BIN BECAUSE OF THAT. I THINK THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS NOWADAYS. I’M GLAD TO SEE A MOVEMENT AWAY FROM THAT DEVELOPING.

MOST KIDS ARE CAPABLE OF LEARNING, AND SHOULD BE GIVEN A CHANCE TO DO IT. THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS WHO DON’T NEED TO STUDY FAIRLY HARD TO PASS A GOOD COLLEGE LEVEL COURSE OR EVEN IN HIGH SCHOOL IS SMALLER THAN MANY THINK, AND EACH MUST LEARN IN HIS OWN WAY. IF THEY HAVE COME FROM A REALLY SUPERIOR HIGH SCHOOL THEY WILL FIND IT EASIER, BUT IF THEY TAKE DIFFICULT COURSES THEY WILL CERTAINLY BE CHALLENGED ALSO.           

THESE STANDARDIZED TESTS ARE MEANT TO CULL OUT THOSE WHO ARE LIKELY TO BE TRULY INCAPABLE OF SUCCEEDING, BUT JUST BECAUSE A STUDENT HAS TO LEARN MORE VOCABULARY WORDS OR MORE MATH AND SCIENCE SKILLS WHEN THEY GET TO COLLEGE, THAT IS ACTUALLY THE WAY THINGS SHOULD BE. TACKLING SOMETHING DIFFICULT IS PART OF WHAT WE NEED TO LEARN TO DO. THE SYSTEM OF FOSTERING THOSE WHO SCORE BETTER ON STANDARDIZED TESTS BECAUSE THEY HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PREP SCHOOL ROUTE AND ARE FROM THE MORE HIGHLY “ADVANTAGED” HOMES IS DEEPLY UNFAIR TO THOSE WHO ARE BURNING TO DO GOOD FOR THE WORLD AND LEARN ENOUGH TO DO IT, IF ONLY THEY CAN BE ADMITTED TO COLLEGE.  

WE HAVE SOMEHOW LOST TOUCH WITH THE FACT THAT REALITY IS COMPLEX AND CHANGES CONSTANTLY, SO WHAT IS DEEMED TO BE TRUE IS FLEETING. TESTS CAN’T MEASURE THAT. THOSE CASES WE’VE READ ABOUT OF TEACHERS GETTING INTO DEEP TROUBLE FOR ACTUALLY CHANGING THE CHILDREN’S ANSWERS ON TESTS REPRESENTS SOME KIND OF DISCONNECT WITH REALITY. ARE THOSE TESTS REALLY ACCURATE ENOUGH TO BE USED?

WHEN I WAS GOING THROUGH SCHOOL, 1952 TO 1963, WE WEREN’T OVERTESTED TO THE DEGREE THAT MODERN KIDS ARE, NOR WAS OUR TRUTH PRESENTED AS JUST A BUNCH OF MANDATORY FACTOIDS WHICH CAN BE MEASURED ON A STANDARDIZED TEST. LEARNING, AS A RESULT, WAS ACTUALLY A PLEASURE. IF KIDS CAN EXPERIENCE THAT PLEASURE, THEY ARE MUCH MORE LIKELY TO DO WELL IN THEIR FUTURE STUDIES. I WANT TO SEE COLLEGE BROADEN AND SHARPEN THE MIND AND, EQUALLY AS IMPORTANT, THE MORAL AND ETHICAL SYSTEM. IF YOUNG ADULTS COME OUT OF COLLEGE HAVING LEARNED HOW TO BE AN ELITIST RATHER THAN ONE WHO CARES ABOUT PEOPLE, THEY HAVE MISSED SOME IMPORTANT KNOWLEDGE WHILE THEY WERE THERE. THAT CAN’T BE MEASURED ON A TEST, EITHER.

Record number of colleges stop requiring the SAT and ACT amid questions of fairness
Education Updated on Oct 10, 2019 3:07 PM EDT — Published on Oct 9, 2019 6:11 PM EDT
By — Alina Tugend, The Hechinger Report

PHOTOGRAPH -- Left: A California bill would require the public University of California system and largest-in-the-nation California State University system to examine the fairness and usefulness of standardized tests in the admissions process.

Julia Tomasulo took the ACT three times hoping to get to get the best possible score when applying for colleges.

Even though she had good grades and was a two-sport athlete, “of the whole college process, the testing was the hardest,” Tomasulo said. She took practice tests daily. Her parents spent about $3,500 on tutoring.

