Tag Archive for: Common Core

A Revelation Regarding the Common Core Sale: Evidence is needed.

/in , , , , , /by

On October 22, 2014, the corporate-reform-friendly think tank, American Enterprise Institute (AEI), hosted a panel discussion entitled, What Now for the Common Core? Below is the description of the panel participants and the *implementation-focused* conclusion is actually what should have happened before the Common Core (CCSS) was adopted by any state and certainly before CCSS was ever proclaimed as “ensuring college and career readiness for all students:

Evidence that it works.

A profound revelation, no?

Here is AEI’s entire event summary spiel:

What is the current state of the Common Core, and what is its future? Moderator Michael McShane of AEI posed these questions to a group of experts at an AEI event on Wednesday. Frederick Hess of AEI, Chris Minnich of the Council of Chief State School Officers, and Catherine Gewertz of Education Week largely agreed that districts and schools are at very different stages of the implementation process, that the public is still underinformed, and that the Common Core comprises more states and has been more federally driven than anticipated.

Hess and Minnich dove into the issue of federal involvement, with Hess emphasizing that the effort should focus on ensuring comparability and rigor across states, not on recruiting as many states as possible. Minnich agreed that governors and school chiefs must take the Common Core out of federal hands.

Gewertz said that most teachers focus on making the Common Core work in their classrooms, not on debating its political implications. One of the biggest impediments has been finding high-quality, Common Core–aligned materials.

To conclude, McShane asked panelists what must happen for the Common Core to be successful. All of the panelists focused on outcomes: there needs to be evidence that students are performing better and that this progress translates into greater college and career readiness. [Emphasis added.]
–Jenn Hatfield

A couple tidbits: First, “moderator” McShane co-authored a CCSS-promo book with Hess in November 2013, entitled, Common Core Meets Education Reform.

That title is redundant.

Second, it is interesting that the above AEI panel summary includes zero discussion of the public rejecting CCSS because CCSS is a top-down, imposed product that teaching practitioners and parents, among other stakeholders, genuinely do not want. Period.

No, no. According to the three non-teacher-practitioner individuals on this panel, what CCSS needs in 2014– four years after it was rushed to its hardly-transparent finish in 2010– is “evidence that students are performing better.”

The horse continues to push the corporate reform cart.

Indeed, the CCSS Promise of College and Career Readiness as being “research and evidence-based” goes back to before CCSS was written. That term– “evidence based”– is a term that can easily serve as a bait-and-switch for what should have happened given the very-high-stakes nature of CCSS: a subjecting of the CCSS product to empirical testing.

Here is the full CCSS announcement from July 4, 2009:

The Common Core State Standards Initiative is a joint effort by the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) in partnership with Achieve, ACT and the College Board. Governors and state commissioners of education from across the country committed to joining a state-led process to develop a common core of state standards in English-language arts and mathematics for grades K-12. These standards will be research and evidence-based,internationally benchmarked, aligned with college and work expectations and include rigorous content and skills. The NGA Center and CCSSO are coordinating the process to develop these standards and have created an expert validation committee to provide an independent review of the common core state standards, as well as the grade-by-grade standards. The college and career ready standards are expected to be completed in July 2009. The grade-by-grade standards work is expected to be completed in December 2009. [Emphasis added.]

Yeah, the top-downers “jointing this effort” thought they would be done six months before they actually were– and even with the delay in completion until June 2010, this CCSS product has “rush job” stamped all over it.

In June 2010, America got a press release.

In place of empirical evidence, America received a short list of endorsements.

Endorsements are not evidence.

No readily available site or search engine to offer the public a comprehensive view of that supposed “research base,” and no empirical “evidence” because, well, there just isn’t any.

Now, this Hunt Institute set of CCSS talking points for governors to use in promoting CCSS– a doc that happens to be posted on the USDOE website (hmm…)– states that there is “evidence.” However, nothing listed includes any practical, real-world testing of CCSS to demonstrate the proclaimed “ensuring” of “college and career readiness.

What is offered is a lit review justifying the idea of CCSS, not its actual utility.

No evidence prior to the June 2010 proclamation that CCSS was a product ready to be used and guaranteed to deliver.

But in 2014, the AEI panel states that evidence is needed. 

Meanwhile, the CCSS website continues to advertise the CCSS Guarantee. Here it is, on a page entitled, “What Parents Should Know”:

Today’s students are preparing to enter a world in which colleges and businesses are demanding more than ever before. To ensure all students are ready for success after high school, the Common Core State Standards establish clear, consistent guidelines for what every student should know and be able to do in math and English language arts from kindergarten through 12thgrade. [Emphasis added.]

What complicates the “evidence is needed in 2014″ issue is that one month after CCSS was released, in July 2010, the standards-grading Thomas B. Fordham Institute proclaimed CCSS as “the winner” despite its own grading of CCSS as lower than or equal to existing state standards– a grading that is further complicated by an utter lack of any logical connection between state results on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)– and a proclamation that CCSS were “clearly superior to those currently in use in thirty-nine states” based upon the *evidence* of “our observations.”

And when a state such as California had highly-esteemed standards in Fordham Institute’s view yet low NAEP scores– former Fordham Institute President Chester Finn blamed (go ahead and guess)– faulty implementation.

For any CCSS supporter, the “faulty implementation” card is the gift that keeps on giving.

But if California has great standards and poor NAEP scores, and other states have “poor” standards and above average NAEP scores, then is it possible that the entire standards-driven idea is too rudimentary to capture the education enterprise?

Here is another hard-hitting question: Is it possible that CCSS cannot be “properly implemented,” period?

Anyone who answers definitively that CCSS is fine and that “implementation is the problem” is only offering an opinion. It might be a fiscally-fueled, ego-stroking, well-publicized opinion, but no number of high-profile endorsements or USDOE talking points will transform it into empirical evidence.

Know who wins in the absence of empirical evidence to support a standards-to-promised-CCSS-results connection given that the nation is now in the middle of the CCSS mud?

For one, the peddlers of CCSS materials– tests, curricula, professional development, and (let us not forget) data collection.

Pearson wins.

AEI panelist and Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) CEO Chris Minnich has Pearson connections… and his CCSSO is one of the CCSS owners.

A thought with which to leave readers.

There is much more that I can write about this AEI meeting of the pro-CCSS minds (yes, Hess, that includes you), but I will save it for another post.

Dirty Books and Corporations in the Classroom

/in , , , , /by

Thomas More Law Center Fights Common Core with Resource Page for Parents and Teachers.

From recommended literature that celebrates pedophilia, and math standards that ignore simple arithmetic, to “new” history, and the infiltration of corporations and advertisers in the classroom and student records, the Common Core aligned curricula, tests, and data are filled with horror stories.

In an effort to empower parents and concerned teachers, the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, has launched a Common Core Resource page which combines commentary and analysis from leading experts along with documentation of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) worst offenses. These offenses include “grooming” children by presenting graphic descriptions of pedophilia, incest and rape as literature, selling American education to the highest bidder, and turning students into lab rats whose data can be shared with any agency using the right code words.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of TMLC, commented: “Our resource page is only a start. And I invite concerned parents and teachers to check it out and notify Catherine McMillan at cmcmillan@thomasmore.org if we have left out an important resource. It goes without saying, I’m grateful to the parents and teachers who have preceded us in this particular fight for the future of our children and nation.”

Click here to go directly to the resource page.

The resource page also includes the Law Center’s comprehensive Student Privacy Protection Request form to assist parents in opting-out of Common Core aligned curricula, data mining and the release of student’s personal information including test scores, religious and political beliefs, biographic, biometric, and psychometric data, such as fingerprints, DNA and information related to children’s personality and aptitude. The form is available as a general reference and guide for all concerned parents.

In addition, for parents seeking to network with others in their state who are also working to eliminate Common Core and its effects, the resource page contains a listing of Stop Common Core groups by state.

As documented in TMLC’s resource page, since its inception, the CCSS have come under heavy fire, from parents and educators, for a variety of grievances including: political, inappropriate, and incomprehensible assignments; costly ties to big corporations; in-test advertising; the elimination of locally appropriate standards; and the emphasis placed on standardized testing.

Additionally, concerns about the alarming explosion of data mining within the classroom have been raised in connection with Common Core. State databases, often referred to as P-20 systems, are designed to gather information and follow students from their entry into pre-Kindergarten up through entry into the workforce. These databases, through a complicated network of contracts and agreements, can then be shared with the federal government, contractors, researchers and other outside agencies. In some instances, these databases can contain over 400 individual data points per student including health-care histories, income information, religious affiliations, voting status, blood type, likes and dislikes and homework completion.

Brainwashing Our Best and Brightest Against Our Own Country

/in , , , , /by

In August, I received a disturbing note from a highly respected expert, Jane Robbins, of the American Principles Project.  It described an assault on our best and brightest high school students who are taking Advanced Placement U.S. History.  For most of the approximately 450,000 students, this will be their last exposure to American History.

college board ap logoThe College Board was responsible for this.  Under the new leadership of David Coleman, who has no actual experience in education other than being Arne Duncan’s college roommate and crafting the Common Core agenda and standards, the College Board has blossomed into the Trojan horse for the delivery of the propaganda of the left.

The College Board controls the Scholastic Aptitude Test, (SAT) the GED, and now, curricular materials of all types which is all now aligned to Common Core.  Most college bound students take the SAT and the GED is used to graduate from high school.

Where “choice” had been a successful key to tailoring education to the individual needs of students, the new buzz words are “Standards and Accountability.”  Religious schools, charter schools and even Home School students are channeled into Common Core if they wish to matriculate to other schools or college as the new College Board tests are now aligned to Common Core and are distinctly different than past tests.

“You get what you reward” is part of the justification for the drive for accountability.

