Is critical thinking across the curriculum a plausible goal?

Critical thinking (CT) is considered an essential educational goal. As a result, many philosophers dreamed their departments would offer multiple sections of CT, hence justifying hiring additional staff. Unfortunately, this dream did not materialize. So, similar to a current theory about teaching writing, “critical thinking across the curriculum” has become a popular idea. While the idea has appeal and unquestionable merit, I will argue that the likelihood the skills necessary for effective CT will actually be taught is minimal

Learning Her Way In: The Life History Of A Latina Adult Educator

This paper explores the various learning experiences of a bilingual and bicultural woman of Mexican heritage. The data collection and data analysis were performed with the intent of creating a life history and allowing recurrent themes to emerge. These three recurrent themes were identified as interplay among learning, survival, and spirituality; health, health care, and parish nursing; and multiple and competing contexts. The essential structure that connected all of the recurrent themes was the participant’s learning and the impacts that it had on her lived experiences. In this way, Monica and her life history are the story of a Latina who has learned her own way into a second culture

Commodified Inequality: Racialized Harm to Children and Families in the Injustice Enterprise

This article addresses the systemic racialized harm of a vast injustice enterprise, with a focus on the symbiotic operations of agencies and justice systems monetizing vulnerable children and families, including the impact of contractual revenue schemes uncovered in my new book, Injustice, Inc. Our foundational justice systems are permeated by a history of racial injustice, and that history reverberates into factory-like operations that churn children and the poor into revenue. The revenue-generating mechanisms used by juvenile and family courts, prosecutors, probation departments, police, sheriffs, and detention facilities all draw the concerning historical connection—interlinked with the practices of child and family agencies—as the institutions abdicate their ethical and constitutional requirements in order to commodify inequality

Poverty Revenue: The Subversion of Fiscal Federalism

Fiscal federalism is a staple of economic theory that underlies the federal-state partnership in the nation‘s largest federal grant-in-aid programs, such as Medicaid and Title IV-E Foster Care. The theory is founded on a simple principle, the collaboration of the federal government‘s financial power and stability and state governments‘ ability to deliver services tailored to regional needs. However, the theory ignores a vast industry that has grown around the flow of federal funds. In addition to providing operational and consulting services for all aspects of government aid, this poverty industry - which usurps inherently governmental functions and is rife with organizational conflicts of interest and a revolving door of personnel - has now tapped into grant-in-aid funding at its source. Through revenue maximization contracts, the poverty industry helps states increase claims for federal aid, and the additional funding is often diverted from its intended purpose. The contractors take as much as 25% as a contingency fee and assist cash-strapped states with strategies to route the aid dollars into general revenue rather than targeted assistance. Then, while maximizing claims on behalf of state clients, the industry simultaneously contracts with the federal government to reduce payout of the same federal funds. Analogous to the iron triangle formed by the military-industrial complex, the vertical relationship between the federal and state governments in grant-in-aid programs has been transformed by a poverty-industrial complex. And as the structure of fiscal federalism is subverted, the benefits of the theory break down. As the intended social welfare maximization goals of government turn to revenue maximization, and intergovernmental collaboration turns to conflict, the integrity of fiscal federalism in grant-in-aid programs is undermined and statutory purpose is lost

Electromagnetic mirror drive system

Oscillatory electromagnetic mirror drive system for horizon scanner

Foster Children Paying for Foster Care

This Article examines the legality and policy concerns of state foster care agencies using children\u27s Social Security benefits as a state funding stream. The practice requires foster children who are disabled or have deceased or disabled parents to pay for their own care. Often with the assistance of private consultants under contingency fee contracts, agencies look for children who are eligible for Social Security benefits and interject themselves as the children\u27s representative payees. Rather than using the benefits to serve the children\u27s unmet needs, the agencies use their fiduciary power to access the children\u27s benefits and apply the funds to reimburse foster care costs for which the children have no legal obligation. Although the practice was upheld by the Supreme Court in Washington State Dep\u27t. of Social and Health Services vs. Guardianship Estate of Keffeler, the decision was limited and legal and policy questions remain unresolved. This Article provides a framework for renewed policy discussions and expanded litigation strategies in the wake of Keffeler. The Article investigates agency practices, weighs the policy concerns, analyzes several possible legal challenges that remain after Keffeler, and concludes with concrete suggestions for reform

