Lone Star Left: Is Texas Turning Blue?

By dianeravitch
October 30, 2026 //
0

Hopes are running high in Texas for a blue wave that sweeps Texas, with James Talarico as Senator and Gina Hinojosa as Governor.

Michelle H. Davis, writer of the Texas blog “Lone Star Left” knows how many times Texas Democrats have hoped for a breakthrough but were disappointed. She’s crossing her fingers and predicting that this time will be different.

Texas Democrats have two stellar candidates. It feels different this time, despite the millions that Elon Musk has spent for Republican candidates.

Davis writes:

If you break a mirror, it’s seven years of bad luck. If you spill salt, you have to throw some over your left shoulder, or else you’ll receive bad news. If a black cat crosses your path, a witch is cursing you. And if you say “Holy shit, Texas is actually turning blue,” before election day, then every pollster adds four points to the Republican margins. 

Last night, James Talarico held a competing rally with Donald Trump in Lubbock. Both events had roughly 4,000 attendees. The Democratic US Senate candidate drew the same crowd size as Mango Mussolini. Did I mention this was in Lubbock?

In 2024, Trump won Lubbock County by 39.5 points. The turnout was 63%.

In 2022, Abbott won Lubbock County by 40.1 points. The turnout was 44.62%. 

One might say Lubbock is a deep-red county. Another might say that Lubbock is a 51% majority-minority county with a history of low voter turnout. 

Let’s look at Lubbock:

Through day 9 of early voting, Lubbock County is up 45% from 2022. West Texas Democrats have been working harder than almost any group in the state. Here are a few of them: 

Left to right: Kyle Rable, Malik Williams, Riley Rodriquez, Diana Luna, and Cathy Broderick

Kyle Rable, running for TX19, started block walking six months ago. In the early vote (EV), TX19 had only 77K votes in 2022, based on precincts. In 2026, the EV is already over 102K in this district alone. This district’s voting-age population (VAP) is only 53% Anglo. Here is TX19:

This district also covers Abilene (Taylor County), which is up 26%. 

TX19 is a ruby red district with a large Hispanic population and low turnout. Now, we’re seeing Hispanic voters and young voters show up in record numbers, at a time when all the data and polls expect them to swing left. That doesn’t necessarily make it a flip opportunity. Maybe we’ll see the needle move, but Democrats are absolutely making a dent in West Texas this year. 

There’s also Riley Rodriquez, running for SD28, which overlaps TX19. SD28 is a 60% majority-minority district. And they’ve had trouble here with the data centers. Rodriquez has become a fixture in this area regarding these data centers, and like Rable, is running a populist campaign. 

Most of the West Texas slate is running on a progressive populist platform. 

From Theo Elections (Lubbock County): 

No matter what happens this election, I’m proud of the West Texas Democrats who have spent all year trying to make a difference where they were told things would never change. 

Where are we at statewide?

Through day 9:

5.6 million voters, or 29.7% of registered voters. And, thanks to the Secretary of State, we don’t have all the numbers in yet. We’re only really missing the smaller counties, so it isn’t that far off. 

Reminder: I’m updating THIS SPREADSHEETwith early voting numbers every day, if you want to follow along.

Rural voters are still getting lapped by urban and suburban areas. For every new rural voter, the cities have added nine. Suburban voters continue to show up early and at the highest rate. 

Theo Elections made a similar graph, but added more categories (not sure how he broke them up). Here’s how it shook out: 

The electorate is moving away from the most Republican parts of Texas and toward the parts where Democrats win. 

A Republican pollster, Cygnal, put this out today:

It’s a national poll, not statewide, but it puts independents voting Democratic at 67% and Republicans crossing over at 6%. 

Day 8 of Ryan Data’s reports: 

Hypothetically, if you use Cygnal’s poll with Ryan Data’s data model, that would put Democrats up over Republicans in Texas right now by roughly +11 points. Of course, this is still with three days of early voting and election day left.

And all I keep hearing is that Republicans aren’t showing up in Texas. 

I want to tell you that what we’re watching right now is Texas turning blue, but I don’t want to be the one to jinx us. 

If a Democratic Senate candidate can match the MAGA Republican president’s crowd in Lubbock, the Texas GOP is in a whole heap of trouble. 

Republicans could still flood the polls on election day. Polls can be wrong, data models can be wrong, and we’ve all been burned enough with “This is the year Texas turns blue” that we should know the differences between trends and results. 

We’ve watched a flailing Democratic Party for 30 years, but this year they have a candidate in every single Congressional and Legislative race. And in places like Lubbock and Abilene, where they’ve long been ignored, candidates have been knocking on doors for six months. 

So I’m not going to say it. I’m not going to say the thing. I’m going to knock on wood, throw salt over my left shoulder, avoid black cats, and go vote.

You should too. Three days of early voting left.

Categories Democrats, Elections, Texas

Peter Greene: Why the Panic Over College Readiness, Again?

By dianeravitch
October 30, 2026 //
2

Kids today! Low expectations! Low standards! Bad teachers! Lazy kids! Cell phones! Social media!

We are in the midst of yet another panic about high schools failing to prepare their students for college. I speak now as an historian. When college enrollments were limited to those who graduated from elite private high schools and to those from public schools with exceptional grades, there was no outcry about unready, unprepared students. When public colleges and universities lowered their admission standards to accept almost anyone who wanted to go to college, the outcry began. It reached a crescendo in 1983 with the publication of the Reagan-era “A Nation at Risk,” which sounded the alarm about low standards and “a rising tide of mediocrity.”

As James Harvey, who was on the research team that drafted “A Nation at Risk” wrote, high-level members of the National Commission on Excellence in Education “cooked the books.” The report was intended to salute American schools for their success in opening their doors to students who were previously excluded or dropped out, but the bigwigs turned it into an indictment instead, cherry-picking statistics to condemn the schools and giving birth to decades of failed “reforms.”

Peter Greene writes here about the current surge in

High school graduates aren’t ready for college! The articles about this problem are popping up all over (here, here and here). Chad Aldeman, who I think of as a relatively level-headed member of the reformy crowd, just dropped a piece passing on UC’s increasing number of math-failing froshies. 