Teachers and administrators are now paid on the students’ results on these tests, so teaching to the test predominates.  They are given scripted lessons which are “paced” so that all students are learning the same thing at the same time.  Teachers are rebuked for attending to slower learners, so they are simply left behind.  High achieving students can’t move ahead and become bored.  Cheating scandals have broken out everywhere as high stakes tests determine pay.

Testing companies put cut scores high to purposely fail students at high rates, as every time they test, those companies get paid handsomely.  By driving to electronic systems in schools, high tech companies eagerly joined to support common core.  They also get to share in the vast wealth of data collection.  Pearson PLC now dominates the market share in education with an approximate 80% share.  They have purchased most of America’s textbook and education delivery companies.  From the Wall Street Journal on line “Libya is Pearson’s fourth-biggest shareholder, according to LionShares. Pearson’s third biggest shareholder, with a 3.1% stake, is ABC Islamic Bank, a unit of the Bahrain-based Arab Banking Corp., which invests in accordance with Sharia law.”

Huffington Post in depth about Pearson:

Aside from money, there is another problem.  Parents, school districts and even States have lost their control over content which is being driven by the College Board and unaccountable DC lobbying groups who have copyrighted the standards.

Lee County is the 34th largest school district in the country.  The book that our district has chosen is “Out of Many”, the AP 6th Edition, by Pearson PLC.   Even the College Board says this about this book:

“Teachers considering the purchase of Out of Many should be aware that the book has become part of the textbook culture wars. Traditionalists who want democracy and free enterprise presented more favorably are bothered by what they see as left-leaning texts that pay too much attention to the dark side of American history. These individuals put Out of Many in this category. Consequently, Out of Many has come under scrutiny, especially where state boards of education have the power to select and reject texts for use in the public schools.

Out of Many‘s greatest weakness is the lack of a bibliography to direct teachers to materials beyond the text. There is also very little historiography, and the book would certainly benefit from something like the Brinkley text’s “When Historians Disagree” segments.”

Here are a few choice quotes from this book, ”Ronald Reagan, a charismatic figure who sometimes created his own past and seemed to believe in it…”

“George Washington was anything but a man of the people.”

“All Indian women controlled their own bodies, were free to determine the timing of reproduction, and were free to use secret herbs to prevent pregnancy, induce abortion, or ease the pains of childbirth.  All this was strikingly different from European patterns, in which the rule of men over women and fathers over households was thought to be the social ideal.”

There are absolutely no sources documents referenced anywhere in the over 1,200 pages.  It is one large opinion piece and it is from the far left.  Does this satisfy our Florida State statutory requirements for history?  I think not:

The 2014 Florida Statutes
Title XLVIII
K-20 EDUCATION CODE		 Chapter 1003
PUBLIC K-12 EDUCATION		 View Entire Chapter
1003.42 Required instruction.—

(a) The history and content of the Declaration of Independence, including national sovereignty, natural law, self-evident truth, equality of all persons, limited government, popular sovereignty, and inalienable rights of life, liberty, and property, and how they form the philosophical foundation of our government.

(b) The history, meaning, significance, and effect of the provisions of the Constitution of the United States and amendments thereto, with emphasis on each of the 10 amendments that make up the Bill of Rights and how the constitution provides the structure of our government.

(c) The arguments in support of adopting our republican form of government, as they are embodied in the most important of the Federalist Papers.

(d) Flag education, including proper flag display and flag salute.

(e) The elements of civil government, including the primary functions of and interrelationships between the Federal Government, the state, and its counties, municipalities, school districts, and special districts.

(f) The history of the United States, including the period of discovery, early colonies, the War for Independence, the Civil War, the expansion of the United States to its present boundaries, the world wars, and the civil rights movement to the present. American history shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed, shall be viewed as knowable, teachable, and testable, and shall be defined as the creation of a new nation based largely on the universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence.

Upon reviewing the book, it is clear that the College Board has gone a “bridge too far” in promoting this course, which likely violates many other states statutes as well.  The question remains, how can we get this out of our schools?  How can we stop the blatant brainwashing of our best and brightest students?

The answer may lie in last year’s Florida legislation SB 864, which includes more local control, “requiring the district school board, rather than the commissioner, to conduct an independent investigation to determine the accuracy of district-adopted materials; authorizing the district school board, rather than the commissioner, to remove materials from the list of district-adopted materials…”

Parents of AP US History students, teachers and concerned citizens should bring this issue to the attention of their school boards across Florida and the nation to demand that this course be immediately halted and demand that the College Board substitute another instead which does comply with Florida law.  Notice should be sent to the parents of students now taking this course of the potential that this course may not comply with State Law.  Districts must challenge the state and the College Board for “boxing in” students who needed this course for college credits and demand solutions.  Taxpayers are the customers of the College Board and will not tolerate the blatant disregard for the laws of our state and the needs of our students.

We must stand for our past NOW, or face a new kind of future without American Heroes, without individual freedom and the rule of law.

Remarkable Idiocy: “Economically-driven Education”

/in , , , , /by

On October 2, 2014, I will be speaking in Indiana to an audience chiefly comprised of university students who have a passing understanding of the intentions of moneyed interests to usurp control of public education.

With a mind toward preparing for my upcoming engagement, I happened to read three pertinent (and powerful) articles: This one on September 26, 2014, in Chalkbeat on Indiana Governor Mike Pence’s plan to use workforce data to determine what schools teach in order to subjugate education to the requirements of the job market, excerpted below:

…Indiana is quietly taking steps to position itself for a future where data drives much of what is learned in school. Gov. Mike Pence has made connecting education and workforce development a centerpiece of his administration’s agenda.…

This year, a bill he wrote created a new state office, under Pence’s direction, with a director who has been nicknamed the state’s “data czar.” That office will manage an expanded network of K-12, higher education and workforce data, working with an outside company to identify trends and opportunities to connect what is learned now to what students will some day need to know.

Just last month, Pence named [state representative Steve] Braun as the state’s new director of the Department of Workforce Development. [Emphasis added.]

Pence wants to tailor education to serve the workforce, not the individual being educated– an important point.

Next is another article, a Living in Dialogue post by Professor Emeritus Denny Taylor, one that deals quite skillfully with the sinister push to make public education little more than the servant of the US economy. The second article refers to very-well-compensated “non-profiteer” Marc Tucker’s 1992 “Dear Hillary” letter, excerpted below. Tucker’s vision is

… to remold the entire American system” into “a seamless web that literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same system for everyone,”coordinated by “a system of labor market boards at the local, state and federal levels” where curriculum and “job matching” will be handled by counselors “accessing the integrated computer-based program. [Emphasis added.]

Again with using education to create workers to serve the workforce.

Finally, in this dehumanizing, “student-as-object” vein, is a third article, from the August 1, 2014, Washington Post and written about the South Korean education system by former South Korean student and teacher, Se-Woong Koo. The entire article I find profoundly sad, but this part stuck me most:

Herded to various educational outlets and programs by parents, the average South Korean student works up to 13 hours a day, while the average high school student sleeps only 5.5 hours a night to ensure there is sufficient time for studying. Hagwons [cram schools] consume more than half of spending on private education.

This “investment” in education is what has been used to explain South Koreans’ spectacular scores on the Program for International Student Assessment, increasingly the standard by which students from all over the world are compared to one another.

But a system driven by overzealous parents and a leviathan private industry is unsustainable over the long run, especially given the physical and psychological costs that students are forced to bear.

Many young South Koreans suffer physical symptoms of academic stress, like my brother did. In a typical case, one friend reported losing clumps of hairas she focused on her studies in high school; her hair regrew only when she entered college. [Emphasis added.]

South Korean children are “typically” losing their hair from the pressure of becoming objects to serve societal education expectation. A shocking image.

US Secretary of Education Arne Duncan believes that the South Korean education system is “better” than the American education system, and he believes America needs to be more like “demanding” South Korea.

When American children *typically* lose clumps of hair as a direct result of the stress of their schooling, perhaps Duncan will be satisfied.

After reading and meditating on these three articles today, I had an epiphany of sorts regarding privatizing utility of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

Now, I know a lot about CCSS. This summer I wrote a book on its history, development, and promotion. However, what occurred to me this afternoon is the reason for the business push for CCSS particularly and the spectrum of privatizing reforms in general.

It has nothing to do with “competing in the global economy.” That’s just a distractor.

The goal of business in aggressively promoting CCSS while bashing the teaching profession into false, test-score-riddled “accountability” is to reshape the purpose of education into streamlined slavery to market service.

Yes, CCSS is about corporate profits, but it is about more than companies like Pearson making potential billions off of selling CCSS products and services.

The true business goal behind CCSS and other market-driven “reforms” is to make American education completely economic– which means completely dehumanized in its purpose.

It is about corporate America’s funneling the nation’s youth into predetermined, objectified service of the corporate, gluttonous market needs. And a crucial component of that goal is to break the spirit of teachers and make us nothing more than the trainers of What the Market Requires.

They must break us because we do not worship profits. The very fact that we enter the modestly-remunerating teaching profession attests to our *failure* to weigh the value of a life in economic terms.

No reasonable individual enters K12 teaching “for the money.”

Though K12 teachers are not driven by thoughts of a fat wallet, don’t kid yourselves for a moment regarding so-called “nonprofits.” They are raking in the dough hand over fist. Consider “think tank and do tank” National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE) CEO Marc Tucker, as cited from the Taylor article:

…For the tax year ending June 30th 2011… Tucker received a total of $2,549,077 in compensation from NCEE and ACI (America’s Choice, Inc.) –$2,055,465 from the sale of ACI to Pearson and $493,612 in compensation and benefits from NCEE. …

In 2012 Tucker received $819,109 in total compensation from NCEE….

