Time to Sunset the Federal Department of Education

The weaponization of public schools as indoctrination camps for the teacher's unions is unacceptable. It is one thing to advocate for the teaching profession itself and quite another to engage in political hate rhetoric against half the voting population of America.

It is also high time to apply the demand for gender equality and equity to the teaching profession at all educational levels. Children deserve and need strong, smart male role models teaching side by side with women. Time to walk the walk.

Can the NEA's disconnect with America's parents and children become any more obvious than this?

Hartford Public Schools and Money

 I found this site to be fascinating.

"It’s a “loan.”  No, it’s a “reallocation.”  No, it’s a “reimbursement.” 

The first two are illegal so the third was concocted (and needs an audit) to justify the city of Hartford allowing Hartford Schools Superintendent Torres-Rodrigeuz to pillage the Other Post-Employment Benefits trust fund (OPEB), a trust fund set up to provide benefits beyond pensions to employees of Hartford Public Schools, not a trust fund to bailout the financial malfeasance of a not-ready-for-prime-time superintendent."

Deleted, Just Like That

WTSmith

Resolving Age Discrimination and Elder Abuse at the Hands of UCONN

 Last week I dropped my complaint against UConn for age discrimination practices in exchange for a promise by their counsel to address the issues involved.

I received the following email from Nicole Fournier Gelston, General Counsel at UCONN.

Dear Mr. Krasicki- 

We appreciate your agreeing to engage in the pre-answer conciliation process with respect to your complaint. As we shared with Mr. Cobb, we regret that the information you received regarding UConn's policy with respect to the Senior Tuition Waiver was not accurate. The Senior Tuition Waiver applies to both undergraduate and graduate program tuition. 

We are committed to taking steps to ensure individuals responsible for or otherwise involved in the admissions processes are fully informed that the waiver applies to undergraduate and graduate level programs. We are also committed to ensuring "Seniors" have clear and complete information. 

Toward those ends, an email communication will be sent to remind individuals involved in the admissions processes of the applicability of the waiver. In addition, the policy on the University Bursar website will be revised to include a statement that the Senior Tuition Waiver applies to both undergraduate and graduate program tuition. 

We apologize for any inconvenience this misinformation caused you. 

Sincerely, 

Nicole Fournier Gelston 

cc: Dr. Kent Holsinger, Graduate School Dean 

The letter has virtually nothing to do with the complaint itself but okay UConn has no interest in correcting the glaring and blatant discriminatory practices I outlined in detail in the complaint. In fact this letter and the pre-answer process was a futile exercise, IMO but, again, okay - UConn is incapable of intelligently responding to the issues at hand.

To that end I drafted and sent a letter that outlined my expectations of what needs to be resolved for individuals applying to any State Higher Education institution using the tuition waiver.

Here was my response.

RE: CHRO Case: 2440052

Dear Ms. Gelston,

This is a letter of acknowledgment of our pre-answer conciliation agreement.

Please attach this as my understanding of your responsibilities in understanding and accepting responsibility for resolving the issues I raised.

All State faculty need to be aware of the law.  I filed the complaint against UConn because it is the state’s flagship institution and claims to be a research institution.  As such, it needs not only to model its educational architecture to honor this law, it also needs to to advocate its adoption to all institutions that are affected by it.

My complaint further documented the fact that any State law that ensures the rights of any minority group can be systemically neutered through adversarial bureaucratic complexity.  More specifically, older students are not necessarily contiguously engaged with educational institutions. When asked for academic references, most of my closest and most complementary mentors are dead.  When you require that elders attempting to take advantage of free tuition contact faculty, you are asking older people to somehow contact, busy and difficult to contact individuals, for an exception to attending their (unwelcoming?) class.

This faculty contact request and response dynamic needs to be made uniform and transparent to all involved and it needs to be that way statewide. This, yet another opportunity for UConn to lead. 

This is nothing less than a discriminatory request and obstacle to equitable participation. This process needs re-imagination and reform. Our reconciliation cannot force you to change any of this but your existing model of class registration is a textbook model of how systemic discrimination is practiced in a multitude of social practices.  In your capacity as legal counsel I hope you make it loud and clear that this is a research topic that needs to be studied and corrected statewide.