The National Center for Education Statistics has a paper that looks at those numbers for 1999-2000, 2003-2004, and 2007-2008, and while it breaks them down a variety of ways, the overall conclusion is that 1999-2000 was worse than either of the other years sampled, and all of the numbers hovered around the twenties, low or high. But this article from Chicagoland says that over a third of students entering college need remedial help, based on 2008 stats from the government– same as the previous report. A Harvard professor looking at a 2003 study comes up with one third as well. The Inside Higher Ed Bridge to Nowherereport throws around a 30% number. And I would swear that I recently heard 46% tossed into the remediation soup as well. Most of these sources do not compare the current figures to any from the alleged golden age of non-remediation. So can I at least suggest that the numbers are “controversial” or “contested” or maybe even “pulled out of a variety of different orifices”

Apparently today’s freshmen were not saved by an entire educational career spent under the guidance (more or less) of Common Core. But before we start using the success rate of college freshmen as an indictment of high school quality, let me suggest a few more factors to also consider.

Admissions process: As the generations entering college get smaller and smaller, and more and more people decide college isn’t worth the bother and/or expense, colleges are doing their best to fill up with students who possess a warm body and can write checks that don’t bounce. Lowering the bar is going to result in students with less college ready capabilities.

Measuring remediation needs: If we’re talking about students who need remediation, we need to talk about how the college is identifying that need. Because sometimes it’s a not-very-good assessment test.

Marketing: One of the big policy pushes, especially from neoliberals dems, has been to get everyone to go to college. “Get a college education, or you will be doomed to living in a van down by the river eating cat food on a hot plate!” has been a big message, and it has scared a lot of people into college who might have been better served by a trade school or another post-high school option.

And perhaps most important is this last one, because if we’re seeing an actual dip in educational attainment, I can think of one factor that distinguishes the education of the generation now entering college that is different from the generations that came before.

Test-centered education is not great: Today’s college freshmen got thirteen years of more-or-lee (depending on their state) Common Core flavored education, which in practice has meant thirteen years of getting prepped for the Big Standardized Test. If we are questioning the quality of the K-12 system, it seems only sensible to look at the policy that has taken control of K-12 education in this country. Maybe centering education on passing a single mediocre math and reading multiple choice test is not a great idea.

There is an extraordinary irony here. Many of the folks now saying, “Boy, you public school teachers are really messing up your job” are the same folks who spent the last twenty years saying, “Here, public school teachers– we are going to tell you how to do your job and you’re going to listen to us or else.” This is an old education story– “accountability” never means “accountability for policy makers.”

We could dig up a few other responses, like questioning why “just raise expectations” is a useful prescription for high schools, but not for colleges.

And there is always the possibility that this is one more faux crisis. But if there is an issue here, it would be useful to look at it more closely than simply declaring that Kids These Days are graduating from high school with underdeveloped thinky parts and it’s probably the fault of Those Damned Teachers and their lousy public schools.

Categories Accountability, Education Industry, Education Reform, Extremism, High School Graduation, Higher Education, Students

Adam Kinzinger: Do Not Let Elon Musk Buy OUR Government!

By dianeravitch
October 30, 2026 //
2

Adam Kinzinger, former member of Congress, writes powerfully here about the most dangerous threat to our democracy: the super-rich who fund politicians to buy government contracts and/or to determine policy decisions.

Kinzinger was a Republican Congressman from Illinois and a military veteran. He and Liz Cheney were the only Republican members of the January 6 Commission. They knew they would pay a price. Cheney lost her Congressional seat in Wyoming to a Trump-aligned conservative. Kinzinger retired from Congress.

He writes here about the importance of limiting the power of wealthy individuals in politics.

Both parties are susceptible to the lure of big campaign contributions. Democrats and Republicans have accepted money from AIPAC to shape government policy toward Israel.

Trump openly courted specific industries to give money to his campaign in exchange for favorable policies. He promised to protect the fossil fuel industry if they gave significant sums to his campaign. As president, he has delivered. He opened protected federal lands to drilling and has canceled government contracts for wind power and other alternative sources of energy. He has encouraged the revival of coal mining. He has gutted environmental regulations to allow pollution of water and the air. A payback to his donors.

And then there is the case of Elon Musk. He has become the richest man in the world with the help of munificent government contracts. In the past few years, he has deployed his riches to try to buy the government and its policies.

Adam Kinzinger details here the case for getting big money out of politics, or at least limiting its power to buy the government it wants.

He writes:

Last Wednesday, the richest man in the world logged on to the social media platform he owns and issued an ominous threat.

“Live by the sword, die by the sword,” Elon Musk wrote. “Those who pick fights with me should understand that I will find out who is really pulling the strings and come for them, not just their puppets…”

What set him off was a story in Politico reporting that if Democrats win control of Congress next week, they plan to investigate him: his time running DOGE, the federal contracts his companies hold, and reports that he ordered Starlink service slowed for Ukraine’s military. When journalist Kara Swisher suggested on her podcast that he could end up facing legal trouble, he shot back that she “really wants to go to prison.”

To recap, a man whose company is paid billions of dollars by the federal government is warning members of Congress that if they look into how he got that money, he will come after them, and after whoever he decides is behind them.

And he isn’t just posting. He’s paying.

The Wall Street Journal captured it in a single chart. One line belongs to George Soros, the liberal megadonor who has spent the better part of two decades as the right’s favorite villain. It climbs slowly, step by step, over more than twenty years, to roughly $624 million. The other line belongs to Musk. For twenty years, it sits flat at zero. Then, around 2024, it turns and shoots almost straight up, past Soros, to roughly $759 million. Two decades of Soros, overtaken in about two years.

Image

Graph courtesy of the Wall Street Journal.

According to a Washington Post analysis of federal filings, Musk has now put about $446 million into this year’s midterm elections alone. That’s the most any individual donor has ever given. It’s well beyond the roughly $290 million he spent electing Donald Trump in 2024. In September, he gave $158 million to the main super PAC backing Republican Senate candidates in just two checks. He’s put another $10 million into a group backing Ken Paxton in Texas.

We have never seen anything like this. And we absolutely should not accept it.

Money has distorted American politics for a long time, and both parties have their megadonors. I spent years in Congress watching how much time members spent dialing for dollars instead of doing their jobs, and how much influence followed the checks. If you’ve ever felt like Washington listens more to the people with money than to people like you, you’re not imagining it. That’s why broad campaign finance reform is needed.

I also believe companies and the people who run them have a right to take part in our political process. That’s part of living in a free country. This column isn’t about that.

This is about something different, and it’s much more dangerous.

