(WATCH.LIVE))St Louis Cardinals vs Philadelphia Phillies Live Streaming Baseball Now
WATCH@LIVE@@Cleveland Indians vs Chicago White Sox Live Stream MLB Watch
WATCH@LIVE@@Philadelphia Phillies vs St Louis Cardinals Live Stream MLB Watch
[Watch/Live]!!Washington vs Oregon State Live Stream NCAA Baseball Online Game Free TV
federal research funding available for civics
US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences (IES): FUNDING OPPORTUNITY FOR R&D and EVALUATION in SOCIAL STUDIES
IES has released its 2019 Request for Applications (RFA) through its Research Grants Program. See: https://ies.ed.gov/funding/pdf/2019_84305A.pdf. The RFA includes a new Special Topic for Social Studies in K-12 Education, with a focus on history, civics, economics, and geography. The application submission deadline is August 23, 2018.
Program Officer: Dr. Edward Metz (202-904-8972, Edward.Metz@ed.gov)
Purpose
Social studies education is intended to prepare students with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to understand complex social and economic issues. Recently, the Every Student Succeeds Act (2015) expanded the curricular focus of U.S. education to encourage states to include social studies and its core disciplines of civics, geography, economics, and history as part of 17 subjects that make up a well-rounded education. Such an expansion will have to address the current level of student knowledge in social studies. For example, the 2014 NAEP found that only 18 percent of eighth graders performed at or above Proficient in U.S. History, 27 percent performed at or above Proficient in Geography, and 23 percent performed at or above Proficient in Civics. Students from lower-income and minority backgrounds performed lower than those in other groups.
Through this special topic, the Institute seeks to strengthen the research base for teaching and learning social studies and its core disciplines. The Institute is interested a wide range of research including but not limited to:
- Exploration of the relationship between social studies and civic skills, attitudes, and participation, particularly for students from low-income and minority backgrounds (e.g., Kawashima-Ginsberg, 2013).
- Exploration of the relationship between social studies and core academic content (e.g., STEM, reading, writing) and social and behavioral competencies, such as socio-emotional development and interpersonal skills (e.g., Swanson et al., 2016; Lawless et al., 2015).
- Development and testing of social studies interventions that actively engage students through forms of experiential and collaborative activities, such as through roleplaying, debates, inquiry and investigation, real-world problem solving, and service learning (e.g., Dack et al., 2016; Furco, 2013).
- Development and testing of interventions designed to support students in becoming digitally literate citizens in the 21st century, including those which integrate new forms of technology within social studies programs, such as social media, multi-user virtual environments, virtual and augmented reality, and wearables (e.g., Curry and Cherner, 2016).
- Studies of the efficacy or effectiveness of state and district policies designed to engage students in disciplinary and cross-disciplinary social studies programs (e.g., Campbell and Niemi, 2017).
- Validation of existing and development and validation of new assessment tools for use in social studies programs (e.g., Sklarwitz, 2017).
Requirements
Applications under the Social Studies topic must meet the Sample, Outcomes, and Setting requirements listed below in order to be responsive and sent forward for scientific peer review.
Sample
Your research must focus on students at any level from kindergarten through high school.
Outcomes
Your research must include measures of student academic outcomes. At least one academic outcome should be in social studies (e.g., an assessment of student learning in history, civics, or geography).
Your research may also include measures of student social and behavioral competencies (i.e., social skills, attitudes, or behaviors).
If your research focuses on teachers you must include measures of their knowledge, skills, beliefs, behaviors, and/or practices that are the focus of your research in addition to the required measures of student education outcomes.
Setting
The research must be conducted in authentic K-12 education settings or on data collected from such settings.
England vs. Tunisia Live Soccer Stream Watch FIFA World Cup Hd game
NCDD Member with Tips to Expand Your Information Bubble
The engagement field knows the value of folks being able to reach outside of their usual information bubble in order to understand other perspectives, build empathy, and expand your mind. Which is why we wanted to share this piece by Annie Pottorff of The Jefferson Center – an NCDD member organization, which shared some excellent tips for bursting your info bubble. We encourage you to share your additional ideas in the comments section below. You can read the article below and find the original on The Jefferson Center’s site here.
How to Burst Your Information Bubble
If you’re reading this, we’d bet that you care about the future of democracy, the forces that damage it, and the work that strengthens it. If you do, then chances are also good that you’ve heard the phrases “information bubble” and/or “filter bubble” as topics of concern. To provide a (very) brief overview: as humans in the digital age, we tend to seek out people and publications with similar opinions to ours, which is a pretty good way to avoid conflict. When we can get our news feed tailored exactly to our tastes, providing only information we’ll appreciate and relate to, why would we want anything else?
