Category: Featured
-
Carousel Digital Signage Integrates with CrisisGo to Empower Safer School Communities
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA – Carousel Digital Signage announces a new technology partnership with CrisisGo that enables K-12 schools and businesses to deliver emergency alerts and other safety messages to digital displays with immediacy. The integration is enabled through an open API that triggers visual alerts, interactive maps and more to Carousel Cloud digital signage networks via the Common Alerting Protocol (CAP), a global standard that supports the digital exchange of emergency alerts and public warnings over multiple networks.
CrisisGo’s Safety iResponse platform offers a comprehensive suite of advanced alerting software and tools that empower school districts to create safer and more secure learning environments. Its features include real-time alerting, incident management and parent notification, all of which combine to help schools respond to emergencies in an efficient and effective manner. The platform also immediately shares emergency alerts with local law enforcement when police assistance is needed.
Direct integration of the two software platforms on a common IT network ensures consistent monitoring of incoming triggers from Safety iResponse to Carousel Cloud. Upon recognizing an incoming alert, Carousel Cloud disseminates the active alert as a priority for instant takeover of all targeted screens. Upon resolution, Carousel Cloud immediately removes the alert and resumes normal operations, eliminating the need to schedule expiration times or manually clear the system. That accelerates the important process of reunification to ensure all students, teachers and other staff members are accounted for and safe.
“Carousel Cloud’s ability to recognize an all-clear message is a differentiator from other digital signage solutions that we have evaluated,” said Jacob Lewis, Chief Security Officer, CrisisGo. “Carousel Cloud will also recognize the type of event our system is addressing and exactly where the alerts need to go, which could be select screens, schoolwide, or across an entire multi-campus network. This seamless interoperability represents an important step in our multimodal strategy for mass notification, which also includes delivery to all computers and mobile devices that are connected to our software.”
The CrisisGo partnership represents the latest technology integration between Carousel Digital Signage and emergency alerting platforms aimed at strengthening school safety in K-12 environments. Lewis says that while K-12 remains the top priority for CrisisGo’s integrated solution with Carousel, he anticipates potential expansion into other verticals including corporate enterprise and manufacturing.
“Our collaboration with CrisisGo represents the next step in our efforts to keep students and faculty informed, safe and resilient across all grade levels,” said Eric Henry, SVP of Business Architecture, Carousel Digital Signage. “Carousel Cloud’s open platform enables clean and reliable interoperability with CrisisGo, and our common integration with the CAP protocol ensures immediate dissemination of important visual alerts that will help school districts keep all campuses safe and secure.”
About Carousel Digital Signage
Carousel is Digital Signage Content Management Software that is easy to use, scalable, and reliable. With a deep feature set and strong technology partnerships Carousel gives you the most value in digital signage. Carousel Digital Signage is a division of Tightrope Media Systems. You can reach the Carousel team at (866) 866-4118, or visit www.carouselsignage.com.
About CrisisGo
CrisisGo has been leading the K-12 industry since 2013, setting the standard for school safety. Our comprehensive emergency and safety management platform empowers schools with real-time alerting, incident management, visitor management, threat and behavioral intervention features, and reunification solutions. CrisisGo also offers comprehensive training to equip staff and teachers with handling emergencies. CrisisGo consistently innovates to enhance K-12 security, partnering with educators and administrators to create safe and nurturing learning environments and redefining school safety for a brighter future in education.
Latest posts by eSchool News Staff (see all) -
Parents, Medical Providers, Vaccine Experts Brace for RFK Jr.’s HHS Takeover – The 74
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
While Robert F. Kennedy Jr. ‘s Senate confirmation to head the Department of Health and Human Services was not unexpected, it still shook medical providers, public health experts and parents across the country.
Mary Koslap-Petraco, a pediatric nurse practitioner who exclusively treats underserved children, said when she heard the news Thursday morning she was immediately filled with “absolute dread.”
Mary Koslap-Petraco is a pediatric nurse practitioner and Vaccines for Children provider. (Mary Koslap-Petraco) “I have been following him for years,” she told The 74. “I’ve read what he has written. I’ve heard what he has said. I know he has made a fortune with his anti-vax stance.”
She is primarily concerned that his rhetoric might “scare the daylights out of people so that they don’t want to vaccinate their children.” She also fears he could move to defund Vaccines for Children, a program under the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that provides vaccines to kids who lack health insurance or otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford them. While the program is federally mandated by Congress, moves to drain its funding could essentially render it useless.