Those who run nonprofits can certainly “profit.” Just ask New York charter queen Eva Moskowitz, who collected over $578,000 in “compensation” from running her charter “nonprofit” in 2012-13 and CCSS salesman, Fordham Institute then-VP Michael Petrilli, who was paid over $214,000 for his “nonprofit” work in 2012.

Talk about the benefits of “choice,” eh?

There is certainly money to be made in promoting “reforms” that, ahem, *benefit the economy.* But we must recognize this “cradle to grave” shaping of the American education system for what it is: A purposed effort to separate America into two groups, the privileged and the serfs. Indeed, the privileged are trying to finesse the message of serfdom as one that “concerned citizens” seemingly cannot say no to: a falsified image of national economic health that, if ingested by the American consciousness, will prove to be nothing more than caustic gluttony that dehumanizes most members of our society and corrodes our democratic foundation.

Ironically and truly, even the fattened Marc Tuckers and their like will fall by their own selfish folly. For all of their economic positioning, they cannot hover above American democratic foundation collapse.

The remarkable idiocy of it all.

RELATED COLUMN: AIR and Fordham Institute Grade Standards; Common Core Wins!

Like my writing? Read my education “reform” whistle blower book, A Chronicle of Echoes: Who’s Who in the Implosion of American Public Education

Greater Consortium of Florida School Boards says “Suspend High Stakes Testing”

/in , , , , , /by

Meetings of The Greater Consortium of Florida School Boards are not usually big news, but this meeting, Friday September 19, in West Palm Beach, Florida was an exception as parents have become a volcano of discontent and school board members are rising to address their concerns. The Consortium is eleven school boards which team together for the purpose of lobbying the state government. Forty two percent of the K-12 children in Florida attend their schools.

In fact, many school board meetings are now the “hot” places to be as pressure mounts against the maniacal testing demands which come with Common Core. News this week included hundreds of new tests to be administered, costing each district millions and crowding out precious learning time. It is estimated that over 40% of class time is already spent on testing alone. Schools have gone so far as to end recess in K-6 so that more time can be spent testing.

Eruptions have occurred in local school board meetings all around the state. In Lee County, there was a vote to “Opt out” of state mandated tests altogether. Hundreds of parents jammed into the board meeting wearing red in solidarity and gave passionate testimony about the disastrous effects of Common Core and high stakes testing.

Now, the rebellion has swelled and the Consortium voted unanimously to include a main plank in their legislative agenda to “suspend high stakes testing.” This will be confirmed by a vote in each school district and will be used as a lobbying platform.
The move was stunning as all districts must agree on issues in the platform which usually results in only non-controversial proposals, not bold statements. But big problems require bold action.

The state, itself, has admitted there are many problems with the deliver and administering of tests. Just last week the Florida DOE ended the K-2 “FAIR” test.

What is “high stakes” testing? Why the aversion to tests? Isn’t “accountability” important?

In the “old days” when schools worked, certified teachers taught in accredited schools and the teachers gave final exams and evaluated the body of student work to produce a grade which was entered in the report card. Students were accountable for their results.

Since 1994, criticism of results led some legislators to say “Let’s raise the bar.” Let’s impose “higher standards” and base teacher pay and tenure on student results. This is “outcome based education.” And this was a big mistake which got bigger as time went on.

The federal government passed No Child Left Behind in 2002. This required tests to show ALL students would progress at a certain rate, or schools would be taken over. Teachers would be paid and fired on results. This led to frustration, teaching only to the test, and widespread cheating scandals.

Of course, accountability for one’s actions is important. But we should not be accountable for results we do not control. That is what we have done to teachers and schools. Lessons are scripted and teachers are not allowed to slow down or speed up as their lessons are “paced.” Bright students get bored and those who don’t catch on right away are left behind.

The state dictates the standards and curriculum must match because pay and even their jobs depend on getting good results on tests the state mandates. Students are not measured on a body of work, but can have life changing decisions made for them on the basis of a single test. Third graders are held back a year, and high schoolers must pass one test in order to graduate. State mandated End of Course (EOC) exams count for 30% of the yearly grade in core subjects.

We should also not be rewarded and punished using unattainable goals as in “No Child Left Behind.” Here’s a simple example: I can reward someone five feet tall millions of dollars to beat a seven fool tall NBA player at basketball and it is nearly impossible for him to attain that goal no matter how hard he tries. I can punish him when he fails, and there is no positive result from either to the shorter player. There would be an enormous negative effect, deflating the ego of the player and discouraging him from trying at all.

Realizing all of this, and examining the disastrous empirical results, we must support the bold move supported by the Greater Consortium of Florida’s School Boards, and press the Governor and Legislators to stop this unworkable, unwise, and unaffordable method of meaningless measurement.

Unwinding the bloated bureaucracy in which corporate cronies such as Pearson PLC, Bill Gates and Jeb Bush have benefitted massively, won’t be easy. But we must free our children of the tests which line their pockets and steal nearly half of their class time for learning.

It is OUR responsibility to raise our children, not the village, not the state, and certainly not Washington DC.

We, the People, must take back our parental rights and demand that the schools, our state, and our nation remember they serve at the CONSENT of the Governed, not the GOVERNOR.

We must be free to teach the truth and America will once again be that Shining City on the Hill where American Exceptionalism is common…

Not Common Core.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Common Core: It Seemed Like a Good Idea Until It Existed

PARCC and SBAC States Agree to Deliver Student-level Data to USDOE

School Board Privatization: Committee for a Better _________ (Your City Here)

One more way to impose Common Core: The National Association of State Boards of Education

/in , , , , /by

Common Core will make its citizens compliant to the demands of the corporations that now control the government, which in turn grants them special favors.  As the federal government controls the state government, it takes away the freedom of parents to direct their children’s education. Go to one state school board meeting and you will see and hear how much board members toe the line from the federal Department of Education, as they grasp for federal funds.

At one time socialists and communists sought to inspire a revolution through the schools.  They did this by revising the history of the United States to make it appear that our principles would no longer serve in a changing twentieth century.  The Soviet Union provided a better model, they claimed, and said so to their charges in the classroom.

Today we are told by business and government leaders that we are now in the twenty-first century, so we must change education.

The radical fringe educators are no longer looking to a socialist state on another continent, but to progressives within, in government departments and large influential corporations and non-profits to produce the new “twenty-first century education.”  It’s known as Common Core, and requires all new tests, books, computers, tablets, training sessions, and conferences.

Common Core will make its citizens compliant to the demands of the corporations that now control the government, which in turn grants them special favors.  As the federal government controls the state government, it takes away the freedom of parents to direct their children’s education.

Go to one state school board meeting and you will see and hear how much board members toe the line from the federal Department of Education, as they grasp for federal funds.  I found this out by attending a meeting in Georgia in November where I heard a long-winded sales pitch for the Georgia Family Engagement Conference, an activity pursuant to the “Parental Engagement” section of the federal Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, where only pro-Common Core speakers were allowed.  In contrast, five citizens were allowed three minutes apiece to make their case against Common Core at the state school board meeting.

As if “parental engagement” weren’t Orwellian enough, the upcoming annual meeting of the National State Boards of Education (NASBE), “a non-profit association that represents state and territorial boards of education,” has as its theme, “Leaders Learning from Leaders.”   The agenda is full of Common Core buzzwords, like “career readiness,” “digital learning,” and “teacher evaluation.”

As it turns out, these “leaders” will really be learning from corporate for-profit and non-profit sponsors with strong government ties, such as Aneesh Chopra, former White House Chief Technology Officer and now Co-Founder and Executive Vice President at Hunch Analytics.  The home page of Hunch Analytics tells us that “Healthcare and Education dominate 25% of the economy.”  A Democratic ideologue in addition to being a techie, Chopra ran unsuccessfully for Lieutenant Governor in Virginia in 2013 and believes in public/private partnerships.  He is a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, founded and funded by billionaire George Soros to mobilize resources to advance a Democratic agenda.  Chopra’s talk is described on the agenda as “offer[ing] an absorbing look at how open government can establish a new paradigm for the internet era and allow us to tackle our most challenging problems.”

The session, “What’s in Store on Election Day and What Does It Mean for Education?” is devoted to political prognostication by polling and public affairs companies, Public Opinion Strategies and Global Strategy Group.  A session on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) is presented by Blair Blackwell of the Chevron Foundation.

The session, “State Boards and Local School Boards Working  Together” with Thomas J. Gentzel, Executive Director, National School Boards Association and Kristen Amundson, Executive Director, National Association of State Boards of Education, suggests that “working together” might be more of a top-down arrangement, given what we know about how the federal-state-local relationship is arranged.

The General Session, “The New Accountability for the 21st Century” features Linda Darling-Hammond, Chris Steinhauser, superintendant of Long Beach schools, and Craig Jerald.  Jerald, who holds a bachelor’s degree in sociology, is an education policy consultant, who writes frequently on such things as teacher evaluation (a big part of Common Core) for the Center for American Progress.  He is now Vice President, Policy, at the College Board, the non-profit in charge of making new SAT Common Core-aligned college entrance exams and writing the new AP history exams and standards.  The president of the College Board is Common Core architect David Coleman.

Darling-Hammond, the radical educator who led Obama’s education transition team, is in charge of designing one of the two national tests under Common Core, and is a collaborator and close colleague of terrorist professor Bill Ayers.  It’s ironic that Darling-Hammond is featured in two panels, one on “accountability.”  The Stanford New School she had founded was denied charter status in 2010 because of its performance as a “persistently worst-performing school.”  Her model school, the June Jordan School for Social Equity did not meet Adequate Yearly Progress, according to an article in Educational Leadership.  Yet, she is described as one of the three “thought leaders” on the panel, someone who has “developed a model for what she calls the ‘51st state’ accountability system.”