Tomasulo, 19, of San Diego, fell short of her magical number, though she did get into her chosen school. But having seen the stress on her daughter — and watching another, who is still in high school, start the process — Alisson Tomasulo wishes less emphasis would be placed on these standardized admission tests.

“I would hope more colleges would go to test-optional,” she said. Students “should be judged on their merit. I think the ACT or SAT just show how they regurgitate information.”

Students “should be judged on their merit. I think the ACT or SAT just show how they regurgitate information.”
With frustration like the Tomasulos’ compounded by reports of test-takers gaming the system or out-and-out cheating, more and more people seem to agree — including some colleges themselves, and a few elected politicians.

This means the SAT and ACT are facing what could be the greatest challenge in their histories, which stretch back to the early 20th century.

“There are a number of things merging that pose a significant threat to standardized admissions tests,” said Michael Nietzel, president emeritus of Missouri State University, who writes frequently on higher education.

One in four institutions no longer requires these tests for admission, for example, Nietzel said. Combined with tutoring that wealthy families can afford, extra time their kids are more likely to get than lower-income classmates and downright cheating, he said, “they’ve lost their luster as a common yardstick.”

READ MORE: To help first-generation students succeed, colleges enlist their parents

What would happen if the SAT and ACT played much less of a role in the admission process is hard to predict, however. So far it appears to be leveling the playing field for some students who don’t always get accepted. The University of Chicago, which created a stir by making these tests optional last year, reports a record enrollment this fall of first-generation, low-income and rural students and veterans.

“Research is mixed, but with a consensus that points toward a bit of increase the diversity of the applicant pool and pretty strong evidence that the overall number of applicants increases,” Nietzel said.

Every 10 days, on average, another university makes these tests optional for admission. Forty-one schools have jettisoned this requirement in the last year, the largest number ever.

A resolution now wending its way through the California legislature calling for the public University of California system and largest-in-the-nation California State University system to study the usefulness and fairness of standardized tests in the admissions process.

Although a long shot, it would be “the grand prize” if California’s public universities went test-optional, said Robert Schaeffer, public education director for FairTest, a nonprofit organization focused on the misuse and overuse of standardized testing.

A June analysis by the Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce suggests that the 200 most selective colleges and universities already look at more than candidates’ standardized test scores alone. It found that, if SAT and ACT results were the sole basis for admission, 53 percent of students who were accepted wouldn’t have gotten in.

Critics of the tests have long argued that they reflect income more than ability, a chorus that is growing louder. And this year’s notorious Varsity Blues admission scandal — in which parents, through an intermediary, bribed test administrators to change test scores or let students cheat — reinforced the idea that the tests can be gamed, legally or illegally, by families with enough money.

The College Board, the $1 billion-a-year nonprofit organization that administers the SAT, is fighting back, including by introducing a dashboard it says will help admission offices compensate for socioeconomic and racial disparities. But it’s not clear that this will slow the test-optional bandwagon.

More than 1,000 accredited bachelor’s-degree-granting higher education institutions now allow prospective students to decide whether or not to submit standardized test scores with their applications, FairTest says.

READ MORE: High school graduation rates for one important group are starting to get better

Although some are open-enrollment, most are not, said Schaeffer.

The goal of going test-optional, for many of its advocates, is to increase diversity; low-income students typically have lower scores than their more affluent peers, putting them at a disadvantage in admission. This is because families with more money usually live in wealthier school districts with more resources and can afford tutors to help with test preparation and other educational assistance.

The average ACT composite score was 23.6 for higher income students and 19.5 for lower income ones in 2016, the last year for which the figures are available, according to the ACT’s own research.

The College Board last year stopped asking test-takers about their parents’ income, but answers from previous years showed scores going up as family income increases; scores overall were also lower on average for black and Latino students than for whites and Asians.

Researchers remain divided about whether or not doing away with the tests would help to fix this.

The adoption of a “well-executed test-optional admission policy” can increase the number of applicants in general and the number of first-generation and low-income students in particular, according to the largest and most current study, released last year.

The study looked at student-record data from 28 four-year degree-granting public and private non-profit institutions that are test-optional.

READ MORE: In Puerto Rico, the odds are against high school grads who want to go to college

Two of the three co-authors were connected to Bates College, which has long been test-optional.

But a separate compilation of studies published last year, two of three editors of which are connected to the College Board, largely questioned the assumption that test-optional policies add diversity.

