Author: Mike Paul

Theocracy in Public Schools: Arizona GOP Pushes Religious Chaplains Over Trained Counselors

gray concrete road between grass field
Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

Arizona Republicans are at it again—dismantling public education and replacing it with religious indoctrination. Their latest stunt? SB 1269 allows untrained religious chaplains to provide mental health counseling to students instead of licensed professionals.

Rep. David Marshall says “Jesus is better than a psychologist,” as if prayer is an adequate substitute for professional mental health care. Meanwhile, Sen. Wendy Rogers, a known far-right extremist with ties to white nationalism, is leading the charge to erase the separation of church and state entirely—because, in her words, “that’s a myth.”

Let’s be clear: this bill isn’t about helping students. It’s about using public schools to funnel state-sanctioned religious propaganda to kids. Republicans claim there’s a “spiritual deficit” causing student mental health struggles—not economic inequality, not school shootings, not climate anxiety, not lack of access to healthcare, but a lack of religion.

This bill:
⚠️ Violates the First Amendment by forcing religious figures into public schools.
⚠️ Endangers students by replacing licensed counselors with untrained chaplains.
⚠️ Opens the door for Christian Nationalism while silencing minority faiths (or, let’s be honest, outright banning non-Christian chaplains).

Meanwhile, Democrats have been fighting for more school counselors, psychologists, and social workers—REAL solutions to the youth mental health crisis. But the GOP would rather ignore science, shove their religion down kids’ throats, and strip public education for parts.

Public schools should be secular, mental health support should be evidence-based, and the government should NOT be a pulpit.


The Eclectic Educator is a free resource for everyone passionate about education and creativity. If you enjoy the content and want to support the newsletter, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Your support helps keep the insights and inspiration coming!

Public Broadband Under Siege: Corporate Interests Threaten Rural America’s Digital Future

blue coated wire
Photo by Brett Sayles on Pexels.com

The $42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program was designed to deliver high-speed fiber internet to underserved rural communities, ensuring equitable access to the digital world. However, recent developments indicate a troubling shift in priorities.​

Evan Feinman, the outgoing director of the BEAD program, has raised alarms about the current administration’s intentions to divert substantial funds to Elon Musk’s Starlink, a satellite-based internet service. Feinman warns that this move could leave rural America with subpar internet service, enriching billionaires at the expense of quality infrastructure.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has announced a “rigorous review” of the BEAD program, criticizing it for not yet connecting any individuals and attributing this to “woke mandates” and regulatory burdens. This rhetoric paves the way for policy shifts favoring satellite providers like Starlink, potentially sidelining the superior fiber-optic solutions that BEAD was set to prioritize.

Feinman’s departure and cautionary message highlight a broader issue: the infiltration of corporate interests into public policy. The potential redirection of funds from fiber projects to satellite services compromises the quality of internet service for rural communities. It funnels public money into the coffers of the ultra-wealthy.​

We must oppose this corporate takeover of our public infrastructure. High-speed fiber internet is a public good and a necessity in today’s digital age. Allowing billionaires to dictate the quality and accessibility of our internet services undermines the principles of equity and public welfare.


The Eclectic Educator is a free resource for everyone passionate about education and creativity. If you enjoy the content and want to support the newsletter, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Your support helps keep the insights and inspiration coming!

When Government Teacher Meets Stoic Guru: McMahon & Holiday’s Epic Book Chat

Affectionately dubbed “America’s Government Teacher,” Sharon McMahon recently geeked out with Ryan Holiday at his Painted Porch bookstore, diving into overlooked gems of American history. Holiday praised Booker T. Washington’s “Up from Slavery,” highlighting its impactful pragmatism. McMahon connected this to the profound ripple effects on figures like Julius Rosenwald, Toni Morrison, and John Lewis.

Their enthusiastic exchange ranged from Paul Jennings’s “A Slave in the White House” to Taylor Branch’s monumental civil rights chronicles, celebrating storytelling that transforms history into vivid, human narratives. Alongside laughter and shared struggles about balancing life and work, both authors reminded us how vital—and fun—history can be.

Their meeting was a vibrant testament to the power of knowing history, geekiness and all.

📚 The list


The Eclectic Educator is a free resource for everyone passionate about education and creativity. If you enjoy the content and want to support the newsletter, consider becoming a paid subscriber. Your support helps keep the insights and inspiration coming!

Could Medical-Style Residencies Save Our Struggling Schools?

