The revenue generated by college athletics is still not fairly shared with the players (“Even the Supreme Court Can’t Save the N.C.A.A. From Itself,” The New York Times, Mar. 24). Although players are now allowed to be paid for their names, images and likenesses as a result of the Supreme Court’s ruling in N.C.A.A. v. Alston in 2021, they can’t be paid for playing.

The NCAA is too powerful.  Players are mere pawns in the system.  It’s time to stop the exploitation of athletes and pay them for their labor.

(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)

It’s hard to understand why the college rankings that U.S. News began 40 years ago are only now being savaged (“The Unraveling of the U.S. News College Rankings,” The Wall Street Journal, Mar. 22).  After all, if they don’t benefit students, hasn’t that always been true? 

Ranking colleges is bound to be controversial.  But I think the outcry is overwrought.  Is it because administrators want to escape accountability? High school seniors and their parents are sophisticated enough not to make choices solely on the basis of what U.S. News publishes.

(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)

Whenever the subject is racial differences in any field, conclusions are guaranteed to be controversial. No matter how much evidence is presented. Nowhere is this more evident than in the performance of Blacks in law school (“Law-School “Mismatch” Is Worse Than We Thought,” The James G. Martin Center for Academic Renewal, Mar. 15).

Affirmative action was well intentioned, but it has been a disaster for those it was designed to help.  The undergraduate grades and median LSAT scores of enrolled Black students were two standard deviations below those of white students.  As a result, Blacks were six times as likely as whites to take the bar exam multiple times but never pass.

Yet we persist in believing that affirmative action is justified.  I fail to see how Blacks are helped in light of the evidence.

(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)

In a misguided attempt to racially diversify elite high schools, some school districts are using a lottery (“Parents Challenge Lottery Systems Used to Diversify Elite High Schools,” The Wall Street Journal, Mar. 13).  Although the policy is well intentioned, it will do terrible harm to whatever academic standards still exist.

With few exceptions, diversity and merit cannot exist in equal proportions.  That’s because life is unfair.  Some young people are smarter and work harder than others. Trying to engineer an ideal racial enrollment will undermine elite high schools. Only the U.S. is hellbent on destroying giftedness.

(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)

Although the Supreme Court in 1925 ruled in Pierce v. Society of Teachers that parents have the right to direct the education of their children, it is only now that they are exercising it (“What the Push for Parents’ Rights Means for Schools,” Education Week, Mar. 8).  I say it’s about time because what is taking place in too many schools is indoctrination.

Critical race theory as well as other controversial topics are replacing the 3Rs.  As a result, students graduate high school with the belief that they are victims.  That attitude will alienate prospective employers who rightly complain that young people are totally unprepared for the marketplace.

(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)

A group of writers, intellectuals and professors has banded together to denounce anti-woke efforts as censorship (“US educational authorities must resist ‘anti-woke’ censorship,” The Guardian, Mar. 10). They claim the movement harms students.

I maintain just the opposite.  Students who have been exposed to a woke curriculum can’t read, write or do arithmetic. Yet they are certain they have been oppressed because of what they’ve been taught.  I fail to understand how they are better off than students who have been taught a traditional curriculum.

(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)

The fundamental problem with critical race theory is that it doesn’t treat students as individuals (“Critical race theory is teaching kids to hate each other,” New York Post, Mar. 9). Instead, everything is viewed through the prism of race.

Even though no race is a monolith, CRT continues to assume otherwise. As a result, students are being taught to hate those who are from a different race.  The damage being done won’t be seen in its entirety for many years.  By the time it is, it will be too late to remedy the damage.

(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)

What’s happening in lecture halls across the country today makes a mockery of critical thinking (“’Tar, a Breath of Fresh Air, Deserves the Oscar for Best Picture,” The Wall Street Journal, Mar. 8).  Students who disagree with their professors or with their fellow students try to silence them rather than engage them with a counterargument. As a result, it’s impossible to develop the knowledge and skills that used to be associated with a college degree.

As long as this trend continues, I don’t think a bachelor’s degree today means much of anything.

(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)

When the mother of a child in a Rhode Island school asked to see the curriculum, she was attacked as an “enemy of the state” (“RI mom says teachers unions treated her like ‘enemy of the state’ after asking about the curriculum,” New York Post Mar. 5).  It’s this kind of reaction that will backfire.

Teachers unions need all the friends they can get.  But they are doing precisely what they shouldn’t.  Parents have every right to examine the curriculum and make their reactions known. If they continue along this line, they will find themselves ostracized.

(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)

U.S. News is assailed for possessing far too much influence in how students choose colleges (“Why Elite Law and Medical Schools Can’t Stand U.S. News,” The Wall Street Journal, Mar. 1).  I disagree.  All it does is to provide comprehensive information that allows students to compare institutions.

If that leads to embarrassment for some college presidents, so be it.  I seriously doubt that the college admissions process would be any less stressful if U.S. News ceased to publish its rankings. The truth is that brands matter in the minds of most people.  Highly selective schools are seen as superior by many students. It’s their choice in the final analysis about where to apply.  Don’t blame U.S. News for their decision.

(To post a comment, click on the title of this blog.)