Registration fees for all this range from $775 to $875.  According to Renée Rybak Lang, Communications Director for NASBE, about 150 to 200 attendees, consisting of “stakeholders,” education commissioners, policymakers, analysts, and researchers, go to each year’s meeting.  About half of the attendees are members of NASBE.

Who pays the exorbitant registration fees and travel expenses?

According to Lang, “individuals” pay the costs.

According to Matthew Cardoza, Director of Communications for the Georgia Board of Education, travel expenses and registration fees are paid for by NASBE dues.  This year Georgia, a super-majority Republican state, is paying $36,997 for the NASBE dues of the 14 members of the Georgia Board of Education.  Two of these board members may attend the meeting, but have not yet confirmed.   Sixty-percent of NASBE’s revenues come from state board of education dues.

What do Georgia taxpayers and students get for almost $37,000 for dues to this one organization?  Says Cardoza in an email, “The benefit is that the board members get to share from others/find out what’s going on in other states and learn about issues that may be impacting Georgia as well.  The networking from board members I am told is invaluable.”

We know that attendees will get a little junket to Denver this year, while learning how to adhere to government policy and rub shoulders with the corporate players.  Questions remain: how does this benefit students and why should taxpayers have to pay for it?

RELATED ARTICLE: Thanks to Common Core, It Takes 56 Seconds to Solve 9+6

Seattle Times’ Gates-funded Education Lab Blog Experiment

/in , , , , /by

Bill Gates lives in Seattle.

His money buys experiments there, too.

In October 2013, the Seattle Times announced that it had “sought” a grant from the Gates Foundation for a year-long “project” in partnership with Solutions Journalism Network– a blog called the “Education Lab”:

Education Lab, a partnership between The Seattle Times and Solutions Journalism Network, will explore promising programs and innovations inside early-education programs, K-12 schools and colleges that are addressing some of the biggest challenges facing public education.

The yearlong project is funded by grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation.

As part of a “Q and A” on the grant money and the project, Seattle Times offers the following:

The project has received $530,000 in foundation funding — $450,000 from the Gates Foundation and $80,000 from the Knight Foundation, a foundation that supports journalism excellence and media innovation.

The Seattle Times will receive $426,000 during an 18-month period. The bulk of its funding will pay for the salaries of two education reporters, allowing us to expand our education team; an editor and photographer primarily dedicated to the project; and a newly hired community-engagement editor. The funds will also be used for community outreach and public forums, creation of a blog and design and data work. …

The Seattle Times would neither seek nor accept a grant that did not give us full editorial control over what is published. Generally, when a grant is made, there is agreement on a specific project or a broad area of reporting it will support. … The foundation had no role in deciding which stories we choose to pursue or how we report those stories. It also does not review stories before publication. … 

Beyond agreeing to fund the project, the foundations have not asked for and will not have any input into the reporting of stories or into any of the content that will emerge from the project. The foundations will not be aware of specific stories we are working on or review them before publication. …

…There will be no direct relationship between the foundation’s education advocacy and the reporting for Education Lab. It is possible the project will analyze and report on efforts that the Gates Foundation supports and those it does not. In determining the focus of the reporting in the project, the support of the Gates Foundation, or lack thereof, will play no role. Throughout the duration of the project, we will be transparent about funding for Education Lab. …

For this project, the [Gates] foundation has a strong desire to test and learn whether this solutions-oriented approach would help promote deeper engagement on a complex topic like education. [Emphasis added.]

The Seattle Times sure is making an effort to convince those in Bill Gates’ home town that this is not just another Gates overreach.

Or is it?

In offering the above information up front, Seattle Times notes that it is being “transparent with readers about the source of the money.”

That’s $450,000 directly from Gates to the Seattle Times, right?

Not according to the Gates Grants search engine, which indicates no grant paid to the Seattle Times on or around October 2013 in the amount of $450,000. The search engine also indicates no $450,000 grant paid to either Solutions Journalism Network or Education Lab.

However…

…the Gates grants search engine does include this this July 2013 grant for $700,000, paid to New Ventures Fund of Washington, DC, for “communications” and “strategic partnerships”– specific to education journalism in the Seattle Times:

New Venture Fund

Date: July 2013 
Purpose: to test solutions-oriented education journalism that leads to problem-solving and positive outcomes with the Seattle Times 
Amount: $700,000 
Term: 18 
Topic: Communications, Strategic Partnerships 
Program: Communications 
Grantee Location: Washington, District of Columbia 
Grantee Website: http://www.newventurefund.org

It seems that someone is not being “completely transparent,” after all.

Looks like Education Lab goes beyond being a Seattle Times idea. Looks like it is another Gates “strategic” education experiment.

Here is what New Venture Fund offers as its mission:

The New Venture Fund, a 501(c)(3) public charity, supports innovative and effective public interest projects. NVF was established in 2006 in response to demand from leading philanthropists for an efficient, cost-effective, and time-saving platform to launch and operate charitable projects. We execute a range of donor-driven public interest projects in conservation, global health, public policy, international development, education, disaster recovery, and the arts. More than half of the 50 largest US grantmaking foundations have funded projects hosted at NVF, including 8 of the top 10. 

NVF is overseen by an independent board of directors that has extensive experience in philanthropy and nonprofit management. NVF is managed under an administrative agreement with Arabella Advisors, a leading national philanthropy services firm that helps philanthropists and investors find innovative ways to achieve greater good with their resources. NVF has collaborated with Arabella on successful projects for many of philanthropy’s leading players and institutions, and the two organizations share a commitment to evaluation and measuring impact. [Emphasis added.]

Along the side bar of the Education Lab funding Q and A page, I noticed a number ofSeattle Times stories focusing on test scores (see here and here and here and here). And here, the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are mentioned, and it seems that parents are fine with CCSS “perhaps because test scores are going up.”

Based upon its sidebar of education stories, the Seattle Times sure is promoting a sunny perspective on test-driven education reform.

Now, according to the Seattle Times, this is their agenda, not a forced Gates agenda.

So that makes it okay… right?

Nevertheless…

Note that Bill Gates has really pushed usage of high stakes test scores. Though Gates is only a “neutral party” when it comes to issues of American education (tongue in cheek), and though he might be willing to delay their high-stakes usage (and by sheer coincidence, the federal government “comes up with the idea” two months after Gates does), Gates clearly intends to promote test-driven education for the masses.

So, for both Gates and the Seattle Times: high test scores are the ultimate determinant of education “success.”

Based upon the sidebar of Seattle Times stories on the Education Lab site, one reads that the Seattle Times also pushes the message that the best outcome for all students is college.

College. For. ALL.

I didn’t see any sidebar stories about students who become successes in jobs requiring specialized– dare I write it– non-college– training or apprenticeships.

If such stories exist, they are not featured on this sidebar.

The Seattle Times does offer some unique stories– like this one about a school transformed into a STEM school with a focus on hands-on projects. Even here, the “college is best” and “higher test scores means it’s valuable” messages lurk in the background of a “learning for learning’s sake” story.

Let us now turn our attention to Education Lab.

Here is the curiosity:

In contrast to the Seattle Times sidebar stories, the two Education Lab blog writers, Claudia Rowe and Linda Shaw, write stories that appear to critically question test-driven reform, as well as stories on special interest, education issues not part of the test-score-driven, education privatization agenda. (Click links to see archived stories by Rowe and Shaw.)

So, one sees this Education Lab blog with some rather refreshing education stories– and at the same time, one sees the primarily test-score-measure-of-success, Seattle Times education stories along the Education Lab sidebar.

Part of the experiment, perhaps?

We might soon find out. That “yearlong project to spark meaningful conversations about education solutions in the Pacific Northwest” will expire in a couple of months.

Perhaps then, the Seattle Times, or the New Venture Fund, or Solutions Journalism Network, or the Gates Foundation will have the word for us on what this “project” means for American education.

Perhaps Bill will address the matter himself. Perhaps Melinda will do it.

You’ll have to forgive me if I appear skeptical of Gates involvement in American education ventures– and especially in the “measuring impact” of Gates-funded “positive outcomes.” Only last month, for my upcoming book on Common Core origins, I wrote a detailed chapter about what Gates promotes as his “neutral” involvement in American education and the reality of his repeatedly and actively promoting his personal view of what American education should look like.

Then again, this Gates “venture” is taking place in Seattle, where people are familiar with his games.

Like my writing? Read my newly-released ed “reform” whistle blower, A Chronicle of Echoes: Who’s Who in the Implosion of American Public Education. NOW AVAILABLE ON KINDLE.

