Assignment #3

Ross Douthat has been a columnist for the New York Times for almost four years and before, was a senior editor at the Atlantic and a blogger for theatlantic.com. He's the author and co-author of works including "Privilege: Harvard and the Education of the Ruling Class" and is a Harvard graduate. In the opinion section of the New York Times, he evaluates Crime and the Social Crisis explaining that "any real prison reform effort is likely to prove much more wrenching than the optimism of policy wonks would sometimes lead one to expect". He uses evaluations from Adam Gopnik's New York essay along with Christopher Glaznek's piece "Raise the Crime Rate" to support his claim "how powerful one finds this counter-argument depends on one's views of mass incarceration and its consequences". He provides evidence on how swiftly crime rates have plummeted over the last decade and a half, which to him proves that there is no social crisis, or at least less of one than Charles Murray's analysis would indicate in his great debate. To me the most important piece of logical information in the commentary is when stated that "maybe they suggest that we've protected American society as a whole from the consequences of social breakdown by imprisoning low-income, less-educated men by the thousands and millions". I agree with a lot his ideas because of their individualistic views like personal perception and interpretation of popular thought.

Stage Two: Article Introduction and Colleague's Blogs

An article in the New York Times discusses how the law know as “No Child Left Behind” has been a long standing operation, heavily involving the federal government's role in education. Its focus is on the use of standardized test scores, encouraging raised academic standards, preparing all students for college or careers. This refocusing of energies, turning the few thousand worst schools, is not only valid, but essential in mediating between the more fortunate schools and themselves. Recently, under the Obama administration, in March 2010 announced its use of executive power to make such changes. This month it was announced that waivers were to be granted to the ten states having taken action. High scoring schools are to be rewarded thusly, and low scoring schools are to be singled out for “rigorous and comprehensive interventions”, mainly targeting the advancement of minority students. The article discusses thoroughly the history and specific significance of the law, and how the government has planned and will continue carrying out its focus.