National

Is a four-day work week “better” than a five-day one? We’ll discuss the arguments made by Prof. Juliet Schor and her colleagues, citing studies of the question in several different countries. Here’s a link to what appears to be their most recent summary document. If you want to read more, you can visit the site for a foundation with which they’re associated, “4 Day Week Global.” Research? or Advocacy?

• “Better” for whom? Workers? Employers? Society? Everyone?
• If it’s a slam-dunk decision, why has a four-day work week not been broadly adopted? In the U.S.? Throughout Western Europe? In developing countries? In China?
• If it’s better, how should we move forward? Educate? Advocate? Regulate?

Sorry for the late post…

With Donald Trump a declared candidate and Joe Biden (or at least Jill) heavily signaling that he will run again, we’ll discuss those prospective candidates and, more generally, presidential candidacy:

• Will Biden run again?
  • If so, how would that affect other 2024 down-ballot candidates?
  • Will anyone (with stature) run against him in the primaries?
  • How should we interpret his proposal to reconfigure the primary calendar?
• How will Trump’s candidacy play out?
  • Can another Republican (DeSantis, others) beat him?
  • If you were political advisor to, say DeSantis, how would you advise him to run his campaign?
• What do we want in a president?
  • A technocrat who knows how to “get things done” in office? (Is “getting things done” more important than what gets done?)
  • A popular personality with lots of name recognition, backed (hopefully) by staff who know how to get things done within government?
  • In terms of government background:
    • A current or former governor (with executive experience)?
    • A senator (or representative) with legislative experience?
    • Someone from outside the D.C. “cocoon” who may have a better handle on the issues and priorities of regular people?

Should be interesting…

At last week’s session, one of our participants suggested that we discuss when throwing money at a problem can and cannot work. (He put it more eloquently.)

So we decided to try it out on education in the U.S.

• Is this a case where more money can solve the issues with lackluster educational performance? Or is performance driven primarily by other factors?
• If more money can make a big difference, how should it be spent? Teachers, school buildings, tutoring, class materials, extracurriculars? All of the above?
• What other societal factors are holding us back? (There is a lot of anecdotal discussion about the social safety net and kids “ready to learn.”)
• How can the charter school (public and private) experience and track record inform our discussion?
• What is the goal of a U.S. education? The three R’s? Civics? Vocational training? College prep? Everything to everyone?
  • With a wide range of goals, how do we define, and then measure, “excellence?”
  • And will more clarity of definition and measurement motivate educators to “teach to the test?” Is that what we want?

This is a subject with a lot of anecdotes. But there have also been quite a few studies examining many of these questions. I encourage participants to spend a bit of time looking for research on the subject.