The Atrocities of Abortion / The Curse of Common Core: It all comes down to “CHOICE”

/in , , , , , /by

Hope all is well with you as we dare to begin the second week of this tumultuous school year. Tumultuous only because an unconstitutional government take-over of our beloved education system has taken over a good majority of the country; “100” out of 176 Catholic dioceses in the United States have sinfully adopted this curse; and the good majority of our 317 million American citizens in the United States still do NOT have a clue what Common Core is – where it came from – and the dangers it is going to have on our nation in a couple of years, if not sooner…

Folks, Common Core has been the most controversial issue to hit our country in decades, maybe since January 22nd, 1973, when the ruthless liberals passed Roe v. Wade, making the killing of innocent babies in the womb, fair game. Abortion has taken a toll on our country to the tune of over 56 million babies having been aborted since that infamous day in ’73. It affects women who have had an abortion more than experts know as they are still doing studies on that. It affects men, just as well. And, society says that it is all about “choice” – that it is the women’s choice whether to have her baby or abort that precious little one. So, as much as us devout Pro-Lifers fight it – this culture of death that we are living in today – says that abortion is perfectly legal and that it is up to the woman to make her choice – whether she sneaks in an abortion clinic as a teenager (without her parents’ consent) or whether it is an older woman in her 40’s, who decides that she can’t afford to have another baby. The word “choice” keeps surfacing when it comes to women’s rights…at least she does have a choice…

Now, let’s take a look at this other attack on our country that has taken it by storm – one that I refer to as the “Curse of Common Core”. Let’s see how it relates to the atrocity of abortion in terms of that word, “choice”…

  • In 2002, all 50 states in our country had the “choice” to come on board with a program called “No Child Left Behind” with regards to Public School Education – under the watch of President George W. Bush. 45 states chose to sign up for this program because the funding was outstanding – they took the millions – but found out shortly that this program was not that outstanding. It barely survived, but those public schools in those respective states’ governments still received lots of money – but, were now “married” to the Federal Government and had to abide by their rules. It was their “choice”.
  • In 2009, when our good buddy, Obama, took over as president in his first term, he and Education Secretary, Arne Duncan, and several other cronies sort of “resurrected” this No Child Left Behind mess and renamed it to “Race to the Top”. Part of the evolution process. They both used their left hands to sign on the dotted line and those same 45 states followed the blind, chasing more money, as they really had “no choice” with which way this administration was going to run this new program. They were still “married” to the government, were at their mercy, and needed the money more than ever, so they continued with their rocky marriage – having “no choice” in the matter…a one-way relationship with no say from the governors or school leaders…

Divorce was NOT an option – they would not receive any more money if they filed for divorce!

Over 7 years had gone by since the start of “No Child Left Behind”, and now, another 3 years with “Race to the Top” – and the public schools from those same 45 states were still at the mercy of this liberal government, who now were looking to come up with another “gimmick”, in order to keep those 45 states eating out of their hands at their command since Race to the Top seemed to have run its course and the top bottomed out. It was time for a new and improved program to keep these 45 governors and their respective school districts quiet and hungry for more…

Come 2012, and Obama and Duncan felt like it was time for another “magic trick” in order to continue to have control over all of these public schools – and without the consent of anybody who mattered when it comes to school matters – they pulled a dirty rabbit out of the hat and decided to call it Common Core. And, those same 45 states had no choice but to continue to follow the blind, chase the money and be at the mercy of the Obama/Duncan dictatorship. All the while, no teacher, student or parent had any clue what these two and the rest of the so-called “education experts” were up to. Only a few of these “corrupt cronies” who were behind this stealth operation knew what was going on and by the time the public finally heard about Common Core, it was already in Phase III…and too late for the public to react…so we thought…And, that was at the beginning of last year’s school year…

Once again, these same 45 states who began with “No Child Left Behind” in 2002 had “no choice” in this matter and could not care less what new name they gave it. They were stuck with it. They just needed the money. For the record: They did NOT volunteer for this new, untested and unproven set of standards that these liberals decided to call Common Core, but they had no choice but to follow along and do whatever it took to stay in grace with the Obama administration and to continue to receive this money – not knowing that the last penny from Race to the Top was going to be paid out on June 30th, 2014. Are you still with me? Stay with us and keep the word “choice” in mind.

“Choice”…a very important word. Important when it comes to a woman’s right. Important when it comes to our children’s education. Keep in mind that all 3 of these government programs that I have spoken about deal with PUBLIC SCHOOLS, ONLY! They have nothing to do with Private schools, Home schools or the ever-curious Catholic schools…

So, when the Catholic schools got wind of this new set of standards and all the money that came with it, they began to explore what was on the other side and started to get a bit curious, then greedy – looking into how they could get their “preying hands” on some of this Federal Funding that these Public schools were receiving. Common Core had nothing to do with the Catholic schools – but, somehow, they made it a point to have something to do with it. It was the beginning of the “fall from grace” – just like the analogy I gave you a week ago when I referred to Common Core as the “forbidden fruit” in the Garden of Eden. Temptations from that evil serpent…Starting to make sense, now?

“100” of the 176 Catholic dioceses in our country (including all 7 right here in our beloved state of Florida), decided to compromise their Catholic identity and cross over the boundaries to the other side to see if they did, indeed, eat from that forbidden fruit, if there were any consequences to pay. Would they be thrown out of that beautiful garden? After all, there was a ton of money out there and what’s a simple venial sin? Once again, it was these Catholic dioceses’ “choice”, with 100 of them disobeying their Creator, listening to the evil serpent, and eating from the forbidden fruit – an apple…and, now the entire country knows that it is “rotten to the core”…

And, that brings us full circle to what is going on in our country today. All the facts are out there now, plain and clear. We caring, anti-Common Core activists continue to illustrate to the entire nation how corrupt, unconstitutional and unethical this Curse truly is. We have laid it out there for all to see while exposing all those who decided to entertain that forbidden fruit – the greedy politicians, the shady legislators, the corrupt school leaders, the superintendents, the Catholic Church leaders, the Bishops, etc. They all know the difference between right and wrong. Moral and immoral. What is the truth, what is not true. And, once again, it’s all about “choice” and free will. Life is all about choice. Giving life – aborting life…it’s all about choice. Adopting Common Core, not adopting it…it’s all about choice…

On January 22nd, 1973, the most critical decision in our country was made in regards to giving a woman the choice to abort her baby or have her baby. Ironically, “abortion was born”. The liberals won that battle and in these past 41 years, 56 million babies have lost that battle…they had “no choice”…

We are now in the year 2014 – six years into the presidency of the most liberal, “Pro-abortion President” this country has ever seen in its 238 year existence, as things continue to move to the left, while Obama continues to promote these two intrinsic evils that I am writing about. American citizens have a choice to make right now, in regards to Common Core, as it is still in its “developmental & experimental stage”, and from the looks of things, the more people in this country learn about Common Core, the more they hate it. It has become the country’s biggest controversy. People are finally beginning to understand the hidden socialist agenda behind this monster that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation helped create with their “blood billions”. Its approval rate is dropping quicker than Obama’s and now more than 65% of the country do not believe that Common Core is good for this country.

So, to tie this entire story together, you can now see how the liberals’ two most controversial claims to fame – Abortion and Common Core – are quite similar in many aspects. Abortion attacks our innocent unborn and it was legalized by the immoral liberals in our country in 1973 – while the Church just sat and watched. Common Core attacks our school children and it was designed by the same people, while that same church has not only sat & watched – but has jumped into the bounty, to make matters even worse. These two evils ultimately will have the same effect on our country’s youth – one destroying them at birth, the other – destroying them in school. Looking at the “Big Picture”, Common Core could be even more detrimental than abortion, and once indoctrinated into our country’s society, Common Core will be entrenched for decades to come. And, not a single student in this country (unless “home-schooled”), will have a choice as to what he or she will be taught in their schools – public, private or Catholic. “NO CHOICE” – it’s Common Core or bust!

And, if you think that the abortion issue has taken a toll on our country these past 41 years – just let Common Core take hold of our beloved schools the way these liberal government and greedy school leaders are pushing for. It will be catastrophic. Mark my words – Common Core will destroy this country because education plays such a huge role in our beloved nation and it will effect everybody – whether you know it or not. And, in contrast to the abortion issue, where the woman has a “choice” to abort or deliver her precious baby – when it comes to Common Core – our beloved children will have “No Choice”. It will be the law of the land unless we citizens stand up for our rights and our freedoms and make our voices heard and fight for our 5 C’s:

Country, Constitution, Church, Children and Christ.

Friends: It is up to the good citizens of this country to take back our beloved country, schools and churches. Almost 13 months have gone by since we began this fight against Common Core. It pales in comparison to the 41 years of our fight against abortion right now – but, Common Core has the makings of being even more damaging as it will affect every child in our country ages 5-18. We have a “choice” today: Either remain silent and do Nothing about this issue – or get up, make your voice heard; stand up for our beloved country, church and children – and say “NO” to Common Core. It’s your choice. It’s our children’s future…and they are the future of our beloved country…

Florida: Lee County Schools First to Opt-out of Common Core Standardized Tests (+ Video)

/in , , , , , /by

On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 the Lee County School Board voted no more State mandated testing. It was 3/2 and the most exciting evening our district has had, EVER. There were over 400 people, most with red shirts showing support, crowded into the board chambers. We had a tailgate party planned, but so much media came that we just talked with media. Groups came from left, right and center. This was not about party, it was about our kids. There were about 40 speakers, some in tears, some children, some made us laugh, and all made the logical request: NO MORE STATE MANDATED TESTING. Teachers are certified, schools are accredited and they know how to grade and test their students without State micromanagers meddling and adding costs and taking up to 60% of class time away from learning.

No one left for hours while the Board debated. The Chair, Thomas Scott made the motion. Don Armstrong made the second. Both said words we were longing to hear. Jeannie Dozier was on speaker phone and we expected her to support, but instead she offered an amendment kicking the decision down the road until we have a “plan.” We all knew what that meant and the crowd responded. Cathleen Morgan seconded her motion and our hearts sank. The amendment discussion opened the door for our Superintendent, Nancy Graham who talked seemingly forever about the boogie man of potential sanctions by the state. Children will be dying in the street! We have no plan and teachers will be lost and won’t know what to do without those tests that grade their performance!

They asked Nancy what date they could expect a plan. She suggested late October and crowd groaned audibly in spite of being reprimanded for noise several times already. Their children can’t wait. Every day in this testing torture puts the children further behind.

Mary Fisher was the wild card. We expected her to support us, but she cowered to the delay and fear tactics of our Superintendent. She droned on and on about how we must not have a knee jerk reaction and must be responsible. We saw her siding with the delay motion and felt like all was lost, when suddenly, she told a story about her own family and how they were negatively affected by test results. She was back.