Teacher preparation programs could take a page from medical training, emphasizing hands-on practice, focused research, and sustained mentorship. Residency-style programs offer promising solutions as the education landscape grapples with high turnover among new teachers and declining student achievement. These models provide novice teachers extensive classroom experience under expert guidance, ensuring they are better equipped from day one. While traditional student teaching often lacks depth and practical relevance, these residencies focus on “gradual release” approaches, allowing new educators to build confidence and skills gradually rather than diving straight into full responsibility.

But adopting a medical residency model isn’t without its hurdles. Funding challenges, inconsistent state requirements, and uneven compensation remain significant barriers. As education leaders look toward the future, it’s clear that reshaping teacher preparation is desirable and necessary for improving classroom outcomes nationwide.

Mental Health, Teacher Pay, and School Choice: What’s Missing in Governors’ Education Plans?

Across the country, governors have laid out ambitious education plans for 2025—but have they missed the mark on boosting student achievement? While state leaders from both parties broadly agree on increasing education funding, supporting student well-being, and enhancing career pathways, few have directly addressed declining academic performance. FutureEd’s analysis reveals significant bipartisan commitments, including strengthening teacher pay and addressing youth mental health, yet highlights stark ideological divides over school choice and the role of diversity initiatives in education.

With federal pandemic-relief funds drying up, previously celebrated interventions like tutoring and enrichment programs are fading into the background. As governors debate whether school choice initiatives or stricter academic standards will drive student improvement, educators wonder: Are we missing an opportunity to place learning at the heart of education policy?

Education Under Attack? Why the ‘Unitary Executive’ Fight Matters for Schools

Unitary executive theory might sound like dry political jargon, but it’s at the heart of debates reshaping how the American government—and potentially education policy—functions. Despite some sensational headlines, the theory doesn’t aim to eliminate the three-branch structure of government; rather, it emphasizes the president’s control over the executive branch, specifically around the ability to remove officials. But why should educators and policymakers care?

Education policy, like other areas managed by specialized agencies, often depends on a certain degree of political independence to ensure expertise rather than short-term politics drive decisions. Agencies like the Institute for Education Sciences (IES) and the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB) are designed precisely with this independence, with leadership terms deliberately spanning multiple presidential administrations.

However, under the Trump administration, these agencies face new challenges as unitary executive theory pushes the boundaries of presidential power. Recent moves by the administration, including contract cancellations and the politically motivated dismissal of key appointees, suggest a test of how far executive authority can stretch.

Why does this matter for education? If the independence of agencies like IES and NAGB is compromised, education policy could increasingly become a political football, undermining long-term, evidence-based educational improvement. For educators and policymakers alike, understanding this debate isn’t just about constitutional theory—it’s about safeguarding the stability and integrity of our educational institutions.

“He won’t be a dictator, unless our republic completely crumbles…”

You have to wonder how politicians live with themselves. Eight short years ago, current Secretary of State Marco Rubio talked with Jake Tapper about Trump and his first presidential run.

This video is on Rubio’s own account, so I won’t be surprised if it disappears soon.

From the video:

Look, I think people are going to have to make up their mind. I can tell you this. No matter what happens in this election, for years to come, there are many people on the right, in the media, and voters at large that are going to be having to explain and justify how they fell into this trap of supporting Donald Trump, because this is not going to end well one way or the other. He’s going to be the nominee, and he’s going to lose. Or, he’ll have thrown this party into its most chaotic and divisive period ever. And that’s unfortunate because the Republican Party is the home of the limited government free enterprise movement in America. And if it crumbles or divides or it splits apart, it’ll be very difficult to elect candidates that hold those views at any level of government until we can bring the party back together.

Profund words, sir. Maybe you should go back and hear them again yourself.

What Happens if Google Loses Chrome?

You may not know it, but Google has been part of an ongoing DOJ antitrust case.

According to the most recent filings, Google may be forced to fully divest itself of the Chrome web browser.

Imagine waking up to a web without Chrome. With Google potentially losing control of the world’s most popular browser—used daily by 3.4 billion people—the ripple effects could be profound, especially in education.

Schools relying heavily on Chromebooks could face immediate disruption.

This shift could usher in a new era of innovation. Education-focused browsers or open-source platforms might emerge, enhancing student privacy, accessibility, and user experience. Educators could rethink their technology strategies, potentially adopting more flexible and privacy-centric tools like Mozilla Firefox or exploring open platforms like Brave.

Change at this scale is rarely comfortable, but it often accelerates growth. The key question isn’t whether schools can handle the disruption—it’s how creatively and effectively they adapt.