The fact that Connecticut offers free tuition to older workers is a lost opportunity under existing practice.

There is already a nationwide debate about the cost of education that needs no further explanation. And in a gig economy where older workers often find themselves unemployed and whose skills are antiquated, Connecticut is offering free up-skilling opportunities is a business magnet assuming the State’s Higher Education institutions bothered not only advocating its availability but recognizing its potential to complement business needs or celebrating its authentic, no-social-engineering-required, diversity.

Finally, though my complaint is being dismissed, the facts I presented were true and actionable.  In other words, you can responsibly examine the material provided or not.  But if CHRO is alerted to the same charges anytime in the near future then this case should remain a part of the institutional memory that UConn was made aware of the issues, promised to remediate them, and didn’t take it seriously.

Regards,

Frank W. Krasicki

cc: Dr. Kent Gelston, Zachary Cobb, Uconn Board of Trustees

In a correspondence before this meeting I alerted them to the following additional context for the complaint.

Frank Krasicki <krasicki@gmail.com>	Thu, Sep 7, 12:41 PM
to Zachary, generalcounsel@uconn.edu

I may be out of town late in September.  Oct 5 works for me. 

To provide some context for this meeting, allow me to offer the following;

Two points of interest from: https://law.justia.com/codes/connecticut/2015/title-46a/chapter-814c/section-46a-83

"(i) After finding that there is reasonable cause to believe that a discriminatory practice has been or is being committed as alleged in the complaint, an investigator shall attempt to eliminate the practice complained of by conference, conciliation and persuasion not later than fifty days after the date of the finding. The refusal to accept a settlement shall not be grounds for dismissal of any complaint."

"(m) The executive director or the executive director’s designee may enter an order of dismissal against a complainant who (1) after notice and without good cause, fails to attend a fact-finding conference; (2) after notice and without good cause, fails to attend a mandatory mediation conference; or (3) refuses to accept an offer of settlement where the respondent has eliminated the discriminatory practice complained of, taken steps to prevent a like occurrence in the future and offered full relief to the complainant."

My interpretation of this legal contradiction is that the elimination of the discriminatory practice is optional based on the discretion of the respondent.  My complaint rests on the fact that the practices employed by UConn are wholly illegal, unethical, and unacceptable.  The practice must be remediated to comply with the spirit, intent, and goodwill interpretation of anti-discrimination law.

Some demographic context based on a lightweight google search:

"http://aging.ctdata.org/

Search for: What percentage of the population is over 50 in the US?
How many senior citizens are in Connecticut?

The state, the seventh oldest in the country, has nearly 590,000 people over age 65 and the most diverse (17.5%) older population in New England. More than 28% of people over 65 live alone and more than 66% of those over 85 are women."

Definition of Elder Abuse

What age is considered elderly in the state of Connecticut?
(ages 60+)
ELDER ABUSE UNDER CONNECTICUT LAW

Elder abuse also includes neglect, exploitation, and/or abandonment of an elderly (ages 60+) person.

Finally, another recent example of potential UConn discriminatory practice that make violate NCAA rules, money laundering or kickback law, or other less than scrupulous DEI practice:

"How many scholarship players can a NCAA basketball team have?

13 scholarships
In NCAA Division 1 basketball, coaches can offer a maximum of 13 scholarships per team. These are called headcount scholarships, also known as full-ride scholarships. The average NCAA Division 1 team rosters 16 athletes, so there might be three players on the team who walked on and don't qualify for athletic aid."

"DEI: https://www.foundation.uconn.edu/uconn-nation-donates-23-million-in-support-of-diversity-equity-and-inclusion/

"The Star Kids Kathy and Geno Auriemma Scholarship supports undergraduate student-athletes who are members of the women’s basketball team, with preference given to students demonstrating financial need"" 

regards,

Frank Krasicki

There is no excuse for UConn being unaware of these glaring issues nor for negligently and, for all intents and purposes, maliciously ignoring the aging population of Connecticut while employing an army of DEI officers statewide dedicated to everyone else but the elderly as individuals who need their attention.