Koslap-Petraco’s practice in Massapequa Park, New York relies heavily on the program to vaccinate pediatric patients, she said. If it were to disappear, she asked, “How am I supposed to take care of poor children? Are they supposed to just die or get sick because their parents don’t have the funds to get the vaccines for them?”
And, if the government-run program were to stop paying for vaccines, she said she’s terrified private insurance companies might follow suit.
Vaccines for Children is “the backbone of pediatric vaccine infrastructure in the country,” said Richard Hughes IV, former vice president of public policy at Moderna and a George Washington University law professor who teaches a course on vaccine law.
Kennedy will also have immense power over Medicaid, which covers low-income populations and provides billions of dollars to schools annually for physical, mental and behavioral health services for eligible students.
If Kennedy moves to weaken programs at HHS, which experts expect him to do, through across-the-board cuts in public health funding that trickle down to immunization programs or more targeted attacks, low-income and minority school-aged kids will be disproportionately impacted, Hughes said.
“I just absolutely, fundamentally, confidently believe that we will see deaths,” he added.
Anticipating chaos and instability
Following a contentious seven hours of grilling across two confirmation hearings, Democratic senators protested Kennedy’s confirmation on the floor late into the night Wednesday. The following morning, all 45 Democrats and both Independents voted in opposition and all but one Republican — childhood polio survivor Mitch McConnell of Kentucky — lined up behind President Donald Trump’s pick.
James Hodge, a public health law expert at Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, said that while it was good to see senators across the political spectrum asking tough questions and Kennedy offering up some concessions on vaccine-related policies and initiatives, he’s skeptical these will stick.
“Whatever you’ve seen him do for the last 25 to 30 years is a much, much greater predictor than what you saw him do during two or three days of Senate confirmation proceedings,” Hodge said. “Ergo, be concerned significantly about the future of vaccines, vaccine exemptions, [and] how we’re going to fund these things.”
Hodge also said he doesn’t trust how Kennedy will respond to the consequences of a dropoff in childhood vaccines, pointing to the current measles outbreak in West Texas schools.
“The simple reality is he may plant misinformation or mis-messaging,” he said.
During his confirmation hearings, Kennedy tried to distance himself from his past anti-vaccination sentiments stating, “News reports have claimed that I am anti-vaccine or anti-industry. I am neither. I am pro-safety … I believe that vaccines played a critical role in health care. All of my kids are vaccinated.”
He was confirmed as Linda McMahon, Trump’s nominee to head the Department of Education, was sitting down for her first day of hearings. At one point that morning, McMahon signaled an openness to possibly shifting enforcement to HHS of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act — a federal law dating back to 1975 that mandates a free, appropriate public education for the 7.5 million students with disabilities — if Trump were to succeed in shutting down the education department.
This would effectively put IDEA’s $15.4 billion budget under Kennedy’s purview, further linking the education and public health care systems.
In a post on the social media site BlueSky, Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, wrote she is “concerned that anyone is willing to move IDEA services for kids with disabilities into HHS, under a secretary who questions science.”
Keri Rodrigues, president of the National Parents Union and a parent of a child with ADHD and autism, told The 74 the idea was “absolutely absurd” and would cause chaos and instability.
Kennedy’s history of falsely asserting a link between childhood vaccines and autism — a disability included under IDEA coverage — is particularly concerning to experts in this light.
“You obviously have a contingent of kids who are beneficiaries of IDEA that are navigating autism spectrum disorder,” said Hughes, “Could [we] potentially see some sort of policy activity and rhetoric around that? Potentially.”
Vaccines — and therefore HHS — are inextricably linked to schools. Currently, all 50 states have vaccine requirements for children entering child care and schools. But Kennedy, who now has control of an agency with a $1.7 trillion budget and 90,000 employees spread across 13 agencies, could pull multiple levers to roll back requirements, enforcements and funding, according to The 74’s previous reporting. And Trump has signaled an interest in cutting funding to schools that mandate vaccines.
“There’s a certain percentage of the population that is focused on removing school entry requirements,” said Northe Saunders, executive director of the pro-vaccine SAFE Communities Coalition. “They are loud, and they are organized and they are well funded by groups just like RFK Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense.”
