Jenn Borgioli Binis

Apologies but I'm not following your argument.

The issue here is very narrow: the VA state legislature passed a law regarding how teachers should teach history; meanwhile, multiple state houses have passed laws banning the use of 3-cueing.

I think they should not do that.

That is not my claim.

I use speech because "curriculum and pedagogical decision making" takes up a lot of space and it covers the basic gist.

I am saying that elected officials - who come and go, who need voters' attentions - should not be using curriculum/pedagogy to get that attention.

Can't answer a question of *should* without knowing the why and how. Are you on their eval list? Are they monitoring your improvement plan?

I don't see how your second question connects to the first one in this skeet. A principal isn't a member of the legislature.

The same holds for banning three-cueing in the elementary classroom as it does mandating teaching a particular approach to history. (There are also the issues with teaching history as settled matter - but that's specific to this issue.)

I'm happy to restate my view in general: when the legislature steps in around curriculum (which is normally handled by the state education department), they are communicating 1. they do not think educators can handle the issue at hand 2. are signaling something to the public. (1/2)

It's not the point of a bill like this but any NYS lawmaker who proposes this will be asking the legislature to break existing NYS law.

I'm never sure what the point of asking about other situations is supposed to serve.

Other government employees aren't teachers. And there are plenty of people who are already tasked with telling them how to do their job.

SAVE remains in the news so sharing this again.

How much homework is too much or too little? Chalkbeat wants to hear from teachers, parents, and students. Are assignments helping kids learn — or just adding stress? Take our short survey and share what you’re seeing in classrooms and at home.

Are assignments helping kids learn — or just adding stress? Take our short survey and share what you’re seeing in classrooms and at home.

*who holds office

Regardless, I'm happy to have a longer text-based conversation with you about this when I start up a new round of posts for my newsletter on discourse. Happy to throw some questions your way if you want to DM an email address.

Two things.

You keep repeating that this law keeps teachers from getting in trouble but I really don't see why/how you're making that leap.

Second. In effect, you're saying quality curriculum and pedagogy is about how holds office. Which... oof and ouch.

I'm going to slide again an offer that the legislation is saying to Virginians, if you don't like what a teacher says, we can pass a law telling them not to say it.

Messaging matters a whole lot here. That's not about civics.

(it's not the point - it's never the point - but it will always make me laugh)

A small note near the floor at the exit of the truck notes the collaboration of PragerU and Hillsdale College, and claims that “neither institution received any federal funds and both generously contributed their own resources to help create this educational exhibit.” It also said “this truck was made possible through a grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services,” which is, of course, a federal agency. Every AI-generated video ended with a title card showing the White House and PragerU’s logo. “The White House is grateful for the partnership with PragerU and the US Department of Education for the production of this museum,” the card said. “This partnership does not constitute or imply a US Government or US Department of Education endorsement of PragerU.”

an enduring part of this administration, I feel, is sullying anything it can't destroy

I will never not laugh at a group that publishes a list that has more men with the same name than women.

For this group, it's Roberts and Dans.

I would offer there is a HUGE difference between state legislature and a school board in terms of curriculum and pedagogical decision making.

I'm struggling to get my head around this argument, especially given what happened here in NYS.

Legislature wanted to pass a librarian shield law - NYSED and Sups reached out to Gov and said block it, this isn't a shield, it's a quagmire. They then released summary of existing shields for all Ts.

I have no idea how to process these sentences.

Out of curiosity, why? That is, why do you want state legislatures to mandate anything related to curriculum and pedagogy?

And yet, it is. We can see that in the discussion in Texas with regards to mandated book lists. It's the flipside of the VA coin.

I use "speech" because "curriculum decisions and pedagogical moves" takes up too many characters.

It remains that it doesn't matter what the specifics of the law say - it never does with laws related to how teachers' teach. It remains VA lawmakers don't trust VA history teachers.

If this is just an "statement of intent," then it's very reasonable to assume the legislature is intending to say, "we will pass laws about what you teach because we do not think you can negotiate this issue on your own." (It's the same with banning 3-cueing reading instruction.)

And yet, I'm not saying it's a First Amendment issue. I'm saying it's an overreach by the legislature - likely because they think it's popular with voters and it really has nothing to do with teachers, pedagogy, or curriculum.

I'm not a fan of this law for the same reason I dislike laws against specific reading instruction pedagogy or mandated reading lists - they're ways for lawmakers to exert power over teachers and police their speech.

I'm not aware of any time legislating curriculum or pedagogy has been a net good.

This law, like those that ban three-cuing reading instruction, police teachers' speech. Any law that does that - even if we agree with the intended goal - is a net negative for the profession.

To echo @civilwarmemory.bsky.social's parallel to NYS, the NYS gov recently (rightly) vetoed a law that, in theory, was supposed to protect librarians from parents looking to ban books. Shortly after, the NYS Ed Department released a backstop policy paper detailing how policy already does that.

Some in the Trump administration are pushing to rebuild IES After DOGE gutted IES, the education and statistics agency inside the Education Department, some in the Trump administration are trying to rebuild it. A new report of ideas on how to do that was relea...

“not one of the recommendations was a new idea to NCES,” said Peggy Carr. “Many had already been implemented or we were working on when the center was dismantled."

Great reporting by @jillbarshay.bsky.social hechingerreport.org/proof-points...

Also, the comments on the Levine's post really speak to how the general public has little understanding of how teaching works.

Oh no! And no worries - it went well! Thanks so much!