I encourage anyone who, going forward, experiences similar experiences in any State Higher Education institution to contact the Connecticut Human Rights and Opportunities Commission - they'll evaluate your problem fairly and armed with complaints such as mine will be armed to ask the right questions.

A Draft Affidavit of Educational Illegal Discrimination Based on Age

The following is a draft version of the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities AFFIDAVIT OF ILLEGAL DISCRIMINATION I plan to submit.

I am crowd sourcing the proof-reading and accuracy testing of what I'm presenting that affects individuals aside from myself. I can be confidentially contacted at krasicki@protonmail.com if you have concerns or corrective criticism. 

 I provide the following particulars:

1. The Respondent employs more than 15 persons.
   
   

2. I am a 71-year-old male with an undergraduate degree (1974) in Studio Art and Education from Doane University (then Doane College), a Liberal Arts institution.  I wanted to continue and further my Studio Art education by applying for an opportunity to be selected into  UConn’s Master of Fine Arts ( MFA ) program at the Storrs Campus at the University of Connecticut.
   On March 24, 2023, I received written notification that I was not selected by Judith Thorpe – the Chairperson of the MFA. And the reason for the denial was there were only five opportunities for admittance and I wasn’t one of the individuals still under consideration.
   My complaint has absolutely NOTHING to do with that selection process. This item simply provides a context and baseline for the following situation that not only affects myself but anyone who is older and not already an insider to the system.
   
   Footnote 1 - The number of accepted applicants to UConn’s MFA program is tightly coupled to the MFA program’s boast that all MFA candidates are “fully-funded” therefore the very acknowledgement that someone attended an MFA program by means other than those already in place will somehow diminish its prestige or competitiveness.
   
   

3. I had collected a number of fallback positions in the event that I was not selected.  One alternative approach was to attend a UConn Studio Art course to introduce myself to faculty and demonstrate both my talent and seriousness in being reconsidered for the program going forward. Concurrently, I learned that senior citizens can attend State institutions tuition free.
   On March 25, I emailed Judith Thorpe to confirm this was true.
   And I inquired about the possibility of attending a UConn studio Art course or the potential to design a DIY MFA that wouldn’t interfere with their current prestige track.
   She replied on March 26 by saying that “Tuition free courses are allowed only at the undergraduate level. You should consider auditing an undergraduate course in drawing, painting, or printmaking to develop your work…”
   
   Footnote 2 - This is a legitimate [tho misinformed] response from the Chair of the Art Department that provides an insight to faculty understanding of how things work.
   
   

4. On March 27, I contacted the UConn registrar’s information office to ask what policy governed the“undergraduate courses only” constraint.  The website merely alluded to the policy but there was no cross-reference as to where it came from or who was accountable for it. The information desk person didn’t know  but said that an email to the registrar was required to get that answer. On March 27, I sent an email to the registrar asking for the information required to appeal the policy because I found it unfair and potentially illegal.
   
   Footnote 3 - This was the basis of my original CHRO complaint. By April 14, I had called CHRO and was corresponding with Robert Aldi to say that I never did hear from the registrar. In order to file this complaint I set about investigating it myself which has far broadened the scope of the discriminatory nature of UConn and the State’s ageism problem.
   
   

5. I spent a lot of time attempting to navigate UConn and other State educational facility website attempting to understand how any senior citizen could know about, navigate, or take advantage of higher education based on the law, DEI protections, or even as a matter of interest.  I will detail some of this below.
   
   

6. On May 3, Uconn’s registrar - thanks to an audit of their email activity or lack thereof - finally responded to the question asked in section 4.
   
   “To clarify, the Over 62 Waiver does cover tuition only for both degree-seeking and non-degree seeking courses in the fall and spring. The webpage on the Bursar's Office is here: https://bursar.uconn.edu/tuition-waivers-graduate-students/ “
   
   …The policy authors are the CT State Legislature, and the statute is cited at the top of the page.
   