Kennedy will also have the ability to influence the makeup of the committees that approve vaccines and add them to the federal vaccine schedule, which state legislators rely on to determine their school policies. Hodge said one of these committees is already being “re-organized and re-thought as we speak.”
“With him now in place, just expect that committee to start really changing its members, its tone, the demeanor, the forcefulness of which it’s suggesting vaccines,” he added.
Hughes, the law professor, said he is preparing for mass staffing changes throughout the agency, mirroring what’s already happened across multiple federal departments and agencies in Trump’s first weeks in office. He predicts this will include Kennedy possibly asking for the resignations “of all scientific leaders with HHS.”
Kennedy appeared to confirm that he was eyeing staffing cuts Thursday night during an appearance on Fox News’s “The Ingraham Angle.”
“I have a list in my head … if you’ve been involved in good science, you have got nothing to worry about,” Kennedy said.
Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
-
White House barring AP from press events violates the First Amendment
A widening gulf has opened between the Trump administration and the Associated Press.
Which gulf?
Precisely.
On Tuesday, the AP said the White House blocked one of its reporters from attending an event in the Oval Office because the outlet continues to use the name Gulf of Mexico in its reporting. This, despite President Donald Trump’s recent executive order renaming it the Gulf of America.
After Trump signed that order, the AP announced it would continue referring to the gulf by its original name “while acknowledging the new name Trump has chosen.” It did so in part because the gulf borders other countries that don’t recognize the name change. (The AP did update its Stylebook to reflect Trump’s separate decision to revert the name of North America’s highest mountain, which President Obama changed to the native moniker Denali, to Mount McKinley because that “area lies solely in the United States.”)
In a Wednesday briefing, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed the AP’s allegations:
I was very up front in my briefing on day one that if we feel that there are lies being pushed by outlets in this room, we are going to hold those lies accountable. And it is a fact that the body of water off the coast of Louisiana is called the Gulf of America.
The standoff continues — and has escalated beyond Oval Office events. Last night, the White House blocked the AP from an open press conference featuring Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
FIRE issued a statement condemning the administration’s actions, which have drawn criticism from press freedom groups, pundits, and politicians across the political spectrum.
In a letter to White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, AP Executive Editor Julie Pace called the administration’s actions “viewpoint discrimination based on a news organization’s editorial choices and a clear violation of the First Amendment.”
She’s right.
To be sure, the First Amendment does not require the White House to open its doors to the media or hold press conferences. Nor does the president have to do a one-on-one interview with CNN just because he did one with Fox News. But court decisions spanning decades make clear that once the government grants media access, it has to play by constitutional rules.
That doesn’t mean the White House has to allow every reporter in the world into the Oval Office or briefing room. Space constraints obviously make that impossible, and not every journalist will manage to secure a press pass. But the reason for denying access matters. When the government shuts out journalists explicitly because it dislikes their reporting or political views, that violates the First Amendment.
As one federal court proclaimed, “Neither the courts nor any other branch of the government can be allowed to affect the content or tenor of the news by choreographing which news organizations have access to relevant information.”
And because denying press access involves the potential deprivation of First Amendment rights, any decision about who’s in or out must also satisfy due process. That means the government must establish clear, impartial criteria and procedures, and reporters must receive notice of why they were denied access and have a fair opportunity to challenge that decision.
The AP — a major news agency that produces and distributes reports to thousands of newspapers, radio stations, and TV broadcasters around the world — has had long-standing access to the White House. It is now losing that access because its exercise of editorial discretion doesn’t align with the administration’s preferred messaging.
That’s viewpoint discrimination, and it’s unconstitutional.
This isn’t the first time the White House has sent a journalist packing for reporting critically, asking tough questions, or failing to toe the government line. During Trump’s first term, the White House suspended CNN reporter Jim Acosta’s press pass after he interrogated the president about his views on immigration. After the network sued, a federal court ordered the administration to restore Acosta’s pass.
But court decisions spanning decades make clear that once the government grants media access, it has to play by constitutional rules.
Democratic administrations have also unacceptably targeted disfavored outlets for exclusion. The Obama administration tried to exclude Fox News from a press pool because of displeasure with its coverage. Obama’s deputy press secretary Josh Earnest said at the time, “We’ve demonstrated our willingness and ability to exclude Fox News from significant interviews.”
