The Los Angeles Community College District is massive. It serves about 250,000 students annually on nine campuses spread throughout 36 cities in the Los Angeles region—making it one of the most geographically diverse land owners in the city. In 2001, the district announced an ambitious green building plan that would radically change the way LACCD operated, from using renewable materials to championing energy efficiency. Vast improvements were planned for each of the nine campuses, each of which would reinvigorate dense urban neighborhoods and reach some of the most underserved residents in the county.
But such efforts—and the $6 billion in taxpayer funds that paid for them—have not been without controversy. Last week in The Los Angeles Times, LACCD got slammed for a solar-gone-sour project that the Times claimed could have cost the district $10 million. But what the Times doesn't mention at all is the sustainable building boom that's happening right now at LACCD schools—thanks to nine architectural firms who have contributed exciting designs for the nine campuses. The concepts, which were each presented at an event last week named 9x9x9, are currently underway across the city.
While LACCD may have miscalculated its ability to effectively power the campuses with solar energy (a technology which, to be honest, has yet to prove its full potential across the construction world), this move to build what are essentially nine community centers will be far more valuable for the neighborhoods LACCD serves. Creating gorgeous, sustainable landmark buildings for higher education will not only provide a healthier, more inspiring learning environment for hundreds of thousands of students, it might just lure some people back to school.
Problematic homework question
A student’s brilliant homework answer outsmarted her teacher's ridiculously sexist question
From an early age, children absorb societal norms—including gender stereotypes. But one sharp 8-year-old from Birmingham, England, challenged a sexist homework question designed to reinforce outdated ideas.
An English teacher created a word puzzle with clues containing “UR.” One prompt read “Hospital Lady,” expecting students to answer “nurse.”
While most did, Yasmine wrote “surgeon”—a perfectly valid answer. Her father, Robert Sutcliffe, shared the incident on X (formerly Twitter), revealing the teacher had scribbled “or nurse” beside Yasmine’s response, revealing the biased expectation.
For Yasmine, the answer was obvious: both her parents are surgeons. Her perspective proves how representation shapes ambition. If children only see women as nurses, they internalize limits. But when they witness diversity—like female surgeons—they envision broader possibilities.
As Rebecca Brand noted in The Guardian: “Their developing minds are that little bit more unquestioning about what they see and hear on their screens. What message are we giving those impressionable minds about women? And how might we be cutting the ambitions of little girls short before they've even had the chance to develop properly?”
X users praised Yasmine while critiquing the question. Such subtle conditioning reinforces stereotypes early. Research confirms this: a study found children as young as four associate jobs with gender, with girls choosing “feminine” roles (e.g., nursing) and boys opting for “masculine” ones (e.g., engineering).
Even preschoolers avoided careers misaligned with their gender, proving sexist conditioning begins startlingly young.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
The problem spans globally. Data from 50 countries reveals that by age 15, girls disproportionately abandon math and science, while boys avoid caregiving fields like teaching and nursing. This segregation perpetuates stereotypes—women are underrepresented in STEM, and men in caregiving roles—creating a cycle that limits both genders.
- YouTube www.youtube.com
This article originally appeared last year.