   That link defines the Over 62 Tuition waiver thus,
   
   “This waiver pertains to any person 62 years of age or older who has been accepted for admission, provided this person is (1) enrolled in a degree-granting program or, (2) for a person not enrolled in a degree program, provided, at the end of the regular registration period (on or after the first day of classes), there is space available in the course in which the person intends to enroll. Students must be a Connecticut resident and 62 years old prior to the beginning of the term they wish to enroll in. The waiver is only available for fall and spring semesters, and is valid for TUITION ONLY. Residual fees are the responsibility of the student. For any person who receives a tuition waiver and also receives educational reimbursement from an employer, the waiver is reduced by the amount of the educational reimbursement. Some fee based programs may not qualify for this waiver. The senior tuition waiver does not apply to students in graduate certificate programs. Please contact bursar@uconn.edu for any questions. For registration inquiries please contact the Registrar's Office.”
   
   Footnote 4 - There is nothing here that indicates Undergraduate Only courses for seniors.  Nor is there a means test to qualify for such a waiver.
   Not only is the website wrong (and subversively discriminatory) but so is the faculty understanding of such a waiver (see item 3 previously).
   The discrimination against senior citizens is systemic and this is just one aspect of what soon develops into a Kafka-trap of ignorant and disingenuous, plausible deniability on the part of these State institutions. Details to follow.
   You might also ask yourself why this information is so deeply buried in their website. I’m a lifelong Software Engineer/Software Architect and I never stumbled across this.  Imagine any senior ever having the chance to know this exists. IMO, this qualifies as Elder Abuse just as withholding health information or necessary drugs from someone does.
   
   Footnote 5 - Notice that the law isn’t discriminatory. UConn’s interpretation, disingenuous dissemination, and implementation is.
   
   

7. Armed with this new information, I contacted Judith Thorpe once again.
   
   “Given this clarification of tuition waiver;

• my application for admission to the MFA program is no longer contingent upon either a grant, scholarship, or other arrangement - the tuition is covered and I can cover any other expenses required

• the prestige of UConn's fully-funded MFA program remains intact

• UConn's misleading website references that institutionally and functionally promote age discrimination based on disingenuous interpretations of the law that create a classic example of passive systemic age discrimination will be addressed through a CHRO complaint that I am currently compiling

For the sake of clarity, I don't necessarily require studio space. I live just a few miles up the road.  While I am open to both the critical nature and informational aspects of the program, I don't believe I add undo or unnecessary overhead to anyone's teaching or guidance role.

So.  What do I need to do to be accepted into the graduate program?  Such acceptance no longer is dependent on the five students already accepted which, presumably was the critical decision in eliminating my portfolio from further consideration. “


Judith never replied back.

8. On May 9, Kent Holsinger - Board of Trustees Distinguished Professor,  Vice Provost for Graduate Education, and Dean of The Graduate School sent me an unsolicited opinion email to reassure me that the system is self-insulating and to go away.
   
   “I understand your disappointment at being declined admission to the MFA program in Art. As Professor Thorpe described in her original email to you, admission to the program is highly competitive. Only a small fraction of the many talented applicants are finally recommended for admission. I have not spoken with Professor Thorpe or with anyone else associated with the decision in your case, but nothing in the correspondence below leads me to believe that the decision to decline your admission was related to your ability to pay tuition, whether through the Over 62 Waiver or not.
   
   If you believe that references on any University website are misleading and promote age discrimination, you may refer your complaint to…” [all of the gatekeepers who enforce these policies in the first place].
   
   Footnote 6 - This is a guy who used to teach science.  Brutal.
   
   He never asked me what the issue was so he can’t know the question. But he has the systemic response in his back pocket. He doesn’t care about discrimination at all.  He personalizes the problem, it’s me (any person), who is unworthy - go test our website out for us - and don;’t go away mad, just go away and don’t forget what a big shot just corresponded with you - just a warning!
   Needless to say I responded in kind.
   