Similar attacks on press freedom happen at all levels of government. In 2022, FIRE filed an amicus curiae — “friend of the court” — brief in a First Amendment lawsuit challenging vague and arbitrary press pass rules that Arizona elections officials used to block a Gateway Pundit journalist from press conferences. The officials didn’t like the conservative journalist’s political views or negative coverage, including his “inflammatory and/or accusatory language.” After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit initially ruled in favor of The Gateway Pundit, the outlet received a $175,000 settlement.
The current spat over naming conventions for a body of water may seem trivial. But it sends a chilling message to all journalists that White House access hinges on whether the president approves of their reporting. Left unchecked, such a precedent opens the door to broader efforts to manipulate public discourse and undermine press freedom. What other “lies” might the Trump administration hold media outlets “accountable” for? Could scrutiny of its immigration policies, economic performance, or claims about election integrity be next?
The characterization of the AP’s editorial style choice as a “lie” shows the danger of empowering the state to police mis- or disinformation. The Chinese government might say the same about anyone who calls a certain territory “Taiwan” instead of the “Republic of China” or “Chinese Taipei.” To a government official with a misinformation hammer, every deviation from official messaging looks like a nail. We saw enough misguided attempts to police “misinformation” during the Biden administration. Let’s leave that behind.
In an executive order signed the same day as the one renaming the gulf, Trump promised to “ensure that no Federal Government officer, employee, or agent engages in or facilitates any conduct that would unconstitutionally abridge the free speech of any American citizen.” That’s a good policy, and the administration should stick to it — the First Amendment requires no less.
Any government attempt to control the flow of information strikes a blow at the First Amendment. A free press performs a vital democratic function — gathering, curating, and delivering information, which we can then evaluate for ourselves. Without the Fourth Estate acting as a crucial check on government power, we’ll know less about what our elected officials are up to, and face greater difficulty holding them accountable.
The beauty of this country’s ideologically diverse media landscape is that if you distrust a particular source, countless others are available offering different information and perspectives. Preserving this rich information ecosystem demands constant vigilance against any threats to free speech and a free press, regardless of who the target is. The alternative — no matter what name you give it — is censorship.
-
FIRE opposes Virginia’s proposed regulation of candidate deepfakes
Last year, California passed restrictions on sharing AI-generated deepfakes of candidates, which a court then promptly blocked for violating the First Amendment. Virginia now looks to be going down a similar road with a new bill to penalize people for merely sharing certain AI-generated media of political candidates.
This legislation, which has been in SB 775 and HB 2479, would make it illegal to share artificially generated, realistic-looking images, video, or audio of a candidate to “influence an election,” if the person knew or should have known that the content is “deceptive or misleading.” There is a civil penalty or, if the sharing occurred within 90 days before an election, up to one year in jail. Only if a person adds a conspicuous disclaimer to the media can they avoid these penalties.
The practical effects of this ban are alarming. Say a person in Virginia encounters a deepfaked viral video of a candidate on Facebook within 90 days of an election. They know it’s not a real image of the candidate, but they think it’s amusing and captures a message they want to share with other Virginians. It doesn’t have a disclaimer, but the person doesn’t know it’s supposed to, and doesn’t know how to edit the video anyway. They decide to repost it to their feed.
That person could now face jailtime.
The ban would also impact the media. Say a journalist shares a deepfake that is directly relevant to an important news story. The candidate depicted decides that the journalist didn’t adequately acknowledge “in a manner that can easily be heard and understood by the average listener or viewer, that there are questions about the authenticity of the media,” as the bill requires. That candidate could sue to block further sharing of the news story.
The First Amendment safeguards expressive tools like AI, allowing them to enhance our ability to communicate with one another without facing undue government restrictions.
These illustrate the startling breadth of SB 775/HB 2479’s regulation of core political speech, which makes it unlikely to survive judicial scrutiny. Laws targeting core political speech have serious difficulty passing constitutional muster, even when they involve false or misleading speech. That’s because there’s no general First Amendment exception for misinformation, disinformation, or other false speech. That’s for good reason: A general exception would be easily abused to suppress dissent and criticism.
Wave of state-level AI bills raise First Amendment problems
News
There’s no ‘artificial intelligence’ exception to the First Amendment.
There are narrow, well-defined categories of speech not protected by the First Amendment — such as fraud and defamation — that Virginia can and does already restrict. But SB 775/HB 2479 is not limited to fraudulent or defamatory speech.