“We found instead, that it increased selectivity,” meaning the reported SAT or ACT scores of students who were enrolled in schools with test-optional policies were higher than for than those that weren’t, said Kelly Ochs Rosinger, an assistant professor in the Department of Education Policy Studies at Pennsylvania State University and a co-author of one of the studies, which examined 180 liberal arts colleges.

Of those, the institutions that went test-optional did not see an increase in their proportions of students who were low-income or from racial groups that are typically underrepresented on campus.

The University of Chicago, which made the SAT and ACT optional last year, reports a record enrollment this fall of first-generation, low-income and rural students and veterans.
This could also be because students with lower standardized test scores didn’t submit them, however, pushing up the averages, she said.

“Our findings are really important, but we need better and newer data,” Rosinger said. “There is no clear, easy solution to expand access to higher education. There are so many barriers beyond test scores.”

The University of Rochester took the middle ground and became “test-flexible” in 2011. That means students could submit Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate scores in lieu of the ACT or SAT.

In hundreds of cases, said Jonathan Burdick, the university’s vice provost for enrollment initiatives and dean of admissions and financial aid, after students were accepted based on other factors, their ACT or SAT score would show up and be put in their record.

“There wasn’t a basis to say that those tests scores would have made us make better or even different decisions,” Burdick said.

Students who were admitted on the basis of, say, their IB scores and later had low SAT scores submitted “have graduated in equivalent numbers to anybody else, in four years and in many cases with honors,” Burdick said. “Had we had the SAT it might have made us less likely to make the good decision.”

The university will go fully test-optional in the fall of 2020.

What really bothers Burdick is the “the distortion of two years of your life during high school,” studying for the ACT or SAT. “You could be spending that 60 hours or more doing test prep doing other, more meaningful things that actually are more productive for your life in the long run.”

The College Board and ACT say standardized testing plays an important role in the admission process and that the best way to predict an applicant’s success in college is by looking at a combination of his or her GPA and test scores.

While students take the ACT and SAT in about equal numbers – the SAT edged out the ACT last year with 2 million students, versus 1.91 for the ACT – the higher-profile College Board has taken a more active role in pushing back against the anti-testing movement.

Although the College Board declined to comment for this story, Steve Bumbaugh, senior vice president for college and career access, has written for The Hechinger Report and elsewhere that the answer is not to take away the SAT, but that “the poor kids need what the rich kids have.”

To that end, the College Board has introduced a number of initiatives to address the needs of low-income students, including free test help through a partnership with the online Khan Academy. (The SAT itself costs $64.50 per exam; the ACT, $67.)

This year, to some controversy, it also unveiled what it first called an environmental context dashboard, later revising it and renaming it Landscape. After piloting the dashboard for three years, the College Board decided to drop the idea of offering colleges a score to represent a student’s socioeconomic background. The score – which had been dubbed an adversity score – had been calculated using school and neighborhood information.

Criticism of reducing such information to a single score, and concern about how that score would be used, caused the College Board to revise and rename the tool.

Information offered to admissions officers by Landscape will include the number of children eligible at the student’s school for free or reduced-price lunches; average number of seniors taking AP courses; and average AP score at that school. Landscape will also evaluate neighborhood factors such as median family income; number of single-parent households; vacancy rates; and typical educational attainment.

These characteristics often affect the performance of even the most talented students, or make them less able to smoothly navigate the complex college admissions process.

Although the original dashboard model had its opponents – and it’s too early to know how Landscape will be viewed – admissions officers say they welcome any additional information to better understand a student’s application.

READ MORE: Can California export enough students to shore up college enrollment in other states?

“Admissions officers don’t have great information about a high-school context,” said Rosinger, who previously worked as an admissions officer at the University of Georgia.

There has been some criticism of the dashboard, the most prominent that it doesn’t address individual differences among students, Nietzel said.

Schaeffer, of FairTest, said the dashboard is an effort by the College Board to reposition its product.

“It’s a pushback at test-optional,” he said. “It proves what we’ve long said – the test is not a level playing field. It’s a better measure of accumulated opportunity than a measure of school success.”

“There is no clear, easy solution to expand access to higher education. There are so many barriers beyond test scores.”

Initial experiments showed that admissions officers were 25 percent more likely to enroll lower-income students if they had better data about the high school, however, said Michael Bastedo, a professor of education at the University of Michigan School of Education who has long researched this area and was a paid consultant to the College Board on the dashboard.