They voted on the amendment and it died, 3/2. More talk by our star of the night, Don Armstrong, and the supporting actor, Thomas Scott, talking about our Constitution and the role of civil disobedience. Don quoted many of our emails filled support. Tom talked about the fact that the State is already in violation of the state Constitution on the issue of class size. He has send them a bill for over $120,000,000 for the costs they promised to pay. Don chided they need to send that to us in cash. Yes, they even talked about the founding of our nation and the Boston Tea Party. They obviously had not read our Common Core history books.

The vote was called and everyone was holding their breath. Tom, Don and Mary voted for the motion, while Superintendent Nancy Graham and Cathleen Morgan grew pale and distraught. The crowd jumped to its feet cheering and clapping in disbelief. Did we actually hear what we heard? YES! It has begun.

I am eternally grateful for the many groups and individuals who made this happen. We are hoping other school districts in Florida and across the nation will be part of a chain of dominos that will show we CAN stand up to the powerful machine standing against us and our children.

Public comments on standardized testing at the Lee County School Board:

EDITORS NOTE: The issues this vote raises include:

  1. What will Governor Rick Scott do? Governor Scott has called for an independent committee to look at the Florida (Common Core) tests and standards.
  2. What will the Florida Department of Education do given its commitment to implement Common Core statewide?
  3. What are the legal ramifications of this district opting out? Emily Atteberry from NewsPress.com reports, “Keith Martin, the [Lee County] board’s attorney, was not sure that there were any ‘immediate, clear’ consequences to the action. He said it was possible the Governor could remove the school board members from their positions of power.”
  4. What will the district use to replace the current tests? Atteberry reports, “While the news was met with jubilation, Superintendent Nancy Graham said she was deeply concerned about the board’s decision. “This will hurt children. There is no way around it,” Graham said while the audience booed. “I am gravely concerned about the decision that was made tonight, and I’ll try to make sense of this. It’s an interesting time to serve as the leader of this district.”

Education has become a defining issue for parents, concerned citizens, teachers and administrators. Governor Rick Scott and former Governors Jeb Bush and Charlie Crist have differing views on Common Core. How Governor Scott deals with this growing grass roots movement to chip away at Common Core in Florida can be a defining factor and determine the outcome of the election in November.

Common Core: Law Center Develops Opt-Out Form for Parents

/in , , , , , , , /by

Amidst growing concerns from parents and teachers surrounding the Common Core State Standards and the Federal government’s control of classroom curriculum, the Thomas More Law Center (TMLC) has prepared a Student Privacy Protection Request form for use by parents who wish to protect their children by opting-out of Common Core aligned curricula, data mining and the release of information concerning their children’s personal beliefs.

The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, designed the comprehensive opt-out form for parents concerned about Common Core and who want to protect their children’s privacy from educational data mining. The form allows parents to choose which Common Core State Standards and data driven practices they do not want their children to be a part of, including standardized testing.

Click here to download a copy of the Student Privacy Protection Request form

The form allows parents to opt-out of sharing their child’s information with the federal government, as well as outside agencies and private contractors. Information which parents can opt-out of sharing ranges from test scores and religious and political beliefs, to biographic, biometric, and psychometric data, such as fingerprints, DNA and information related to children’s personality and aptitude.

Richard Thompson, TMLC President and Chief Counsel, commented, “The opt-out form is based on the constitutionally recognized fundamental right of parents to direct the education of their children and on federal statutes which were designed to protect student privacy.  Our Founding Fathers recognized the dangers to our freedoms posed by centralized control over public education.  However, today, all but a handful of state governments, enticed by millions of dollars in federal grants, are voluntarily inviting the federal government to take control of our public schools, imposing untested educational standards and obtaining personal information on children and their parents which would make any totalitarian government blush with envy.   We must ever keep in mind, ‘The philosophy of the classroom in one generation will become the philosophy of the government in the next.’ Clearly, Common Core is a threat to individual privacy and liberty, and to our Constitutional Republic.”

Religious and private school educators have also criticized Common Core. In a statement the Cardinal Newman Society, an organization dedicated to the defense and promotion of faithful Catholic education said, “This school reform effort is nothing short of a revolution in how education is provided, relying on a technocratic, top-down approach to setting national standards that, despite claims to the contrary, will drive curricula, teaching texts, and the content of standardized tests.  At its heart, the Common Core is a woefully inadequate set of standards in that it limits the understanding of education to a utilitarian ‘readiness for work’ mentality.”

Political Commentators Glenn Beck and Michelle Malkin have repeatedly reported on the dangers and horrors of Common Core, with Malkin saying, “It’s about control, control and more control.”

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) were developed under the supervision of the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), with funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, to ensure that education and educational outcomes were consistent across the United States. The CCSS provides a set of standards they claim are “essential, rigorous, clear and specific, coherent, and internationally benchmarked.”

However, the CCSS have come under heavy fire since the beginning for a variety of grievances including: incomprehensible, political and inappropriate assignments; costly ties to big corporations; in-test advertising; the elimination of locally appropriate standards; and the emphasis placed on standardized testing.

In addition, with the implementation of the Common Core State Standards, whose educational value has not been demonstrated, also comes an alarming explosion of data mining within the classroom.  Student data are stored in databases designed to follow students from their entry into schools in pre-Kindergarten up through their entry into the workforce. These databases, through a complicated network of contracts and agreements, can then be shared with the federal government, contractors, researchers and other outside agencies. Testing corporations can then analyze the test data, produce recommendations for how to “remediate” student weaknesses, and then sell that information back to states and school districts.

These state databases, often referred to as P-20 systems, like Common Core are tied to federal funding, through the 2009 Federal Stimulus package and Race to the Top waivers, and in some instances can contain over 400 individual data points per student including health-care histories, income information, religious affiliations, voting status, blood type, likes and dislikes and homework completion. The data is then available to numerous public agencies. Despite federal student privacy protections guaranteed by the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, the administration is paving the way for private entities to buy the data while the U.S. Department of Education is encouraging the shift from aggregate data collection to individual student data collection.

As a result of concerns expressed by a Michigan member of the TMLC regarding Common Core in March 2014, the Law Center began its study of the issues regarding the Common Core Standards.  The Student Privacy Protection Opt-Out Request was designed by the Thomas More Law Center as a result of that study.  It is available as a general reference and guide for all concerned parents.  However, each state has different laws that may impact educational issues differently.  Therefore, if parents are dealing with schools outside of the state of Michigan, it is important that they consult with a licensed attorney in their state for additional review and modifications of the opt-out form to comport with the laws of their respective states.

RELATED VIDEO: How Education Savings Accounts Are Empowering Families:

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES:

The Common Core: A Poor Choice for States – The Heartland Institute
Common Core Issues – Home School Legal Defense Association
Common Core: What’s Behind the Language – Rachel Alexander
Common Core – The Eagle Forum
10 Facts Every Catholic Should Know About the Common Core – Cardinal Newman Society

AP History, Fake Indians, and Donate Buttons!

/in , , /by
Russell_Kirk

Russell Kirk: 10 Principles.

Dispatching from the Alexander Hamilton Institute, where Professor Robert Paquette outdoes himself in a post titled “The New Discrimination on U.S. Campuses” at SeeThruEd.  It’s discrimination against intended beneficiaries of affirmative action, illustrated by the fake Indians Ward Church and Elizabeth Warren, former Harvard law professor, now senator from Massachusetts. Warren has issued Eleven Commandments of Progressivisim:

During her ascent, [Senator Elizabeth] Warren, no Sitting Bull, has paused to fire up the faithful by issuing from barked scrolls what some of her fans in the media have called the “eleven commandments” of progressivism (note “commandments,” not principles). Since many Americans wonder why the country is floundering at best and unraveling at worst, Warren’s eleven commandments might be usefully contrasted with a set of conservative precepts to suggest why the United States has entered a period reminiscent of the 1850s, when domestically a sectional political struggle was metamorphosing into a clash of civilizations and eventually civil war.

Professor Paquette then contrasts these commandments to the ten principles of conservatism articulated by the late Russell Kirk, but not before reminding readers about the one-drop rule and how it is being perversely exploited by opportunistic professors on the left:

In certain areas of the Jim-Crow South, for example, no matter how light a person’s phenotype, if his or her genealogy contained an identifiable African ancestor somewhere in the past, then the category “black” was applied for various discriminatory social and legal purposes.  Within the arcane, darkened corridors of the postmodern campus, however, a strain of institutionalized discrimination has emerged under pressure from the diversity cartel that is not debilitating but consciously elevating. It might be called the no-drop rule.

Today, progressives “Opportunistic whites, openly of a radical bent or pose, take advantage of affirmative action criteria to attain jobs as aggrieved minorities for the dual purpose of advancing themselves and the progressive beliefs that they purport to hold dear.”  Such is the case with the former Harvard law professor, now Senator Elizabeth Warren, who thinks she has established her bona fides enough to issue from “barked scrolls” her Eleven Commandments, which are contrasted to Russell Kirk’s principles here.  The appointment of professors based on faked anceestry might be worthy of campus protests.

Smoke and Mirrors in the New AP History Exam

Don't ask how/ it's magic

Don’t ask how/ it’s magic.

Don’t ask how/ it’s magic Speaking of history, specifically, AP history, non-historian, non-teacher-ever, English major David Coleman who now is president of the College Board which develops AP and SAT tests, has issued a letter in response to the demands of the little people, er, those who signed an open letter or who were on the National Republican Committee, and who have dared to question the content of the new AP exams.

According to Inside Higher Ed, Coleman in an open letter:

said he hoped the unprecedented move of releasing an exam to non-certified A.P. teachers would quell concerns that framework neglected or misrepresented the important parts of American history.