For laws that burden protected speech related to elections, it is a very high bar to pass constitutional muster. This bill doesn’t meet that bar. It restricts far more speech than necessary to prevent voters from being deceived in ways that would have any effect on an election, and there are other ways to address deepfakes that would burden much less speech. For one, other speakers or candidates can (and do) simply point them out, eroding their potential to deceive.
The First Amendment safeguards expressive tools like AI, allowing them to enhance our ability to communicate with one another without facing undue government restrictions.
We urge the Virginia General Assembly to oppose this legislation. If it gets to his desk, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin should veto.
-
New accommodation scholarship for UK-bound Indian students
Student accommodation platform University Living and the National Indian Students and Alumni Union (NISAU) have launched the Living Scholarship – worth £12,000 (INR 13,10,832).
The scholarships will be provided to 10 “outstanding students” from India, who are planning to pursue higher education in the UK.
“Accommodation is the second-largest expense after tuition for students studying abroad, and we believe financial challenges should not be a barrier to achieving academic dreams,” said Saurabh Arora, founder and CEO, University Living.
“Through this scholarship, we are committed to providing meaningful support to Indian students so they can focus on their education and future careers with greater confidence.”
Beyond financial assistance, recipients will benefit from exclusive mentorship, participation in student ambassador programs, and access to internship opportunities, through the organisations, all aimed at fostering their professional growth and future career success.
Accommodation is the second-largest expense after tuition for students studying abroad, and we believe financial challenges should not be a barrier to achieving academic dreams
Saurabh Arora, University Living.“NISAU has long worked to ensure Indian students in the UK are set up for success, and the Living Scholarship is a vital step in reducing financial stress for them,” said Sanam Arora, chairperson, NISAU UK.
“Together with University Living, we aim to empower students with not just financial aid but also networking and professional growth opportunities.”
The Living Scholarship will open for applications on February 14, 2025, with more information available on www.universityliving.com.
Indian students and alumni are recognised as an integral part of the UK higher education system, with organisations like NISAU celebrating their achievements annually through events such as the India-UK Achievers Honours and Conference, which took place in central London on January 13.
Despite the UK emerging as one of the most sought after study destinations among students from India, in recent years poor job prospects, and stricter rules on students bringing dependents into the country with them have led to falling numbers.
As per a report by the Times of India, students from India have seen the largest drop, falling from nearly 140,000 in 2022/23 to 111,329 in 2023/24 – a decrease of over 20%.
Applications from other major sending countries such as Bangladesh and Nigeria have also fallen.
However, new data from the UK Home Office reveals that 28,700 sponsored study visa applications were submitted in January 2025 – a 12.5% increase compared to the 25,500 applications recorded in January 2024.
Though there are encouraging signs, Home Office data continues to show a broader downward trend over the past year with applications from main applicants totalling 411,100 in the year ending January 2025 – a 13% decrease compared to the previous year.
-
Leverage expands services to Türkiye
“The Turkish young, sitting at the centre of Europe and Asia, are true globalists. Their appetite for winning on the international stage is a delight to watch,” said Akshay Chaturvedi, CEO of Leverage Edu announcing the news that the edtech firm, which specialises in study abroad services, will be launching its services in Türkiye.
“To fuel those dreams, we are incredibly excited to launch LeverageTürkiye — starting with our AI tools for counsellors, the Leverage Edu consumer app for students, Student-ops 360 for partners, and a line-up of special exclusive products tailored to meet that ‘education to career’ arc.”
With over 50,000 Turkish students pursuing higher education abroad in 2024 – a number that continues to climb – the country has emerged as a critical player in the global education landscape.
Leverage Edu CEO and founder, Akshay Chaturvedi with Ali Can Cirak, regional manager, business development. Factors fuelling this growth include Türkiye’s youthful population, where more than 50% of its citizens are under 30, and an increasing demand for globally recognised degrees in fields such as engineering, medicine, and business.
The Turkish young, sitting at the centre of Europe and Asia, are true globalists
Akshay Chaturvedi, Leverage Edu“Türkiye represents a very dynamic opportunity, just given where it sits on our planet,” said Chaturvedi. “As a country with a vibrant young population and increasing global mobility, it not only offers immense potential for growth but also serves as a bridge linking two of the most dynamic educational ecosystems in the world – the East and the West – hence an important first-level brick on top of which we’d like to build much more.”