   

9. RE: Footnote 3 -  My research into the details because nobody else - not UConn, not DEI, not their Board of Trustees, nor anyone else incentivized to raise an eyebrow for American Connecticut senior citizens - fuck ‘em, they can’t prove it!
   
   a.) 2019 State Programs for Older Adults (https://www.cga.ct.gov/2022/rpt/pdf/2022-R-0131.pdf)
   
   “Tuition Waivers for Older Adults By law, state residents age 62 or older may qualify for a tuition waiver at any of the state’s public higher educational institutions, if at the end of the regular registration period enough students are enrolled in the course for it to be offered and enough space is left to accommodate the senior citizen (CGS §§ 10a-77(d), -99(d), and -105(e)). “
   
   b.) Revisit Item 3 - “consider auditing an undergraduate course in drawing, painting, or printmaking to develop your work…”
   
   See: https://nondegree.uconn.edu/senior-citizen-audit/
   
   “Senior citizens who do not seek degree credit may audit undergraduate courses only. Consent of the instructor is required. …[snip]... The senior audit does not apply to laboratory or studio classes.”
   
   In other words, not only are senior citizens denied an opportunity to take or audit a graduate level course, they cannot take a necessary [laboratory or studio] undergraduate course either.  In Footnote 4, I described the discriminatory practice as systemic.  This is another example of the Catch-22 nature of attempting to take advantage of a State-sponsored tuition waiver and the intentional roadblocks that the University invents to prevent in succeeding - you can’t get there from here. This likely affects other such waivers - say for veterans as well.
   
   Note the systemic nature of the discrimination is the reminder of the brain-dead “undergraduate only” UConn policy that no one seems to be accountable for except to deflect blame somewhere else.  For individuals who already hold undergraduate degrees this makes zero sense while for those without either an undergraduate degree or relevant life-experience, the policy works.  In other words, it is written to constrain the academically immature or unprepared from advancing beyond their preparedness.  Applying this to individuals who have earned degrees, succeeded in a life’s journey, and want to proceed is something that makes this unnecessarily punitive and petty.
   
   But even these arguments fail to fully describe the broader scope of discriminatory practice at UConn that involves not only ageism but a failure to provide uniform, consistent diversity practice throughout the State.
   
   To compare and contrast the difference between the treatment of senior citizens and younger students one need look no further than E.O. Smith high school -  the only high school that UConn allows qualifying junior and senior high school students the opportunity to attend tuition-free, undergraduate courses.
   
   The comparison is stark. A high school student can “step up into” undergraduate courses that have empty seats (the priority of these students with veterans and other qualifying candidates is unclear).  What is clear is that these students do not even possess a high school diploma yet and can move ahead.
   Seniors with either life experience aplenty, an undergraduate degree or more are not able to move up into appropriate courses.
   
   But as obvious as this difference is, there are even more complicated nuances involved. The E.O. Smith students who enjoy these benefits are more often than not related to UConn employed local citizens can mean that ensuring that “consent of the instructor” qualifications are wholly impartial is a questionable requirement for seniors or older vets to contend with.  I served on the E.O. Smith Board of Education for 12 years so I’m confident of what I’m saying.
   
   But the rabbithole of cascading discriminatory practice digs even deeper. E.O. Smith students who succeed in these courses enter UConn not only with a pocketful of tuition free courses that give them a head start.  UConn’s process of course selection includes a Byzantine hierarchy of who gets first preference in selecting courses. These high school/UConn courses are applied to that course selection priority ranking. All things being equal, these students can and do enjoy an entitlement that even better or equally qualified undergraduates cannot match.
   
   And deep as this rabbithole is, it has even more consequences that UConn’s virtue signaling marketing hides.  The Storrs campus is surrounded by lily-white suburban communities. If high school kids from the area can take tuition-free courses based on geography alone then logically - I, as a senior citizen of the area - should also enjoy that preference.
   
   But it’s not about geography, it's about the comfort of nepotism. UConn and other State institutions have urban extensions throughout the State.  The E.O. Smith high school entitlement is not extended anywhere else - not Hartford, New Haven, Bridgeport, or a dozen other locations - despite the University’s virtue signaling rhetoric about the importance of student opportunity and diversity. This is an institution that needs fresh governance and a serious and honest audit of their current educational practice.  While my complaint is constrained to age it should be obvious that the cancer of structural and systemic discrimination is chronic and widespread.
   