Some of the “non-certified” critics of the exam had originally questioned the 98 pages of directives that replaced the 5-page topical outline. Like Common Core, the AP standards supplant local and state curricula, as Jane Robbins and Larry Krieger wrote in their critique. (and here by National Association of Scholars President Peter Wood)

In response to the sample test, Joy Pullman said that Coleman’s “graciously worded letter, still leaves unanswered questions about what half a million of nation’s brightest high school students will learn about their country’s character and history each year.

The sample exam had been released to the certified evaluators who had also signed “confidentiality letters.”  You can read the practice exam for yourself.  The number of questions has been reduced from 80 to 55 in order to permit more focus on “historical thinking skills.” These “historical thinking skills” seem to involve pictures and photographs and open-ended questions about short reading passages, ala Common Core.  Cutting back the number of multiple choice questions and asking students to interpret and write about photos that display negative aspects of American history seems to be a means to testing for correct progressive views under the guise of “deeper learning.”  All this is notwithstanding Coleman’s repeated claims to improving rigor through “original documents.”

All of this discussion of “original documents” is smoke and mirrors, an opportunity to impose selective passages on youngsters who will know little history outside of the progressive perspective issued in the nearly 100 pages of AP guidelines.

Jim Galloway, political columnist at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, however, doesn’t address anything in the guidelines specifically, but calls the controversy over the new AP standards and exams a “sequel to the fight over Common Core.”  Galloway does not bother to break down the standards or to address any of the detailed arguments made by opponents. Instead he impishly relies on Republican State School Superintendent John Barge’s charge that ideological motives might be behind Georgia Concerned Women for America’s opposition to the new AP standards, as well as some nefarious money-making motives because, get this, the website has a donate button!

Galloway quotes one-time Common Core opponent Barge:

“I’m going to be very honest and very blunt about what I think is behind this. And I think it’s money”. . .

He described a visit to the website of Concerned Women for America:

“The first thing that comes up is a bright red ‘donate now’ button,” he said. (We tried it. The red button is there at the top, but it didn’t jump to the front.)

In a similar display of lazy reporting and innuendo, Maureen Downey’s column, “Running for cover over Common Core,” about current hearings on Common Core is a cut-and-paste rehash of previous attacks and the talking points distributed in 34-page messaging “tool kit” from the public relations department of one of the major agencies behind Common Core, the CCSSO.  One would expect more from an education editor and former teacher than this:

Extremists in the Republican Party contend Common Core is Obamacare transferred from doctors’ waiting rooms to America’s classrooms, dressed in sensible shoes and a cardigan and carrying a pointer.

I’m still waiting for this education expert to point to specific parts of the Common Core that are superior to the previous Georgia Standards.  I would like the “evidentiary standards” that proponents claim are being demanded of students under the new AP and Common Core guidelines.

Using a Bill Gates Grant to Sidestep Standardized Testing in University Admissions?

/in , , , , , /by

Billionaire Bill Gates believes in testing. However, it appears that he believes in “the market” even more. Consider Gates’ words to legislators in 2009:

When the tests are aligned to the common standards, the curriculum will line up as well—and that will unleash powerful market forces in the service of better teaching. For the first time, there will be a large base of customers eager to buy products that can help every kid learn and every teacher get better. [Emphasis added.]

Bill Gates has no background in K-12 classroom teaching. He has no background in assessment. He does have money, lots of money. It must be his money that allows him to even write a guest editorial in the April 2013 Washington Post to share his views on the *appropriate* role of student test scores in teacher evaluation. He assumes that student standardized test scores will work as a component of teacher evaluation. He also assumes that merit pay can and will work, if only “we” would be careful as “we” “drive the long-term improvement our schools need.”

We?

Bill Gates has no background in teaching. Instead, he views education through the lens of business. And if the tests are interfering with business, perhaps it is time to pull back on the testing in order to save Gates’ extensive CCSS investment. To this end, in June 2014, the Gates Foundation declared the need for a “moratorium”– not the end of testing, mind you, and not the end of CCSS– just a break from theconsequences of testing in order to take the heat off of CCSS:

The Gates Foundation is an ardent supporter of fair teacher feedback and evaluation systems that include measures of student gains. We don’t believe student assessments should ever be the sole measure of teaching performance, but evidence of a teacher’s impact on student learning should be part of a balanced evaluation that helps all teachers learn and improve.

At the same time, no evaluation system will work unless teachers believe it is fair and reliable, and it’s very hard to be fair in a time of transition. The standards need time to work. …

Including the assessment results in teacher evaluations even though they won’t count for two years also has benefits: First, the teachers can begin to use the assessments to inform their practice, and second, teachers can see how their performance looks using these measures and make sure it lines up with other measures of teaching practice. This is crucial in building teacher trust in the assessments.

In our view, allowing two years in which assessments will be administered and scored but not yet taken into account strikes the best balance between a commitment to teacher evaluations that measure student learning and a commitment to ensure that teachers will not be harmed as they complete the transition to the Common Core.

Protecting the Gates investment. Cutting mass education a deal.

The Gates Foundation published this position only five days after Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin signed legislation to immediately replace CCSS with Oklahoma’s former state standards until new standards and assessments could be developed.

This is not good for Gates’ CCSS investment, which Gates hopes will bring American education “to scale” in order to benefit “the market.”

Gates does not restrict his business applications to K-12 education. He is willing to spend his billions on better business models for higher education, as well. Consider this January 2014 grant to the Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities (APLU):

Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities:

Date: January 2014 
Purpose: to support a cohort of public urban research universities to develop new business models that can increase access, improve success rates and find greater cost efficiencies and then use national association networks to scale promising practices 
Amount: $2,507,628

Much of this funding has been divided among seven universities in a seeming “innovations contest” to “improve success rates.” The seven recipients have one year to develop its “innovations”– with the intent that “successful” innovations will be “scaled” (efficiently reproduced).

Temple University was one of the recipients:

The Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU) and the Coalition of Urban Serving Universities (USU) announced today that Temple University is one of only seven universities nationwide selected to participate in an innovative, one-year project that seeks to transform the way higher education is delivered.

Temple will receive $225,000 as part of the Transformational Planning Grant project—an initiative funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation—to research, develop and test new university business models that can increase access, improve student success rates and find greater cost efficiencies. …

APLU intends to use its national network to work to scale the most promising findings and practices of Temple and the six other grantees—California State University, Fresno; Florida International University; Georgia State University; Portland State University; the University of Akron; and the University of Illinois at Chicago—to help its more than 200 public university members across the country better meet the needs of their evolving student populations.

In an interesting turn of events, Temple University plans to use its Gates “better business of education” money to admit students without use of standardized test scores and instead incorporating “noncognitive approaches” to student success:

Temple’s Transformational Planning Grant will be used to develop new approaches for recruiting and evaluating prospective Temple students. The project will be piloted among students in Philadelphia area high schools whose potential may be overlooked by traditional measures of achievement, such as standardized testing. Temple also will analyze how these “non-cognitive” approaches—strategies that take into account factors such as a student’s grit, determination, self-assurance and self-advocacy—can be incorporated into the university’s academic policies, financial aid strategy, and advising and support services.

So, it seems that Gates might experience some “business model clashing” given the Gates preference for standardized testing as assumed “good for education business” and now a Gates grantee assuming that standardized testing could “overlook potential” in some students– which implies that standardized testing has limitations that make it suspect a component for any high-stakes decisions.

No seasoned teacher needs to be told that some students just don’t test well.

But Bill Gates is certainly no seasoned teacher. He is just a man with lots of money who gets to purchase his viewpoint. He believes that standardized tests should be “part” of “measuring” teacher effectiveness.

I wonder what Gates will do if via Temple University’s “innovation” he is faced with the news that forsaking standardized testing “promotes greater cost efficiencies” in the business of higher education.

Would he be willing to promote such a finding “to scale”?

RELATED ARTICLE: What National Group Is Funding the Pro-Common Core Lawsuit in Louisiana?

Diocese of Palm Beach rejects Common Core for Catholic Schools

/in , , , , /by

Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito, the Diocese of Palm Beach, has decided to placed the defense of faith and the welfare of Catholic children first over government pressures and money handouts by rejecting Florida State Standards.  For the school year, 2014-2015, all of Palm Beach County Catholic schools will not be following the Florida (Common Core) State Standards.

Bishop Palm Beach

Bishop Gerald M. Barbarito

Florida Catholics Against Common Core (FCACC) states in an email:

We thank you for sending the petition letters to the Florida Bishops and to the courageous families in the Palm Beach area for starting the removal of Common Core from our Catholic schools.  We thank Bishop Barbarito for being “Bold for his Faith” by standing up for our beloved school children and saying NO to the curse of Common Core!  Thank you and God Bless You, Bishop!

We still need more petitions, we have many other Bishops that need to be as courageous as Bishop Barbarito and put a stop to this takeover of the Federal government on the education of our children.

We are asking you to share our request for petitions with your family, friends and neighbors.  Remember that they do not have to have children in Catholic schools to send a petition to the Bishops.  A shared concern is sufficient.

In order to stop Common Core everywhere we need to start some place and the Florida Catholic schools have been a first-line defender for education and moral values being taught to our children.

We will be contacting the Bishops personally as soon as enough petitions are sent.

The more we learn about Common Core, the more concerned we become, and we know for sure that we need to stop Common Core everywhere.  Our children are our future,  We must protect them and give them every opportunity to succeed.

Those concerned citizens wishing to sign the FCACC petition my do so by clicking on this link.

Will Florida’s 67 School Districts empower parents to decide what their children learn, or not?

/in , , , , /by

During the 2014 session the Florida legislature passed, and Governor Rick Scott signed into law, Senate Bill 864. SB 864 took effect on July 1, 1014. All 67 of Florida’s school districts are now in the process of implementing the provisions of this bill. However, some question whether the bill’s intent, to empower parents and stakeholders, will be fully realized.