To support its Turkish students and partners, Leverage is deploying a dedicated team on the ground in Türkiye, including a country manager to oversee operations and drive business success in the region. Additionally, several university representative desks will be dedicated to Turkish students.
In the coming months, Leverage’s ancilllary services Fly Finance and Fly Homes will also be available in Türkiye.
“We are committed to creating many win-wins, for students and institutions alike,” Chaturvedi added.
-
Can regional leaders help bring peace to DR Congo?
Critics abroad and in Congo accuse DRC president Tshisekedi and his government of being distant, corrupt and ineffective and continually failing to meet promises or even talk to the rebels.
“I am exhausted with Tshisekedi’s governance,” said one Congolese citizen.
There have been strong and repeated accusations by the United Nations and others that the M23, which is now part of the broader Alliance Fleuve Congo (AFC), receives both funding and tangible support from Rwanda and its army, that it has been responsible for excessive violence — including reports of rape in a Goma prison last week — and that it has benefited from the increasing control of lucrative mineral mines in the region.
A multinational push for peace
The actual truth is much more complex, nuanced and difficult to distinguish, especially given the direct involvement of national army soldiers on the ground, not just from the DRC and Rwanda but from other countries, such as Burundi, South Africa and Tanzania.
There are also about 14,000 UN peacekeeping forces in the region, as well as more than 100 other militia groups and even mercenaries from Eastern Europe. Rwanda recently ensured the safe repatriation of 300 of them back to Romania.
And then there are powerful political and business leaders in the United States, Europe, Russia and China who somewhat cynically want to ensure the continued supply of precious minerals — such as cobalt, coltan and tantalum — for their cars, cellphones and computers.
On a more personal level, I live with my Rwandan wife and young son in a newly-built house just south of Rwanda’s capital city of Kigali, which lies only 150 kilometres away from the current conflict zone and which has been repeatedly threatened by DRC president Tshisekedi and leading government officials.
Just last week, Rwanda’s ambassador to the UN in Geneva, James Ngango, accused the DRC of amassing a stockpile of weapons — including rockets, kamikaze drones and heavy artillery guns — that are pointed straight at Rwanda.
Fears that violence will cross borders
My wife Merveille — whose father and three brothers may well have been murdered by some of the current FDLR militia fighters in eastern DRC — still has nightmares about them possibly attacking or even taking back Rwanda.
A Rwanda security expert texted me that the threat to “attack Rwanda immediately” was real before the M23 rebels took over Goma and there are still concerns about large weapon stockpiles in South Kivu province. He added that if the M23 can now secure the regional capital of Bukavu and the nearby Kavumu airport “all security risks against Rwanda will be reduced/mitigated.”
This will allay our personal concerns but we are still worried about the security of some close friends in Goma, who fell silent for five whole days after the M23 rebels took control of their city in late January but thankfully got back in contact right after power and WiFi service were restored.
Daily life in Goma has returned to something like normal over the last week or so but the nighttime is different.
One of our friends texted me on Tuesday: “Safety in Goma is degrading day in, day out. Getting armed looters at night. From this night alone we register more than seven deaths. A friend was visited as well. He let them in and his life was spared and his family. He said this morning that it was hard to determine their identity because they had no military uniforms but we all suspect they are they are the Wazalendo or prisoners who escaped from Munzenze prison. They come in to steal, rape and kill who ever shows resistance.”
The Wazalendo — meaning “patriots” or “nationalists” — are a group of irregular fighters in North Kivu province, who are allied with the Congolese army and opposed to the M23.
Our friend in Goma said that he still has enough security in his house but when asked about the potentially revitalised multilateral peace process, he said: “I am actually speechless right now, I don’t know what to think about all this. So much has happened.”
The weekend summit’s joint communiqué did call for an immediate end to the violence and for defense ministers to come up with concrete plans for sustainable peace measures, such as the resumption of “direct negotiations and dialogue with all state and non-state parties,” including the M23 that DRC president Tshisekedi has long tried to resist.
Observers see this as a positive sign and there are renewed hopes — along with lingering doubts after so many earlier failed initiatives — that this unusual and timely degree of coordinated Africa-based action and support at the highest levels could mean that the fighting, killing and disruption may wane soon and a long-lasting, peaceful solution can be reached.