   

10.  The Roots of Discrimination
    
    Age discrimination is explicitly expressed in https://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/chap_185b.htm#sec_10a-100
    
    “PART III
    THE UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT
    Sec. 10a-102. (Formerly Sec. 10-117). Object of The University. Enrollment. Degrees. The University of Connecticut shall remain an institution for the education of youths whose parents are citizens of this state. The leading object of said university shall be… [snip]... The board shall establish policies which protect academic freedom and the content of course and degree programs.”
    
    Bolded mphasis mine.
    
    Compare and contrast this to (https://www.bestcolleges.com/blog/free-college-tuition-senior-citizens/)
    “ Colorado State University — Fort Collins, CO
    
    CSU's senior citizen class visitation policy allows resident instruction classes on a space-available basis to students age 55 and over. Lifelong learners can register for classes in subjects like theater, Italian, and women's studies without paying tuition. “
    
    Nationwide the use of terms like “lifelong learners” is wholly non-discriminatory and wholesomely accurate.  Uconn’s indifference to 18% of Connecticut’s population who are potentially lifelong learners is criminal. It is the responsibility of the State’s flagship higher education institution to correct this.
    
    
    

11. To synthesize my complaint I offer this draft summary.
    
    There are unnecessary UConn policies that violate the spirit and intent of the anti-discrimination State and Federal laws. These policies not only compound the inability of senior citizens to take advantage of a benefit from institutions that many of us have spent decades supporting with our taxes but these benefits are subverted by obfuscating their existence not only to senior citizens but UConn faculty, communications, and administrative services.
    
    I think I’ve sufficiently documented how self-serving and self-insulating the system is.  What UCONN is doing is a form of discrimination under Title VII, the ADAA, ADEA, and a host of State and regional legal protections.
    
    
    

12. Upon belief & knowledge, I and many more are being discriminated against by the university because of age. 

I request the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities investigate my complaint, secure for me my rights as guaranteed to me under the above cited laws and secure for me any remedy to which I may be entitled.

Resources on the Teaching Effects of AI Chat Bots

 This from Yale: 

The End of the American Bill of Rights - The Freedom of Speech is Dying

 In the early hours of the dawn of Liberal Fascism, the first empirical casualty is the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.  The assassins are twofold - a public education system that has imprinted the idea that speech is violence and a social media war that rewards on a first come first serve basis the solicitation of censorship.

The society of the United States has normalized a global social practice which is the idea that free speech is only practiced between trusted cohorts.  In repressive and unstable countries, the individual is no less capable of Free Speech but it carries a heavy risk.  What separated the United States conceptually was the idea the the free exchange of ideas was precisely what liberated society and the country to greater art, science, and political stability.  After all, if only tolerated speech was common, free speech that differed was not only risky but psychologically retarding.

In recent years, the main stream media (major networks and streaming services large and small) have vocally advocated the kind of Freedom of Speech that repressive societies practice.

It is usually expressed in one way or another this way - "Say whatever you want but there are consequences!"  And it isn't expressed in a way that implies that Freedom of Speech is a healthy exchange of ideas, a reasoned civil disagreement, or simply a temporal opinion or belief based on recent thinking.

No, Freedom of Speech today is a chilling subliminal warning that saying anything that isn't believed or tolerated by the urban liberal majority WILL be subject to immediate consequence.  That could mean loss of job, loss of access to one of the many 21st century communications platforms, physical harm, exposure of family to social retribution, and so on.

This xkcd website political cartoon puts a smiley face on the obvious ominous warning;

The door being illustrated is to a gas chamber,  a person cancellation that is publicly humiliating and that carries draconian punishment that far outweighs any harm that the speech might contain. It invites and encourages "people listening" to imagine and fashion a door of their own choosing that somehow teaches the speaker of an unacceptable narrative a punishing lesson.

The new theater lesson isn't the fear that someone will yell 'fire' in the crowded theater, it is the fear that the crowed theater will all yell 'kill' should anyone dare speak something unwelcome.

Snow Days a Thing of the Past

In 2006, as a member of the school board, I created a post advocating Virtual Make-up Days.

Fourteen years later, the State of CT - thanks to a worldwide pandemic - has finally figured it out.

Someday learning will apply to teachers, administrators, and education bureaucrats as well.