Sherri Krass, founder of Eye on U.S. Education (EUSE), has done an analysis of SB 864. Krass writes:

Senate Bill 864, sponsored by Senator Alan Hays, initially stated that all counties SHALL create an “instructional materials committee” consisting of parents and teachers. The word SHALL dictates that this must be done. Parents would be able to provide input into the approval of the textbooks used by their children.

Unfortunately, by the time the bill left the House and a “compromise” was agreed upon, the body of the legislation was “hollowed out” – where only a “skeleton” remains of the original legislation.  The legislation now states:

(2)(a) If a district school board chooses to implement its own instructional materials program, the school board shall adopt rules implementing the district’s instructional materials program which must include its processes, criteria, and requirements for the following, but need not be limited to:  1. Selection of reviewers, one or more of whom must be parents with children in public schools.

Therefore, the creation of such a committee falls within the domain of each County School Board.  They can choose to not have one.

The legislation does provide an “opening”. Parents can still insist on a committee being formed.

A date is provided when School Boards have to “certify” the instructional materials.  Textbooks must align with the “Florida Standards” – a pseudonym for “Common Core”.

The district school superintendent shall certify to the department by March 31 of each year that all instructional materials for core courses used by the district are aligned with applicable state standards.   

But, parents can still reject a textbook and insist on another one. Textbooks can be found that align with the “Standards” and are not specifically written for “Common Core”. A major problem with “Common Core” are the textbooks that have been published for it. Rejecting these textbooks is a step forward in removing its influence.

Question: Will every school district empower parents and let them decide what textbooks and instructional materials are best suited for their children?

There are several indicators of a school district’s intent to empower parents and stakeholders in the adoption of textbooks and instructional materials.

  1. The establishment of a district Instructional Materials Committee, codified in district policy;
  2. Who selects the committee members, the Superintendent or School Board;
  3. The makeup of the committee (e.g. do parents or district staff have the majority of votes on the committee);
  4. Has the district established a fair and equitable process whereby parents can file a complaint directly to the local District School Board requesting rejection of a committee educational materials selection.

I asked Lori White, Superintendent of the Sarasota County Schools, if an Instructional Materials Committee would be formed and if so, when? Here is Superintendent White’s reply:

It is our intent to continue to participate in the state adoption process as outlined in the School Board policy 4.21. Our current policy requires that one or more laypersons participate in the district council. In most cases, these community members are parents with children in the system. Our School Board policy will be revised to incorporate the new requirements outlined in SB 864 regarding the process for a parent to protest the School Board’s decision to adopt a specific instructional material.

Krass wants to make sure parents are empowered and has asked Floridians to sign a petition stating so to Governor Scott and Florida’s legislators. Krass states, “EUSE suggests that a petition be submitted to each County School Board stating that parents want an ‘instructional Materials Committee’ to be formed.”

Krass has an online petition asking the Florida legislature to amend SB 864 to “require” that school districts establish a district Instructional Materials Committee. Interested citizens may sign the petition by clicking here.

The Common Core Fight: What Went Wrong, What Went Right, What To Do Next

/in , , , , , /by

The Washington Post reported that within two years of an organizational meeting at Bill Gates’ Seattle headquarters, 45 states and the District of Columbia had adopted the Common Core State Standards. President Obama, whose administration was “populated by former Gates Foundation staffers and associates,” was “a major booster.” 

After legislative battles this year, 42 states and the District of Columbia remain in the vise of Common Core, the federal education dictates.

One of these states, Georgia, illustrates the incredible hurdles citizen-activists face in their fight against the united forces of big government and big business.  Senator William Ligon (R-Brunswick) was blocked in his efforts to pass a Common Core withdrawal bill by the Republican governor and Republican-dominated House.

Jane Robbins, senior fellow at the American Principles in Action, which supported Ligon’s bill, comments, “During the last hearing on the bill, we saw dozens of corporate and other well-funded lobbyists parade up to the podium to explain why their interests should trump those of Georgia families.”

I observed this parade, and the smear-campaign against citizen-activists concerned about educational quality and government overreach.  While teachers and parents spoke about developmentally inappropriate assignments, mind-boggling busy-work math, and ideological curricula, the pro-Common Core lobbyists, legislators, superintendents, principals, and teachers seemed to follow a script.  I heard the same phrases repeated – “state-led,” “critical thinking skills,” “locally controlled,” “standards, not curriculum,” and on.

And then I learned that they were following a script.

Dts_news_bill_gates_wikipedia

Bill Gates. Photo courtesy of Wikipedia.

The script was linked in the June 7 Washington Post front-page article, “How Bill Gates pulled off the swift Common Core revolution” – published after legislatures had recessed.  These were “Talking Points” developed by the Council of Chief State School Officers, the supposedly independent organization behind Common Core.  CCSSO received over $11 million from the Gates Foundation in 2013.

That Bill Gates was “de facto organizer,” influencing states through donations to teachers unions and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, was hardly a revelation.  In August 2013, blogger Mercedes Schneider reported, “the four organizations primarily responsible for CCSS–[National Governors Association], CCSSO, Achieve, and Student Achievement Partners – have taken $147.9 million from Bill Gates.”  Jane Robbins and others also made the charge long before the Washington Post’s exposé.

The Post reported that within two years of an organizational meeting at Gates’ Seattle headquarters, 45 states and the District of Columbia had adopted the standards. President Obama, whose administration was “populated by former Gates Foundation staffers and associates,” was “a major booster.”

In the Post interview, Gates denied that he had any self-interest, but the article noted, “In February, [Gates’ company] Microsoft announced that it was joining Pearson, the world’s largest educational publisher, to load Pearson’s Common Core classroom materials on Microsoft’s tablet, the Surface.”  This allowed Microsoft to compete for school district spending with rival company Apple, whose iPad dominates in classrooms.

According to a tape released by Glenn Beck last September, in 2009 Gates told the National Conference of State Legislators that he anticipated a “large uniform base of [Common Core] customers.”

More recently, Microsoft’s website warned schools to migrate to the new Microsoft Windows operating system.  Opponents had predicted that computer-administered Common Core tests would require expensive upgrades.

Still, Common Core promotional sites, such as the Georgia pro-Chamber of Commerce Republican blog, Peach Pundit, mocked the notion of “Obamacore” and called Gates’ profit-motive a “conspiracy theory.”

Editor-in-Chief Charlie Harper testified against the Common Core withdrawal bill, while directing the smear campaign through posts and comments. He also is executive director of the non-profit PolicyBEST.

In February, PolicyBEST Policy & Research Director – and Peach Pundit blogger – “Eric the Younger” called a rally in support of Ligon’s bill a “train wreck,” filled with “crazy talk”: “It’s [sic] attendees included Jane Robins [sic], Sen. Judson Hill, Sen. William Ligon, Ralph Hudgens’ wife, “and a few of the other usual suspects.”

He promoted a new coalition that included PolicyBEST, “Better Standards For A Better Georgia.”  The “diverse group . . . brought together through the Georgia Chamber” includes 100 Black Men, Georgia Association of Educational Leaders, Georgia Association of Educators, Georgia Partnership for Excellence in Education, Georgia school board and school superintendents associations, Technical College System of Georgia, and the University System of Georgia.  In 2013, 100 Black Men received $583,531 from the Gates Foundation; Georgia Association of Educational Leaders received $179,015 in 2012.

Eric the Younger’s creativity only extends to name-calling, however.

Consider the CCSS “talking point”: “This has always been, and continues to be, a state-led and driven initiative. States voluntarily adopted and are currently implementing the standards. . .  .  These standards are in no way federally-mandated. . . .”

Eric the Younger dutifully wrote, “The Origins of the Common Core State Standards are here in Georgia with our former governor Sonny Perdue and State School Superintendent. . . .”

Elders, like “youngers,” also recited CCSSO’s script.  The U.S. Chamber’s President and CEO Thomas Donahue wrote in the Washington Post, “Common Core is a not curriculum, a federal program or a federal mandate.”

Peach Pundit continued its campaign of smearing and repeating with a February 10 Courier-Herald column.  After charging Common Core opponents with “a campaign of misinformation that at times borders on hysteria,” the writer essentially repeated a talking point: “Common Core is not a curriculum,” but “a set of benchmarks. . . .  The curriculum – what is taught and how – remains up to states and local school systems…”

Cited also was a June 2, 2010, press release announcing then-Governor Sonny Perdue’s release of Common Core state standards that featured a panel discussion with the CEO of the PTA and Leah Luke, 2010 Wisconsin Teacher of the Year.

Where did this idea come from?

The CCSSO toolkit recommends as key spokespeople “State Teachers of the Year,” “Award-winning school leaders and principals,” and “Heads of local PTAs.”

Nothing was left to chance in CCSSO’s well-orchestrated campaign that included strategies for “engaging” teachers, “stakeholders,” elected officials, etc. Provided were fill-in-the-blank “Scene-setting Op-ed,” “Letters to the Editor,” “Local Op-ed and Blog,” and “Teacher Communication Preferences Survey.” There were tips for pitching stories and providing background information to reporters.

Most reporters, indeed, repeated CCSSO’s “talking points.” Now an NBC reporter is on Gates’ payroll.

In spite of overwhelming odds, a couple states rejected Common Core this year, following changing public sentiment.  Pitfalls lie ahead, though.  What these are and tips for fighting them will be discussed next time in Part II.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the Selous Foundation.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

North Carolina Governor Signs Bill to Revise Common Core
Common Core in Louisiana: Two Days, Two Lawsuits
A July 21, 2014, Update on Common Core, PARCC, and Smarter Balanced
American Federation of Teachers: “Remediating” Duncan and Retaining the “Corrupted” Common Core