In the words of the sadly-departed Rabbi Lord Jonathan Sacks of the UK: “The greatest single antidote to violence is conversation, speaking our fears, listening to the fears of others, and in that sharing of vulnerabilities, discovering a genesis of hope.”
Three questions to consider:
1. Why is the situation in Eastern DRC so difficult to sort out?
2. Think of a time when you, someone you knew or someone you respected used “direct negotiations and dialogue” to achieve a positive outcome to a challenging problem.
3. What would you say or do if you were one of the regional African leaders trying to achieve a sustainable, non-violent solution to the Eastern DRC crisis?
-
Reaching peak engagement in K-12 science education
Key points:
More than half of science teachers believe the most important value of science education is how it contributes to students’ curiosity, critical thinking, and creativity, according to a new report from LEGO Education. But are today’s students truly engaging with science education?
LEGO Education’s State of Classroom Engagement Report: Science Edition surveyed more than 6,000 global teachers, parents, students, and U.S. administrators to gather data that can offer insight to support educators as they strive to engage their students in science learning.
Science learning builds life skills students will use even if they do not pursue the science in college or as a career. It also increases student engagement and well-being, but here’s the catch: Students have to feel connected to the material in order to build these skills.
Just over half of global science teachers say their students are engaged in science, which points to a critical need to boost engagement in the subject, according to the report. Interestingly, students say they are more engaged in science than they are in school overall. Only one-third of teachers worldwide indicate that their students are engaged in the classroom. Schools could leverage students’ interest in science to build schoolwide engagement–a key factor tied to student well-being.
When students aren’t engaged in science, what’s behind that lack of engagement? Often, they’re intimidated before they even learn the material, and they assume the topics are too challenging. Students lose confidence before they even try. Of students who say science is their least-favorite topic, 45 percent say science is too hard and 37 percent say they are bad at science. What’s more, 77 percent of global teachers say they believe students struggle because of complex concepts and curricula, and they’re searching for for impactful resources that support every student’s success.
“If students think they’re not good at the subject or avoid it, we risk losing an entire generation of innovators and problem solvers,” said Victor Saeijs, president of LEGO Education, in the report.
How can educators reach students who struggle to engage with science? Hands-on science learning is the key to piquing student curiosity, prompting them to engage with learning material and build confidence as they explore science concepts. Sixty-two percent of science teachers say hands-on activities drive student engagement in science. Seventy-five percent of science teachers who do incorporate hands-on activities believe this approach leads to higher test scores and grades.
More students need access to hands-on science learning. Only 55 percent of students say they regularly get hands-on experiences–these experiences usually require extra time and resources to plan and execute. Eighty-two percent of science teachers say they need more ways to teach science with play and hands-on methods.
Having access to hands-on science learning experiences increases students’ confidence, giving them the boost they often need to tackle increasingly tough-to-learn concepts:
- 73 percent of students with access to hands-on learning opportunities report feeling confident in science
- Just 52 percent of students who do not have access to hands-on learning report feeling confident in science
Hands-on experiences in science drive:
- Learning outcomes: 71 percent of science teachers who incorporate hands-on, playful learning believe the methodology supports higher test scores and grades
- Engagement for all learners: 84 percent of U.S. teachers and 87 percent of administrators think that hands-on experiences help all types of learners engage with science concepts
- Love of science: 63 percent of students who love science credit their passion to regular hands-on experiences
- Confidence: 79 percent of students who have hands-on science experiences are confident in the subject
Administrators and science teachers are short on time and need hands-on tools and resources to quickly engage students in learning:
- 59 percent of U.S. administrators and 54 percent of science teachers say they need more tools to engage students in science
- Nearly one-third of U.S. students do not get hands-on science experiences.
Latest posts by Laura Ascione (see all) -
Elite Universities With Legacy Admissions (edreformnow.org)
Here is a short list of US universities with legacy admissions. These elite and highly selective schools give preferential treatment to applicants who are related to alumni, which rewards parents, grandparents, and relatives of students rather than rewarding deserving students for their skills and efforts.
For a more exhaustive list, visit edreformnow.org. The spreadsheet is here.
California banned legacy admissions for private colleges in 2024. The practice is also under increased scrutiny in the wake of the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling against college admissions policies that consider race.
While it may not be just or fair, the process is not illegal in the
United States, nor is there much public outcry about this elitist tradition.
Without insider information, it’s also difficult to know how individual schools use legacy admissions and
how the murky process operates.