Buying the Government That Pays You

Elon Musk isn’t just the richest man in the world. He got there, in large part, with the help of the American taxpayer. SpaceX has received more than $20 billion in federal contracts, with NASA and the Pentagon among its biggest customers. Starlink has become essential infrastructure for our military and our allies. His companies depend on decisions made by the very government he’s now spending hundreds of millions of dollars to shape.

Think about what that means. The man whose company is paid billions by the federal government is spending a fortune to decide who runs the federal government. The senators he helps elect will vote on defense budgets that include his contracts. The agencies that regulate his companies answer to the president he helped put in office. Even if every one of those decisions were made in good faith, how could anyone know?

Here’s the part most people don’t realize: we already decided, decades ago, that this kind of thing is wrong.

For more than 75 years, federal law has barred government contractors from making political contributions. The whole point is to avoid even the appearance that taxpayer-funded contracts are for sale. Courts have upheld that ban even as they’ve struck down other campaign finance laws. Regulators have enforced it against contractors who tried to give to super PACs.

So how is Musk allowed to do this? Because of a loophole. The ban covers the company holding the contract, and federal regulators read it narrowly. In their view, Musk’s spending doesn’t count, because it comes from him as an individual rather than from SpaceX or Tesla. The company can’t spend a dime.

But the man who controls the company can spend nearly half a billion dollars in a single election.

Sell to It or Buy It. Not Both.

I support sweeping campaign finance reform. But the fix for this particular problem isn’t radical, and we don’t have to start from scratch because some states already do it.

New Jersey has a pay-to-play law that doesn’t stop at the company holding the contract. It covers the company’s principal owners, officers, and directors, and anyone who controls 10 percent or more of the business.

Connecticut goes further, covering any shareholder with a stake of 5 percent or more.

Both laws were passed after real scandals, by legislators who saw what happens when contracts and campaign cash get tangled together. And they’ve worked. New Jersey’s own election watchdog said its law was achieving exactly what it was meant to do: reducing political contributions from the people doing business with the government.

Congress should do the same thing at the federal level. Extend the existing contractor ban to cover the owners, executives, and major shareholders of companies that take big federal contracts. Apply it to everyone, on the left and the right, no matter which party they support.

Nobody needs to take anything away from Elon Musk. This is just a very reasonable choice: if you want to keep selling to the United States government, you don’t get to buy it too. If you’d rather spend unlimited money on elections, you’re free to stop bidding on taxpayer contracts.

Pick one.

What Money Can’t Buy

Elon Musk can buy a lot of things. He can buy television ads in every market in America. He can buy a social media platform and tilt it toward the candidates he likes. He can fund a get-out-the-vote operation bigger than some political parties.

What he can’t buy is your vote. Not unless you let him.

A week from now, Americans will decide this election, not Elon Musk. Every ad he pays for still has to convince a person. Every dollar he spends still has to get past the voter in the booth. That’s the one place in American democracy where the richest man in the world and a retired schoolteacher in Ohio count exactly the same.

So show up. Bring someone with you. And then let’s get to work making sure that no one, no matter how rich, can ever again buy the government that pays them.

— Adam

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Corruption, Democracy, Democrats, Deregulation, Elections, Environment, Ethics, Failure, For-Profit, Fraud, Funding, Musk, Elon, Republicans, Trump

Julian Vasquez-Heilig: A Win by Gina Hinojosa Would Dramatically Change Education in Texas

By dianeravitch
October 29, 2026 //
2

Julian Vasquez-Heilig is a scholar and activist who has been a leader in studying and promoting equal access to educational opportunity for all students.

He writes here about the consequences for Texas students, teachers, and communities if Gina Hinojosa manages to get elected Governor of Texas next week. She is heavily outspent by Governor Greg Abbott, who is seeking his fourth term, yet the polls show that the race is virtually tied. The latest reports show that Abbott has a campaign chest of nearly $100 million, while Hinojosa has raised $7-8 million.

Abbott has been a forceful advocate for privatization of public schools, pushing the Republican-controlled legislature to authorize charter schools and vouchers. Rural Republicans opposed vouchers, so Abbott got $12 million from Pennsylvania billionaire Jeff Yass to defeat the anti-voucher Republicans.

If Abbott wins, expect a doubling of the voucher budget from $1 billion a year to $2 billion a year. That increase was recently proposed by Don Huffines, the state’s chief financial officer. Expect an increase in funding for privately-managed charter schools and less oversight. Expect a steady erosion of public schools and low pay for teachers.

Vasquez-Heilig describes what to expect if Hinojosa wins:

The midterm vote in the United States could do more than change who holds political power; it could determine the future of education.

First, congrats to Lula for his big victory this week in the national Brazilian elections! Incidentally, a Brazilian university recruited me for a Fulbright project that past year examining how Brazil was recovering and reinventing its education system after Jair Bolsonaro’s presidency. After the invitation, I applied and Fulbright faculty peer reviewers scored and approved the proposal. Unfortunately, the U.S. State Department then rejected it. I was not given an explanation establishing why they rejected the invited and reviewer approved Fulbright, although I couldn’t help wondering whether examining the innovation of the education system after Bolsonaro was an uncomfortable subject for the Trump Administration.

The experience left me thinking about questions much closer to home. What would it take to reimagine and rebuild education in the United States after the midterms? More specifically, what might be possible in Texas after more than a decade under Governor Greg Abbott as a case study? 

I spent eight years as a professor at the University of Texas at Austin, studying educational equity, civil rights, school accountability, and privatization. During my time in Texas, I witnessed how nakedly political decisions shaped educational opportunities for millions of students and the educators who served them. With State Representative Gina Hinojosa now challenging Abbott for governor, I have examined her official education platform and considering what could change if Texas takes a different political direction. 

The possibilities extend well beyond one state, considering that the Republican’s ideas for education are all over the place (charter schools, vouchers, banning curriculum etc). Texas offers a compelling case study of how shifts in political leadership after the midterms could reshape educational policy, governance, and public investment in states transitioning from Republican to Democratic control. What happens in Texas could offer important lessons for the future of public education across the country.

For my case study, I examine ten possibilities. Some of the ideas below are commitments Hinojosa has publicly made. Others are reforms I believe deserve consideration, particularly in higher education and financial accountability.

1. The Texas Education Agency Would Get an Educator as Commissioner

Hinojosa has explicitly promised to remove Texas Education Agency non-educator Commissioner Mike Morath and appoint an educator. This could fundamentally change the agency’s relationship with schools. The next commissioner would bring direct experience with teaching and learning to an organization responsible for overseeing millions of students, school accountability, state interventions, and billions in education spending.

