Detained Immigrants Facing Prospect of Solitary Confinement Often Have No Access to Counsel

/ The Old Crank

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about a proposal by Robert Katzmann, a federal appellate judge in New York, to develop an “immigrant justice corps” program that would recruit and train young lawyers to assist illegal immigrants. I speculated in that post about whether the problem of inadequate legal representation for immigrants in general (especially low-income immigrants) might acquire greater urgency in the near future, once an immigration reform bill is passed.

Last week, in case you missed it, the New York Times reported on the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s horrific use of solitary confinement on detained immigrants. (If you read the article—and you should—I think you’ll agree that my choice of the word “horrific” is not hyperbole.) One has to wonder whether better and more widely available legal representation would keep this practice in check. As the author of the piece notes, immigrant detainees are not automatically represented by legal counsel, and about 85% have none, and the consequences can be dire. I wish the piece would have made the connection between this problem and the efforts that Judge Katzman and others are making to address the adequate counsel issue.

I can’t imagine why anyone facing the potentially devastating psychological effects of long-term solitary confinement should not have access to counsel.

Surprising GED News

/ The Old Crank / 3 Comments

For those of you following the whole GED saga, the GED Testing Service made a surprising announcement earlier today: the new, computer-based test being rolled out in 2014 will not only be computer based, but will only display correctly on high-definition, 3D-capable screens of at least 27 inches in diameter.

Adult education programs—and many states—have already expressed concerns over the switch to computer-only testing, and this news will likely fan the flames of discontent even more. (Some states have already announced plans to replace the test with another exam.)

GED Testing Service officials noted that the screen size/resolution is necessary in order to properly display the full range of content planned for the new test.

“Last we checked, the real world was both in color and in high def,” officials said. “Without these changes, employers will have no way of knowing whether potential employees can work in such environments.”

Asked why the displays would need to be 3D-ready, officials noted that the Center on Education and the Workforce at Georgetown University estimates that by 2017, nearly 73% of all jobs will require experience using and manipulating objects in three dimensions, which means that future versions of the exam will need to take that into account. “The old paper-and-pencil GED is part of the past,” they said. “I mean, does anyone even know where you can go to buy pencils anymore? The new infrastructure we’re putting into place today looks forward towards a Minority Report-like future, where you can just point and wave your hands at the screen, and stuff happens.”

“The existing test is so putridly and disgustingly out of date we can hardly stand to look at it without becoming slightly nauseous,” officials continued. “And then we realized that even our original designs for the revised computer-based version were kind of out-of-date too. With the new technical requirements we are announcing today, adults without a high school diploma—especially those who already own a set of 3-D goggles—can be confident that we’ll be rolling out the kind of exam that will prepare them for work, college—and beyond. Putting off these changes would only result in another generation of individuals denied the opportunity to prepare for the increasing number of jobs that exist outside the old, black & white, 2-D world of the past.”

In related news—which, like the above, is not as good as last year’s—the Center on Education and the Workforce also announced today that by the year 2030, the majority of jobs in the U.S. will require not only college, but a Ph.D. and “at least some” astronaut experience.

More Information and Fee Waivers Encourage More Low-Income Students to Apply to Top Colleges

/ The Old Crank

(Updated Below)

A new study suggests that basic information—especially regarding costs—might substantially might encourage more high-achieving, low-income students to apply to top colleges.

In addition, according to the Times, coupons to waive application fees “had a particularly big effect.” I suspect those fee waivers are substantial barriers for many families, and I’d be interested in seeing a study that isolated the effect of waiving application fees alone.

A broader question is to what extent low-income young people in general—not just the highest achievers—are informed about the different kinds of postsecondary education options available to them. I recall a conversation a few years ago with a community college official who told me that for many of the students at his institution, not understanding how to apply for financial aid was as big an issue as the cost of college itself.

Note: Revised last paragraph about an hour after posting to make it a little clearer and easier to read.

UPDATE: I just noticed a piece published Friday by ProPublica on the increasing number of fees charged by many colleges and universities in addition to tuition, which I’m sure contributes to the challenge of figuring out the actual costs of attending.

 

This Is the Way It Should Work Everywhere

/ The Old Crank

Education leaders in Biddeford, Maine have come up with a great idea (reported in the Biddeford-Saco-Old Orchard Beach Courier): let’s take our early childhood education leaders and put them in charge of adult education as well.

If the people accountable for early childhood education were also in charge of our adult education system, I think we’d start to see adult literacy more thoughtfully integrated into school readiness strategies, as well as a stronger push for adult literacy outcomes that are more closely tied to the role that parents and other caregivers play in the literacy development of their children. (And the evidence continues to build that this is one of the key strategies we should be taking to address early literacy development.)

There are, of course, many great family literacy program models that do the kinds of things described here, but what appears to be unique and encouraging about this is that it’s a district-wide strategy.