These bubbles can also be dangerous: when we remain inside, we don’t interact with those who disagree with us or with the information they consume. That may sound great on the surface, but this makes it easier for us to dismiss opposing opinions as being in the minority (even though that may not be the case), since we aren’t seeing them on a daily basis. Making things worse, actually escaping the bubble is pretty difficult. Our social media algorithms have been programmed specifically to show us stories we’ll generally like and agree with. Plus, we’ve all seen (or maybe even gotten involved with), political Facebook fights with distant relatives, or stumbled down the rabbit hole of our local newspaper comments section. Seeing these extreme views from people on the internet can make it difficult to even want to listen to anyone who may have different thoughts than us.
But at the Jefferson Center, we’ve found that when people have their beliefs challenged, it can be a good thing. We host Citizens Juries–deliberative events where a group of randomly-selected citizens are given the knowledge, resources, and time they need to create solutions to community issues. People often find themselves sitting across from complete strangers, and quickly realize that not everyone from “the other side” is as extreme as the pundits we see on TV and the trolls in the comment section. Instead, many people have a spectrum of beliefs, shaped by their own experiences, and aren’t easily labelled. Especially when it comes to local issues, participants find that partisan politics disappear when it comes to things like improving city government communication. As one citizen said “It’s really refreshing to sit down with a bunch of community members and realize you share the same core values and are united.”
If we choose to burst our information bubbles and listen to each other, we will let in not only new information, but new people, ideas, and experiences. Here are a few easy ways you can start:
1. Visit websites that present different takes
On allsides.com, you’ll find today’s biggest headlines and coverage from the left, center, and right. They also provide media bias ratings and a “balanced dictionary”, because certain news terms have come to mean different things to different people.
If you’re a reddit user, you can also submit and post in r/change my view. It’s pretty much what it sounds like–you submit an opinion, and ask people to present other viewpoints. The page is focused on having respectful, engaged discourse, rather than fighting.
2. Sign up for a well-rounded news digest
The Echo Chamber Club newsletter delivers a variety of viewpoints and contrary opinions on relevant news. Their goal is to offer an alternative to the personalized articles we see via social media algorithms, and instead showcase the nuances in today’s tough issues.
3. Curate a well-rounded list of reputable news sources
Here’s a great starter list of well-regarded news sites across the political spectrum, curated by Patrick Kulp at Mashable:
Conservative-leaning prestige media:
- The National Review
- The Weekly Standard
- The American Conservative
Conservative-leaning new media:
- Independent Journal Review
- Heat Street
- The Daily Caller
Liberal-leaning prestige media:
- The New Yorker
- The Nation
- Mother Jones
Liberal-leaning new media:
- Salon
- AlterNet
- Talking Points Memo
International Perspective:
- Al Jazeera
- The Economist
- Der Spiegel
4. Analyze your social media and browsing settings
Did you know you can adjust your news feed preferences on Facebook? Just click on the drop down arrow in the upper right corner of your homepage, select “news feed preferences”, and choose a variety of news sources to appear at the top of your feed.
There are also browser extensions you can download that pop your information bubble for you! Escape Your Bubble, available on Chrome, automatically inserts articles and issues that may challenge your current political views into your feed, after taking time to learn your personal news consumption habits and preferences.
5. Read your local newspaper, including the editorials!
Checking out your local op-ed section will give you good insight into what your neighbors are thinking about local and national issues. Plus, if you disagree, you can shake things up and provide a few counterpoints in the next edition.
6. Be critical
Learn how to identify fake news sites and bots before you share, like, or comment. Sometimes these fake articles can travel around Facebook or Twitter for days, because people don’t investigate beyond the headline. Here are a few ways to root them out:
- Fake articles usually use all caps, and are hyperbolic. Most legitimate news sites don’t write headlines like this.
- Actually click the article–if the page doesn’t exist or is unavailable, it’s probably fake.
- Double check the URL. Fake news sites thrive off of having almost legitimate names, like cnn-news.com.co
- Skim the article. If it seems unprofessional, is riddled with errors, or presents information on a topic completely different from what the headline promised, you should move on.
- It’s also important to be critical of your favorite news sources. Recognize when your go-to sites use clickbait tactics or present their partisan opinions as fact.
7. Attend community meetings
Because of TV shows like Parks & Rec, we’re inclined to picture community meetings as full of impassioned people yelling about pretty mundane issues.
But what if more and more people began to show up? We’d probably have a more diverse approach to many community issues and understand our neighbors a little better.
8. Have a few uncomfortable conversations
On Mismatch.org, you answer a few questions about yourself and your views, and they automatically match you with someone across the country with different views for a guided video conversation.