The consequential question would be whether that professional background will actually translate into different institutional priorities. Texas educators have spent years operating under accountability pressures, staffing shortages, and extensive state requirements. A commissioner with educator experience could approach those challenges with a different understanding of what teachers and students need, although successful administration would also require considerable policy and management expertise.

Earlier I provide some persepctives on California’s newly implemented commissioner position here.

2. Houston and Other State-Controlled Districts Could Return to Their Communities

Hinojosa promises to end state takeovers and restore local governance. Houston ISD offers the most consequential example, with state-appointed leaders making major decisions about instruction, staffing, and campus operations after the 2023 state takeover ostensibly due to single test score in a single high school. For the Republican in Texas, local control has meant controlling people locally.

The educational record deserves careful examination. State officials and takeover supporters cite improved academic ratings at historically struggling campuses in Houston, while critics have raised concerns about teacher turnover (about 12,000 have left the district), instructional restrictions and canned curriculum, elimination of an elected school board, and the manipulation of student populations to show fake results. A transition back to community governance would produce actual improvements while restoring democratic accountability.

Fort Worth, Austin, and other districts facing or experiencing state takeover present similar questions about who makes decisions and how communities regain authority over their schools.

3. Testing and Accountability System Would Be Revised

Hinojosa has proposed ending STAAR, pausing A through F accountability ratings, and developing a new system. Her campaign reports that TEA has awarded more than $1.7 billion to testing vendors during Abbott’s governorship.

During my years at UT Austin, I studied how high-stakes accountability affected schools serving historically marginalized communities in Texas. That research shaped my advocacy for community-based accountabilityand multiple measures of school success. This revised system could place greater emphasis on academic growth, graduation, student engagement, access to advanced coursework, and the opportunity to learn. Such changes would require legislation and a credible replacement system that gives families actually useful information about school performance.

4. Voucher Spending Could Face a Comprehensive Audit

Texas has committed $1 billion to its new private school voucher program, which Hinojosa proposes to end. A comprehensive financial review could examine who received funds, what providers charged, whether expenses met legal requirements, and whether safeguards adequately protected taxpayers.

Other states offer reasons to investigate. In Arizona, the media has reviewed records showing that education savings account money had been spent on travel-related expenses across 44 states and 13 countries. More than 100 accounts were associated with at least $21,000 in spending at Disney parks, Disney stores, and Disney’s streaming service. Some expenditures may have been approved under existing program rules, which makes the distinction between legal spending and appropriate public spending particularly important.

Texas investigators could carefully examine whether its own program permits comparable purchases, whether vendors are properly screened, and whether families and providers comply with spending restrictions. Arizona’s experience is a warning about oversight. I recently heard at the Network for Public Education conference that Florida has a $1 billion state budget deficit due to unlimited vouchers; that’s another warning.

5. Charter School Financial Misconduct Could Face Stronger Enforcement

Texas already has a documented history of serious charter school spending controversies. Consider IDEA Public Schools, one of the nation’s largest charter networks. Its leadership faced scrutiny over plans involving private aircraft and expenditures of approximately $400,000 on premium San Antonio Spurs tickets and luxury seating. Reports also described a proposed private jet lease, executive travel expenses, related-party business arrangements, and the acquisition of a boutique hotel. Former CEO Tom Torkelson departed with a reported $900,000 severance package. In 2024, TEA placed IDEA under conservatorship following a years-long investigation into financial and operational misconduct.

Texas could strengthen financial disclosure requirements, investigate conflicts of interest, recover improperly spent funds where legally possible, and refer substantiated fraud to law enforcement. Prosecutions should follow evidence of criminal violations rather than assumptions about an institution’s charter status.

6. Abbott’s University Regents Could Be Replaced

Texas governors exercise substantial influence over higher education through appointments to university governing boards. At the University of Texas System, nine regents serve staggered six-year terms and require Senate confirmation. A new governor would inherit those existing terms. However, three UT regent terms are scheduled to expire in February 2027, creating an early opportunity for appointments if successors are confirmed. 

New appointments could change the governing boards’ approach to presidential selection, academic freedom, institutional performance, and faculty governance. They could also prompt closer examination of whether political relationships have been given undue weight in university leadership appointments.

Hinojosa has not announced a comprehensive regent replacement agenda, and current regents cannot simply be dismissed for their political associations in theory. Nevertheless, governing board appointments would be an important part of any change in Texas higher education policy.

7. University Presidents, Provosts, and Deans Could Face New Evaluations

Changes to governing boards could eventually produce changes in university leadership. Presidents are selected and evaluated through governing structures, while presidents exercise substantial authority over the appointment and dismissal of provosts, deans, and other academic administrators. The University of Texas System’s rules generally delegate responsibility for appointing and dismissing institutional administrative officers to university presidents. 

A new governing board could examine whether presidents were selected through credible processes, whether administrative appointments emphasized academic qualifications, and whether leaders delivered results in enrollment, research, student success, and institutional governance. Where community-wide evaluations establish serious leadership failures, governing boards and presidents could make personnel changes consistent with applicable rules and contracts. 

8. Black, Latino, Indigenous, and Gender Studies Could Regain Support

Texas universities have faced substantial political and legislative pressure concerning diversity initiatives, academic programs, and the teaching of race and gender. A change in state leadership could reopen discussions about the important place of Black Studies, Latino Studies, Indigenous Studies, Gender Studies, and related fields within public universities in our democracy.

These disciplines contribute to historical understanding, scholarship, public policy, and students’ ability to examine complex social questions. Decisions about their academic standing should involve faculty expertise, scholarly standards, student demand, and institutional missions.

Restoring programs affected by state policies could require legislative changes, governing board action, institutional funding, and faculty recruitment. Hinojosa has not explicitly promised these restorations, but her administration’s approach to higher education appointments and governance could influence their future.

9. Teachers Could Receive Higher Pay and Greater Professional Influence

Hinojosa’s education platform calls for raising teacher salaries and reviewing vendor contracts that her campaign considers wasteful or improper. She proposes using recovered resources to support educators.

Texas would need to determine how much money contract reviews could actually recover and whether those savings would support recurring compensation increases. Significant statewide salary changes would likely require legislative appropriations.