“You can be against standardized tests and in favor the dashboard,” he said. The key point is to “put every applicant in the context of the opportunities they have.”

Besides, he said, simply going test-optional, without increasing financial aid to poorer students and supplying other support, may not make much difference.

The University of Chicago, for example, along with going test-optional, also announced new scholarships and access programs and an initiative to pay the full tuition for families that earn less than $125,000 a year.

The dashboard has been piloted over the past few years and the College Board said it hopes that as many as 150 institutions will use it this fall.

Editor’s Note: Since the original publication of this story by The Hechinger Report, the College Board renamed its environmental context dashboard. This report has been updated to reflect the changes.

This story about SAT and ACT was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for our higher education newsletter.

Left: A California bill would require the public University of California system and largest-in-the-nation California State University system to examine the fairness and usefulness of standardized tests in the admissions process.

Related
Should the SAT be optional? Bribery scandal renews debate
By Carolyn Thompson, Associated Press

Race in college admissions: Read the Trump administration’s statement on reversing policies
By Meredith Lee

Why finding out how much a college costs is harder than it looks
By Jon Marcus, The Hechinger Report

Admissions scandal highlights ‘disconnect’ between colleges’ message and action



I DON’T LIKE TO HAVE TO SAY THIS, BECAUSE I WOULD MUCH PREFER A CLEAN AND FAIR AND (THEREFORE) DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT; BUT THE LEVEL AND VARIETY OF CRIMES THAT HAVE SHOWN UP IN THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE IS TRULY SHOCKING. IT’S LIKE THROWING A FISHING NET OUT INTO THE WATER. YOU NEVER KNOW WHAT KIND OF CREATURE WILL COME UP WHEN IT’S REELED IN. THIS DOESN’T SEEM LIKE DRAINING THE SWAMP TO ME, BUT BRINGING IN NEW AND MORE DANGEROUS CREATURES.

2 Florida men tied to Giuliani arrested on campaign charges
Politics   Oct 10, 2019 10:58 AM EDT
By — Michael Biesecker, Associated Press
By — Larry Neumeister, Associated Press
By — Eric Tucker, Associated Press

FILE PHOTO: Rudy Giuliani delivers remarks before Donald Trump rallies with supporters in Council Bluffs, Iowa, U.S., September 28, 2016. Photo By Jonathan Ernst/Reuters

WASHINGTON (AP) — Two Florida businessmen tied to President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani have been arrested on campaign finance violations resulting from a $325,000 donation to a political action committee supporting Trump’s reelection.

Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman were arrested on a four-count indictment that includes charges of conspiracy, making false statements to the Federal Election Commission and falsification of records.

Parnas and Fruman were central to Giuliani’s efforts to get government officials in Ukraine to investigate business dealings by former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter in the war-torn former Soviet republic.

Records show that Parnas and Fruman used wire transfers from a corporate entity they controlled to make a $325,000 donation to the America First Action committee in 2018. But wire transfer records that became public through a lawsuit show that the corporate entity reported as making the transaction was not the true source of the money.

John Dowd, an attorney for the men, hung up on an Associated Press reporter calling about the case.

READ: Whistleblower protection, explained

The men, who were arrested at Dulles International Airport, were expected to appear later Thursday in federal court in Virginia. Two other men were charged in the case.

The indictment says Parnas and Fruman “sought to advance their personal financial interests and the political interests of at least one Ukrainian government official with whom they were working” and took steps to conceal it from third parties, including creditors. They created a limited liability corporation, Global Energy Producers, and “intentionally caused certain large contributions to be reported in the name of GEP instead of in their own names,” according to the indictment.

Prosecutors charge that the two men falsely claimed the contributions came from a liquefied natural gas business. At that point, the company had no income or significant assets, according to the indictment.

WATCH: Why the White House argues it can reject the House’s impeachment requests

The big PAC donation in May 2018 was part of a flurry of political spending tied to Parnas and Fruman, with at least $478,000 in donations flowing to GOP campaigns and PACs in little more than two months.

The money enabled the relatively unknown entrepreneurs to quickly gain access to the highest levels of the Republican Party, including face-to-face meetings with Trump at the White House and Mar-a-Lago in Florida.

The AP reported last week that Parnas and Fruman helped arrange a January meeting in New York between Ukraine’s former top prosecutor, Yuri Lutsenko, and Giuliani, as well as other meetings with top government officials.