Living Room Conversations provides a local model for respectful discourse: you find someone to act as your co-host that has a different perspective than you on a given topic. Both of you find two other people to join. Then you meet for a guided conversation in a living room, church, school, or other community meeting place.
Did you notice anything missing from this list? Let us know so we can add it!
You can find the original version of this article on The Jefferson Center’s site at www.jefferson-center.org/how-to-burst-your-information-bubble/.
Sessions and the fate of Herod
In case you missed it, Jeff Sessions defended his policy of seizing children at the border with the words, “I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes.” Sarah Huckabee Sanders then added: “I can say it is very biblical to enforce the law, that is repeated a number of times throughout the bible.”
She was right about that. Characters in the Bible do frequently enforce the law. For example,
Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently inquired of the wise men (Matthew 2:16)
This was the governmental action that made Joseph, Mary, and Jesus into refugees who needed asylum in Egypt.
Herod’s fault was not that he obeyed the law, as Paul advised a small, powerless community to do in Romans 13. Herod’s problem was that he was the law, and he saw his status as the king as the guarantee that his discretionary decrees must be right.
This was a habit that didn’t end well for him:
Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.
And he killed James the brother of John with the sword. …
And when Herod had sought for [Peter], and found him not, he examined the keepers, and commanded that they should be put to death. And he went down from Judaea to Caesarea, and there abode.
And Herod was highly displeased with them of Tyre and Sidon: but they came with one accord to him, and, having made Blastus the king’s chamberlain their friend, desired peace; because their country was nourished by the king’s country.
And upon a set day Herod, arrayed in royal apparel, sat upon his throne, and made an oration unto them.
And the people gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man.
And immediately the angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost. (Acts 12: 1-2, 20-23)
This situation also raises issues of church and state. The US government should not cite a biblical verse as justification for a policy, because that “establishes” one religion. Arguably, that means that a reporter shouldn’t ask Sarah Sanders whether the Bible justifies seizing children at the border. It’s an irrelevant question to direct at a representative of the US government. If Sanders is asked that question, her answer should be, “I speak for the White House, and we don’t address questions of religious doctrine.” Sessions shouldn’t cite Rom. 13 to justify his policy, even if that were a good reading of the Bible. Finally, I shouldn’t take his religious claim seriously enough to attempt to rebut it on religious grounds.
My view of church and state is a little less stringent than the above. Sessions cited Romans in response to an eloquent letter by members of his own religious community that denounced his policy on theological grounds. I think citizens are entitled to petition the government in religious language, and if an employee of the government disagrees with a theological claim, he or she may address it. Thus Sessions was not wrong to cite the Bible in the particular context he did, as a response to a religious petition directed at him. But his reading of the Bible opened him to theological charges of blasphemy and idolatry.
See also a plea to conservatives and why Donald Trump is anti-conservative.
Check out the New NIFI Issue Guide on the Opioid Epidemic
In response to the opioid crisis that has been affecting communities across the US, the National Issues Forums Institute – an NCDD member org, recently released their issue guide on the opioid epidemic. The issue guide offers three options for participants to use during deliberation on how to address this rampant crisis. You can download the issue guide for free on NIFI’s site. Read more about the issue guide below and find the full version on NIFI’s site here.
What Should We Do About The Opioid Epidemic?
Drug abuse, a problem the United States has faced for decades, has taken a sharply more lethal turn with the rise of opioids—both legal pain-killers, such as oxycodone and fentanyl, and illegal ones like heroin. Drug overdoses are now the leading cause of death among Americans under 50.
More than 64,000 Americans were killed by drug overdoses in 2016, according to the Centers for Disease Control. That is worse than the death toll at the peak of the HIV epidemic in 1995 and more than the number of US combat deaths in the entire Vietnam War. At least two-thirds of those 2016 drug deaths were caused by opioids.
This issue guide presents three options for deliberation. Each option offers advantages as well as drawbacks. If we increase enforcement, for example, this may result in putting many more people in prison. If we reduce the number of prescriptions written, we may increase suffering among people with painful illnesses.
Each option is based on differing views about what we hold most valuable. Each represents a general direction and suggests a number of actions that can be carried out by different people or groups.
This issue guide presents the following three options for deliberation:
Option 1: Focus on Treatment for All
This option says that, given the rising number of deaths from opioids, we must devote considerably more resources to treatment in order to make any real headway in turning around the epidemic.
Option 2: Focus on Enforcement
This option says that our highest priority must be keeping our communities safe and preventing people from becoming addicted in the first place.
Option 3: Focus on Individual Choice
This option recognizes that society cannot force treatment on people.
You can find the full version of this NIFI issue guide at www.nifi.org/en/issue-guide/opioid-epidemic.