10. We Can Reconsider the Relationship Between Education and Political Power

For too long, political leaders, including the governors, education commissioners, and state legislatures, have used the power of government to exert oppressive pressure on public schools, educators, universities, and the communities they serve. Through state takeovers, punitive accountability systems, restrictions on academic freedom, increasingly centralized decision-making, and privatizing our schools, communities have too often been treated as problems to be managed rather than partners capable of developing solutions. Political authority has been used to impose decisions while diminishing the voices of parents, teachers, students, and locally elected representatives.

A different approach in Texas and elsewhere after the midterms would begin by recognizing that communities are the solution, not the problem. That principle should apply equally to red and blue communities, rural towns and major cities, and neighborhoods across every region. Families and educators understand their local schools, their children’s needs, and the challenges facing their communities. Their knowledge deserves meaningful influence over educational decisions. Restoring public trust requires moving away from political coercion and toward shared responsibility, meaningful local governance, transparent accountability, and genuine community participation.

After the midterms we will have an opportunity to reconsider how political power is exercised in education. Governors, commissioners, and legislators should use their authority to support communities, expand educational opportunity, and provide the resources schools need to succeed. The ultimate measure of leadership should be whether public institutions strengthen the capacity of people to shape their own futures. Regardless of whether a community votes red or blue, its children deserve excellent public schools, its educators deserve professional respect, and its residents deserve a meaningful voice in the decisions affecting their lives. A stronger education system can emerge when state leaders begin trusting communities as essential partners in educational improvement.

Years from now, our children may not remember who won the midterms. But they will live with what the winners chose to build, whose voices they listened to, and whose futures they believed were worth investing in.

Categories Accountability, Billionaires, Censorship, Charter Schools, Civil Rights, Class size, Corruption, Cruelty, Curriculum, Democracy, Education Industry, Education Reform, Elections, Ethics, Extremism, For-Profit, Funding, Higher Education, Houston, Privatization, Separation of church and state, Standardized Testing, Texas, Vouchers

Marc Elias: A Heroic Defender of Democracy Details Trump’s Efforts to Disrupt the Electioms

By dianeravitch
October 29, 2026 //
0

Marc Elias is founder of Democracy Docket and a legal team devoted to fighting the enemies of free and fair elections in court. Marc jumps in to defend democracy whenever itvv cc is threatened in court.

He is a champion of those of us who hope to protect our democracy.

He writes:

We are six days away from the midterms, and Donald Trump’s unprecedented attacks on free and fair elections are continuing to escalate. Many of you have asked what to watch for and what to expect next.

A colleague of mine once coined the phrase “shark closest to the boat” to help focus on the most immediate threats. It doesn’t mean it is the only concern, but it is the most immediate.

Here is my guide to the sharks closest to the boat carrying our democracy in these troubled waters:

1. The Department of Justice’s lawsuit over ballot counting

The Department of Justice’s lawsuit blocking ballot counting in California is the shark closest to the boat. This is the shark from “Jaws,” and it threatens to sink our democracy if we don’t call up Captain Quint.

And yes, we’re going to need a bigger boat. Especially because the DOJ has already spread this playbook to Washington State, where the DOJ demanded that the state set aside ballots from more than 400 voters it claims are noncitizens. No matter where you live, your vote is not safe.

I am certainly concerned about this shark. My legal team is already running from the beaches into the water to fight back.

U.S. District Judge David Carter is expected to issue a ruling today. The DOJ will likely lose. But that will not be the end of this shark. The department will take this case to the Supreme Court, where I am certain this shark will meet its end.

2. The DOJ’s lawsuit to block Alaska from certifying the Democratic Senate candidate 

This is a frivolous case, but be warned: The shark is still circling the boat.

As a reminder, Trump’s DOJ is suing to block certification of the Senate election if Democrat Mary Peltola wins. The DOJ’s argument is baseless and weak. This case never should have been filed in the first place.

But that doesn’t mean we should rest easy. Trump is invested in this case because he is determined to steal the Senate. He claims that he’s the one who gave the go-ahead for the DOJ to file.

My law firm has moved to intervene on behalf of Peltola’s campaign and the DSCC. The DOJ must respond to the motion to dismiss by tomorrow. I expect we will see the last of this shark soon enough.

3. DOJ threats to state election officials for following state laws

The DOJ has been threatening state election officials who are simply doing their jobs. They warned election officials they could face criminal prosecution over noncitizen voting, and as we get closer to the election, those threats are only ramping up.

On behalf of the DSCC, DCCC, DGA and Nevada Democratic Party, as well as Sen. Schumer and Rep. Jeffries, my law firm sued to stop these threats. Trump and the DOJ are clearly using intimidation to dictate who can vote and how elections are run. We will not let them win.

This is a pretty big shark that should unsettle all of us. Right now, this shark is a little further off the coastline, but it’s moving fast and picking up speed. We need to keep an eye out.

4. Red states colluding with the DOJ and Trump

There is a shark keeping a low profile on the ocean floor. That shark is red state officials colluding with the DOJ and Trump to subvert the election results in their states.

In some states, that looks like willingly handing over voter data. In others, it’s delaying mail ballots. As early voting starts, that could be welcoming federal agents at polling locations.

While this shark hides from view of the public, we need to be aware of it and keep our eyes peeled. It could make the difference between a Democratic or Republican victory.

5. Ballot seizures

This is the great white shark haunting our elections. We have not seen it yet, but the sea shanties worry us. This is the shark we fear the most.

If ballot seizures happen, it will be in the days following the election. The Tina Peters of the world — MAGA election clerks colluding with Trump — will mobilize and cause mayhem at the local level. Republican governors like Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbott will likely not stop them.

I worry because our attention will be divided. We will be fighting a lot of battles on a lot of different fronts. The sharks will attack before we see them.

But that does not mean we are not ready to fight back.

When the sharks attacked in 2020, I won 64 out of 65 cases. And we will win again.

The sharks may be circling, but they are no match for us.

Categories Education Reform

Andy Spears: Justin Pearson Has a Good Chance at Winning a Tennessee House Seat

By dianeravitch
October 28, 2026 //
4

At Trump’s urging, Tennessee lawmakers gerrymandered the state to create more districts likely to elect Republicans. One of those seats was created by dividing Memphis and spreading its voters across rural districts. A likely casualty was Justin Pearson, who expected to be elected to represent Memphis.

But Andy Spears thinks that Pearson has a good chance of winning, despite the gerrymander. Pearson was one of two Black legislators expelled in 2023 by the Republican super-majority in the state legislature for their protest against the body’s refusal to enact gun control after a shooting of three students and three teachers at the Covenant School in Nashville.