Poverty Revenue: The Subversion of Fiscal Federalism

Fiscal federalism is a staple of economic theory that underlies the federal-state partnership in the nation‘s largest federal grant-in-aid programs, such as Medicaid and Title IV-E Foster Care. The theory is founded on a simple principle, the collaboration of the federal government‘s financial power and stability and state governments‘ ability to deliver services tailored to regional needs. However, the theory ignores a vast industry that has grown around the flow of federal funds. In addition to providing operational and consulting services for all aspects of government aid, this poverty industry - which usurps inherently governmental functions and is rife with organizational conflicts of interest and a revolving door of personnel - has now tapped into grant-in-aid funding at its source. Through revenue maximization contracts, the poverty industry helps states increase claims for federal aid, and the additional funding is often diverted from its intended purpose. The contractors take as much as 25% as a contingency fee and assist cash-strapped states with strategies to route the aid dollars into general revenue rather than targeted assistance. Then, while maximizing claims on behalf of state clients, the industry simultaneously contracts with the federal government to reduce payout of the same federal funds. Analogous to the iron triangle formed by the military-industrial complex, the vertical relationship between the federal and state governments in grant-in-aid programs has been transformed by a poverty-industrial complex. And as the structure of fiscal federalism is subverted, the benefits of the theory break down. As the intended social welfare maximization goals of government turn to revenue maximization, and intergovernmental collaboration turns to conflict, the integrity of fiscal federalism in grant-in-aid programs is undermined and statutory purpose is lost

Primary Stroke Prevention: 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-Coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) Reductase Inhibitor (statin) Use in the Diabetic Patient

Purpose: The primary objective for this retrospective chart review was to evaluate provider adherence to the 2011 AHA/ASA Primary Stroke Prevention guideline of prescribing a statin to all diabetic patients for primary prevention of stroke, regardless of dyslipidemia. A second aim of this study is to identify provider facilitators and barriers to prescribing a statin therapy for primary prevention. Methods: Using a retrospective study design, a random sample of 100 medical records of diabetic patients presenting to a university women’s health clinic within the previous year were reviewed for statin use and rationale. Results: Of the 100 diabetic patients sampled, only 69% were currently prescribed a statin therapy. Furthermore, only one patient had a diabetic rationale for statin use. Primary stroke prevention counseling and therapy aimed at prevention of primary stroke will be completed at a future date. Conclusion: In this clinic setting there is no documentation of adherence to the 2011 AHA/ASA Primary Stroke Prevention Guideline recommendation that statin therapy be used as a primary prevention in the diabetic population

Child Support Harming Children: Subordinating the Best Interests of Children to the Fiscal Interests of the State

This Article examines the government policy of seeking reimbursement of welfare costs through child support enforcement. Under our welfare program, Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF), custodial parents applying for benefits are required to establish child support obligations against the absent parents and to assign the resulting child support payments to the government. As a result, half of the $105 billion in national child support debt is owed to the government rather than to children. The government\u27s fiscal interests are in direct conflict with the best interests of the children - the controlling legal standard in child support matters. The conflict results in legal confusion, and the welfare cost recovery efforts harm children, families and society. Children in welfare families struggling to become self-sufficient lose out as their support payments are redirected to the government. Fragile relationships between mothers, fathers and children are often broken. The fiscal benefit to the government is minimal, at best. And the social fabric is torn, as significant numbers of welfare fathers retreat from the workforce and their families. This Article thoroughly examines the conflict and resulting legal and policy questions. The Article explores the history of the competing interests and purposes of child support in America, describes the framework and impact of the current government welfare cost recovery system, addresses the long ignored and unresolved legal questions that result from the conflicting missions, and concludes with suggestions for reform including the Article\u27s primary conclusion that welfare cost recovery is a failed effort - and should therefore end