Giuliani’s efforts to launch a Ukrainian corruption investigation were echoed by Trump in his July 25 call with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky. That conversation is now at the heart of a burgeoning congressional impeachment inquiry.

A whistleblower complaint by an unnamed intelligence official makes reference to “associates” of Giuliani in Ukraine who were attempting to make contact with Zelensky’s team, though it’s not clear that refers to Parnas and Fruman. That could put the two men squarely in the middle of the investigation into Giuliani’s activities.

Neumeister reported from New York City, Mike Balsamo contributed from Washington.



THIS STORY FROM PEOPLE.COM OF 2016 IS MORE TRUTH TELLING THAN WE’VE HEARD ABOUT BERNIE’S PERSONAL LIFE FOR THE MOST PART. I’M GLAD HE’S OPENING UP, AS HE HAS SEVERAL TIMES IN THIS SECOND RUN FOR THE PRESIDENCY.

I’M GLAD HE HAS A GOOD RELATIONSHIP WITH HIS WIFE. IF THE NYT SAYS THAT HE’S SOMETHING APPROACHING “HEN PECKED,” I DOUBT IT. HE HAS SAID THAT HE RESPECTS HER AND THAT SHE IS “BEAUTIFUL.” WHAT I SEE IN BOTH OF THEM FROM THE TEN OR SO PHOTOS AND VIDEOS I’VE SEEN OF THEM TOGETHER IS A TRUE LOVE MATCH, AND THERE AIN’T NOTHIN’ WRONG WITH THAT!!

How Bernie Sanders Romanced His Future Wife While They Were on a Friends-Style 'Break'
Bernie Sanders employed various methods, including playdates, Christmas presents and a fateful date at Friendly's
By Sandra Sobieraj Westfall   January 20, 2016 01:30 PM

PHOTOGRAPH -- Jane and Bernie Sanders MARTIN SCHOELLER

If “romantic” isn’t the first image presidential candidate Bernie Sanders conjures, think again.

The cantankerous-sounding Vermont senator hot on Hillary Clinton‘s heels for the Democratic presidential nomination is also a slow-dancing-in-the-living-room kind of guy, his wife Jane O’Meara Sanders tells PEOPLE.

And he’s not a quitter.

In an expansive at-home interview for the new issue of PEOPLE, Jane, 65, recalls how she and Bernie, 74, met – at his first mayoral debate in Burlington, Vermont, in 1981. As Sanders was at the lectern, challenging the then-incumbent mayor, “I sat in the second row and I fell in love with Bernie’s ideas,” Jane recalls.

“We met eyes – a few times, which I thought was interesting.”

Jane and Bernie Sanders

At an election-night party weeks later, Sanders asked her to dance “and that was it,” says Jane, then a divorced mother of three young children.

The couple dated for eight years before breaking up for about a year. “I wanted to get married and he didn’t,” Jane says. Then, evoking Ross and Rachel of TV’s Friends, she adds, “We were on a break.”

But Bernie did not give up – on Jane or her children.

“He still came over that Christmas to give them presents and be with them,” says Jane. “And he made it a point to go out with them even though he and I weren’t together anymore. He taught them basketball, baseball, checkers, chess.”

“It wasn’t that he just went away. When he finally asked me to marry him, I thought about that, about how he’s somebody you can count on.”

And, about that marriage proposal – Sanders himself winds up the story: “Look when you do a proposal, it has to be done with ambience. Proper moment, proper lighting. Right? I’ll let Jane tell you the rest of the story.”

Continues Jane: “We were on a break and he was trying to get me back and I said, ‘No. I want to get married and you don’t.’ We finished our ice cream sundae at Friendly’s and we walked out to the parking lot and he said, ‘You want to get married?’ ”

“I said, ‘You know I do. Let’s not talk about this again.’ ”

“I wasn’t getting it, so he took me by the shoulders and said, ‘Will. You. Marry. Me.’ And I said, ‘When?’ ”

More than 27 years later, Jane says, the couple are still dancing together – at home in the living room.

“It just happens. Not around other people. Slow dance. Just swaying.”

So, is Sanders a romantic? Says Jane, “He’s romantic enough for me, believe me.”


For more of our at-home interview with Senator Sanders and his family, pick up the new issue of PEOPLE, on newsstands Friday



Comments

Popular posts from this blog