In an unexpected twist in the campaign, Pearson’s opponent, State Senator Brent Taylor admitted sending nude photos (“dick pics”) to women he didn’t know. Taylor called it a “youthful indiscretion” but he last did it when he was 53. He is now 58. ProPublica reported tha Brent Taylor’s agenda in the legislature was devoted to undermining the rights of blacks.

Who will voters choose: the energetic young black man or the aging white guy who likes to expose himself?

Veteran Tennessee journalist Andy Spears writes:

After the Tennessee General Assembly’s GOP Supermajority attempted to dilute the power of Memphis voters by carving the city up into three different congressional districts, State Rep. Justin Pearson delivered a powerful speech on the House floor. 

He closed with these words, “No matter what you do, no matter how much you try and break us and make us bend and make us quit, we will still be here.”

At the time, Pearson was already a candidate for Congress in the 9th District – now, with newly drawn lines, that district includes 15 mostly rural counties. 

Pearson stayed in the race, winning the Democratic primary comfortably.

With just under two weeks before the November 3rd election, I spoke to Pearson about his campaign and why he thinks he can win. From the start, it was clear Pearson was in motion – whether in a car or simply moving around a campaign office – he exuded an energy felt over the phone. Though his vocal cords offered evidence of relentless use, his answers to questions were crisp and focused. 

He mentioned on several occasions that his opponent, State Senator Brent Taylor, was “Trump-endorsed.” He also noted that Taylor backs the Trump policies that are making life more challenging for residents of the 9th District. 

Our conversation covered three issues: Affordability, Healthcare, and Data Centers.

Affordability

Pearson said the people he meets in the 9th District are “devastated” by the high prices of everything from “gas to groceries to healthcare.”

He laid responsibility for the spike in costs squarely at the feet of Donald Trump. Specifically, Pearson called out the war in Iran as a key driver of price increases. Pearson noted that his opponent continues to support Trump policies, like the war and tariffs, and these same policies are hurting Tennessee families. 

To address affordability, Pearson said America needs to find a way to end the war in Iran as soon as possible. He also said he supports raising taxes on billionaires and raising the minimum wage. The federal minimum wage last increased in 2009 and remains at $7.25. 

Health Care

When asked about Tennessee having the unenviable distinction of being a national leader in medical bankruptcy, Pearson said this was due in part to the state’s failure to expand Medicaid and provide insurance to more Tennesseans. Additionally, Trump Administration policies (ending ACA subsidies, for example) – which Taylor supports – have made insurance unaffordable for many families. 

Pearson said in Congress he would support expanding access to coverage for all Americans by way of a Medicare for All plan. 

He also said there should be a national effort to clear medical debt – by buying and cancelling it. The City of Memphis recently provided $17 million in medical debt relief to some 12,000 residents. Gov. Andy Beshear of Kentucky used surplus state funds to provide $250 million of medical debt relief in his state. 

Pearson said, “If we have $2 billion a day to fight a war of choice in Iran, we can afford to buy back and cancel medical debt for American families.”

Andy Beshear Takes Action to Cancel Medical Debt for Over 100,000 Kentuckians

Andy Beshear Takes Action to Cancel Medical Debt for Over 100,000 Kentuckians

Data Centers

Pearson has long been a leader on helping communities resist data centers. WPLN notes: 

Pearson supports a statewide moratorium on large data centers. The state lawmaker told WPLN that laws to protect land and people’s health from data centers will have to come at the federal level, given the Tennessee GOP’s alignment with business interests. He said he’s already drafting legislation.

A recent story in the New Yorker also points to Pearson’s work fighting against Elon Musk’s xAI data center:

Pearson and his brother KeShaun are the two most prominent local opponents of Elon Musk’s xAI, a subsidiary of which has developed a massive data-center complex, provocatively named Colossus, in and around South Memphis. The Pearsons’ group, Memphis Community Against Pollution, has questioned the legality of the company’s use of gas turbines at the data centers, alleging violations of the Clean Air Act and raising concerns about air quality.

At the federal level, Pearson says America needs a national moratorium on data centers so Congress can develop regulations that “protect communities and workers.” He said there’s a real danger that AI and the data centers it requires will end up making more money for billionaires while leaving the working class behind.

When asked why an undecided voter should support him, Pearson said, “I will fight for you, my Trump-endorsed opponent will protect the billionaire class.”

Pearson clearly has a record of leading successful fights. A record of persistence and resilience that gets results. 

In just over a week, we’ll know if that record will translate into earning Pearson a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Categories Elections, Ethics, Evil, Racism, Tennessee

House Democrats Release Report about Trump Dealings with Epstein and DOJ Suppression of His Behavior

By dianeravitch
October 28, 2026 //
3

Have you ever wondered why Trump has so little sympathy for women who say they were victims of sexual assault or rape? Why he praised Vivek’s Ramaswamy’s ad attacking Amy Acton and belittled her history of being raped by her step-father? Why Trump’s Departnebt of Justice refuses to release all the Epstein files and why those released were heavily redacted?

The House Democrats released a scathing report linking Trump to Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal activities, accusing the Department of Justice of a cover-up, and linking Trump to 11 women who claimed they were raped by him.

Julie K. Brown, the journalist at the Miami Herald who broke the Jeffrey Epstein story open after it was buried and forgotten, writes here about one of the women mentioned in the Democrats’ report.

A new sex allegation has surfaced against President Donald Trump by a former Miss Switzerland contestant who alleges that he brutally raped her during one of his beauty pageants events in 1993. 

The details of her story mirror those of other women who have accused Trump of sexual abuse and even rape. But what’s also noteworthy about this story is the gawking and grinning Trump and Epstein did at these model gatherings. They hardly seemed interested in the business of modeling; if true, it was as if they were engaged in an intrasexual competition. 

The beauty queen, Beatrice Keul, has previously said she was 24 and attending Trump’s pageant when Trump tried to attack her in a hotel room. She now says that the attack was much more violent than she previously recounted, telling the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee that Trump raped her during his American Dream Pageant.

At the event, she also recalled meeting Epstein and that he invited her to parties that he said he arranged for Trump at Mar-a-Lago. 

“I’m Jeffrey, Don’s best friend,” Epstein told her at the pageant, according to the report.

Read the Miami Herald Story Here.

The claim is part of a 53-page report compiled by Democrats on the House judiciary committee, which on Monday called for a special prosecutor to investigate Trump’s ties to Epstein and the administration’s “cover-up” of potential sex trafficking crimes by Epstein and other men, including Trump. 

“A growing body of evidence demonstrates that Donald Trump was an active participant in Jeffrey Epstein’s sexual abuse of young women during the mid-to-late 1990s,” the report says.

There have been more than a dozen women who have accused Trump of sexual improprieties, and even assault. Some of their accounts, which were previously known, are also included in the Dem’s report. 

One of the women, E. Jean Carroll, successfully sued Trump for raping her in a department store changing room. A federal jury found Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation in connection with the 1996 assault in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room. 

Many of the women listed in the Dems’ report have previously gone public with their accounts— and sadly, in some ways, have been forgotten. 

Maybe it is time for the public to take a new look.

Categories Character, Corruption, Cruelty, Elections, Gender, Scandals, Trump

“Abbott Elementary”Is Delightful. The Damage to the Children of Philadelphia Is Not.

By dianeravitch
October 28, 2026 //
5

Bruce Baker, a specialist in school finance, writes here about the longstanding underfunding of Philadelphia’s public schools and the consequences of the funding gap with the city’s suburbs.

He writes:

Abbott Elementary plays it for laughs. Janine Teagues hunts for a working rug, a functioning copier, a single extra aide. Barbara Howard has seen every reform come and go. Gregory Eddie inherits a classroom with no curriculum. Melissa Schemmenti knows a guy who can get the supplies the district can’t.

The show is entertaining. The damage is real. Behind every running gag is a funding gap that has been measurable, year after year, for at least fifteen years, and that has landed on real children in real Philadelphia classrooms.

Philadelphia’s district schools have spent between a third and a half less than what it would cost to get their students to national-average outcomes in every year from 2009 to 2023. Over the same years, the 61 suburban districts in Bucks, Chester, Delaware and Montgomery counties spent between half again and twice what their own students needed. We laugh at the broken boilers, missing counselors and teachers buying their own supplies. The kids living it don’t get a laugh track.

What follows walks from the money to the classroom: first the adequacy gap, then the simple “screwed city” picture, then teachers per child, teacher pay, and finally who is actually standing in front of the kids.

Fifteen years below the line

In 2022-23, the School District of Philadelphia spent $18,329 per pupil. Our National Education Cost Model estimates it would have needed $28,187 to give its students a shot at national-average test scores. That is a gap of $9,858 per child, or roughly $1.2 billion across 118,000 students, in a single year.

The suburbs face the mirror image. Their enrollment-weighted average spending was $20,059 against a required $13,298, a surplus of $6,761 per child. Same metro, same labor market, same state constitution.

Actual vs. required spending per pupil, Philadelphia and suburbs, 2009–2023

This is not a recent dip. Philadelphia sat 33% below its adequacy target in 2009, sank to 50% below in 2015 in the wake of the “doomsday” budgets, and was still 35% short in 2023, even with federal pandemic aid in the mix. The suburbs started out spending more than double their target and have drifted down to about 51% above it. The rest of Pennsylvania sits in between, about a third above.

Percent above or below adequacy, Philadelphia, suburbs, and rest of Pennsylvania

The outcome side tells the same story. Philadelphia’s students scored roughly 0.8 standard deviations below the national average in 2022-23, while suburban students scored about 0.2 above. Abbott’s students are not falling short because nobody cares. They are falling short where the money falls short.

Open the link to read the full report.

Categories Budget Cuts, Funding, Philadelphia

Vivek Ramaswamy is a Vile and Disgusting Man, Unfit to be Governor of Ohio or Anywhere Else

By dianeravitch
October 27, 2026 //
7

Imagine this scenario: a candidate for Governor of a major state pays for a campaign ad that portrays his opponent as a liar. That in itself is not unusual. But suppose that candidate’s staff has located the mother of his opponent and has persuaded her (paid her?) to make an ad saying that her daughter is a liar, is possibly mentally unstable, and should not be elected Governor.

But this is what’s left out of the story. The context. The target of the ad–Dr. Amy Acton– has not spoken to her mother in more than 40 years. Between the ages of 9 or 10 and 12, she was raped by her stepfather. He was indicted by a grand jury for child rape but fled the state before trial. The candidate’s mother never divorced the man who raped her daughter. The daughter and her brother were removed from their mother’s care.

The mother is a felon, charged repeatedly for non-violent crimes like fraud, writing bad checks, and even animal cruelty.

The ad in which Dr. Amy Acton’s mother attacks her is the dirtiest trick of the midterm elections. It was funded by Vivek Ramaswamy, a billionaire who is running for governor of Ohio. Vivek must have gotten tired of hearing his Democratic opponent, Dr. Amy Acton, talk about living in distressful conditions as a child. Someone on his staff found Acton’s birth mother, who lied on video to hurt her daughter yet again.

How painful for Amy Acton, who suffered through a horrible childhood, was estranged from her negligent mother, and now must endure the pain of being insulted by the mother who failed to intervene to stop the rapes and protect her daughter.

Amy Acton rose above her childhood abuse, went to college, then to medical school and became a doctor. Before she entered the race for Governor, she served Republican Governor Mike DeWine as Ohio’s Director of the state Department of Health.

Governor Mike DeWine urged Ramaswamy to take down the ad; so did other Republican state officials.

But Trump thought it was a terrific ad and urged Ramaswamy to keep running it. Trump tends to side with men accused of sexual assault, never with their victims. Vivek plans to spend $4 million to continue to run the campaign ad.

Trump and JD Vance saw nothing wrong with the ad attacking Acton. Vance said that critics should “stop whining” about the ad and focus on winning.

The one sure conclusion I reach is that these men don’t care if children are sexually assaulted and raped. They side with rapists and pedophiles, not their victims.

To these symbols of “manliness,” women don’t count.

These men are unfit to hold office.

Categories Accountability, Bias, Character, Cruelty, Elections, Ethics, Evil, Extremism, Gender, Ohio

Why Reading Fiction Matters

By dianeravitch
October 27, 2026 //
21

Did you know that reading fiction is inportant for your social and emotional development? Did you know the the widely adopted Common Core state Standards actually diminish the reading of fiction in school? The standards describe the percentage of time that should be devoted to “informational text” and fiction. As students grow older, teachers are supposed to reduce fiction and favor informational text. Studies have shown that fiction-reading has declined, which was the intended effect of the Common Core.

This article explains why the reduction of fiction reading harms students.

Richard Sima wrote the following column for The Washington Post.

Curling up with a good book isn’t just enjoyable. It’s also good for your brain.
Reading in general — newspapers, magazines, nonfiction books — has been linked to slower rates of cognitive decline in older adults and even longer lives.

But reading fiction may have unique benefits. For example, the amount of fiction people read seems to be a better predictor of language ability than nonfiction, research finds. And, perhaps even more importantly, research has found that fiction is linked to better social cognition — our ability to think about and interact with other people — and an increased understanding of the world as a complex place.
Why? Fiction forces you to imagine a story’s world and characters. It makes you grapple with different perspectives, mentally inhabiting distinct points of view, according to Nick Buttrick, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

This can help us find “better insight into our own experiences, insight into the experiences of others who are very different from us,” said Raymond Mar, a professor of psychology at York University in Toronto, who recently wrote a review on the benefits of reading narrative fiction. “It just tends to evoke a form of reflection and contemplation, which can only be good for us.”
Why reading is actually social
Social health is important for overall health. And it turns out that reading, though often thought of as a solitary activity, can boost our social abilities.
To understand why, it helps to look at how reading shapes us as we grow.
Between ages 4 and 6, children develop a theory of mind — the ability to understand that others have different beliefs, perspectives and feelings. Studies find that children exposed to more storybooks are further along this developmental milestone than those exposed to fewer ones, Mar said.

A 2025 meta-analysis of 21 studies found that children who read more storybooks had more empathy. And there is evidence that empathy and reading go both ways. Better reading comprehension was a predictor of empathy later in life, while empathy also was a predictor of better reading ability, according to a 2024 study of more than 900 children. And adolescents who read more for fun became more social adults, a 2023 study found.
Reading fiction “presents to us a complex cognitive and emotional simulation of the social world,” which is useful in the real world, Mar said.
The power of storytelling
These benefits may be due, in part, to the power of storytelling.
Neuroimaging studies find that brain networks involved in understanding stories overlap with brain networks needed for theory of mind. This suggests that “while engaging with stories, we’re also pulling online the same kinds of brain networks that we use to understand other people,” said Mar, who wrote a review about these studies.

Other forms of storytelling, such as television and movies, may provide similar benefits, but “one of the things that you do when you read is you have to construct the world” in your head, Buttrick said. “The world is not given to you. You have to do the work of imagining.”
This extra work may amplify the benefits of engaging in a story.
Spending time with our favorite story characters may also help us feel connected. “Even if our friends aren’t around and can’t get together, we can always open up a book,” Mar said.
Reading can be a social activity, too, one that reinforces the joys and benefits of reading. Book clubs, shared reading organizations and social media communities like BookTok can connect us with other readers and add yet another layer to building our social cognitive abilities.
Talking to others about the books you read means you’re not only imagining the characters in a story, but also gaining an understanding of how other people respond to those characters, Buttrick said.

Exposure to difference
Beyond helping our social cognition, reading fiction can expand our world and our understanding of its complexities. Good authors are master observers of the human condition and can expose us to experiences outside our comfort zone.

“Reading is an encounter with difference, with a different kind of mind, a different place, a different approach to the world,” Buttrick said. “And so a lot of the places where I think reading is most interesting are in places where it smashes this up with difference as strongly as it can.”
In a 2022 study of more than 5,000 people published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Buttrick and his colleagues found that those who grew up reading more literary fiction were more likely to become adults with more complex worldviews — with more nuance, more psychological richness and intellectual humility.

“I think if we want to live in a world in which everyone’s treated as something like an individual, knowing that the world is complex, especially socially complex, is probably really good,” he said.
But there are inherent difficulties with studying the effects of reading because “reading is a part of a person’s life,” Buttrick said. “And when people have more time, more space to read, more inclination to read, they’re not doing that at random.”
Benefits probably take time to accrue, and socioeconomic status is a strong predictor of reading behavior and ability, though a 2025 study of more than 14,000 students found that leisure reading had the largest benefits for children whose parents had less education.
“Successful art resonates with a great number of people because it captures something about being human that appeals to us and maybe that we don’t fully understand,” Mar said.

How to read more
Start slow. Mar recommends getting off your phone before going to bed and spending that time reading instead. “Maybe you have to build up to an hour,” he said. “But you can start with 15 minutes and then work to 30 minutes, then 45 in an hour before you go to sleep. It’s probably a good thing.”
Cultivate a habit. Consistency is key. “I don’t think that any one book will change a person’s life,” Buttrick said. “I think it’s the accretion of lots of books, you know, reading again and again and again, that really has an effect on how people think about the world more broadly.”
Dive into the vast diversity of reading. Different forms of reading — short stories, graphic novels and fan fiction, for example — also count. Given his busy work schedule and reading of academic journals, Mar prefers to read short stories. “It’s hard for me to commit to a book,” said Mar, who has most recently read the works of Irish writer Claire Keegan.

(Buttrick is currently reading Spencer Ackerman’s “Reign of Terror” and gearing up to read William Vollmann’s 3,000-plus-page novel, “A Table for Fortune.” And I’ve been reading through my collection of Terry Pratchett, who is a hilarious satirical writer, including “Small Gods,” which tackles religion, and “The Truth,” which is about journalism.)
Audiobooks can be beneficial, too. Buttrick said audiobooks still count as reading. In fact, the format may make certain books easier to grasp. Listening to James Joyce’s “Ulysses” not only makes it easier to understand and funnier, but also makes “you realize how much of it is just a song,” Buttrick said.
Remember that reading should be enjoyable. “I don’t think of reading as a monastic experience that you have to do alone at night in order to grow as a person,” Buttrick said. Lean into what you enjoy.

Make it social. Book clubs are excellent and flourishing. It’s nice to have an accountability partner and others with whom to share perspectives, Buttrick said.
Read unselfconsciously. Reading is for enjoyment. “A lot of times people seem embarrassed about the things that they’ve been reading,” Mar said. But “there’s nothing to be embarrassed about whatever you’re reading.”
Do you have a question about human behavior or neuroscience? Email BrainMatters@washpost.com and we may answer it in a future column.

Richard Sima is a neuroscientist turned award-winning science journalist who writes the “Brain Matters” column about mental health and why we do, think and feel the things we do.

Categories Cerf, Chris, Character, Charter Schools, Education Reform
« Older Entries