Monday, December 29, 2014

Pearson Overtakes Saudi Arabian Education System

Pearson Overtakes Saudi Arabian Education System

This June 24, 2014, article is from Innovation Africa Kigali, Rwanda.

It seems that Pearson– which already “has a significant presence in Saudi Arabia”– has “pledged its support for a new education initiative” in Saudi Arabia.

Saudi King Abdullah is adding an extra $21 billion to the Saudi Arabian education budget.

Pearson is there– already– to dip into those billions.

Indeed, this Saudi Arabian “education overhaul” will be quite the lucrative field day for Pearson since 58 percent of the population is under 25 years old (termed a “youth bulge”). However, the “challenges” this presents could have been cut and pasted from any number of documents on the “failure” of the US education system:

At present, there is a significant gap between the needs of business and industry, and the skills and knowledge being provided by the country’s education system. Young Saudis are finishing their education at higher levels than ever before, but are finding it increasingly difficult to find meaningful employment. At the same time, research shows that employers throughout the Kingdom, and across the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council), cannot find enough appropriately skilled workers to fill their human resource requirements. Saudi Arabia, like its neighbours also suffers from a lack of workers trained for in-demand professions in the engineering, science and medical fields. [Emphasis added.]

Sounds like justification for the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).

That achievement gap must have lots of stamps on its passport.

Pearson has a “country manager” in Saudi Arabia, Mohammed Asiri, and he is ready with some more CCSS-type, economically-driven, education language:

The unique demographic make-up of Saudi Arabia is an once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for the country. The large – and growing – number of young people entering the workforce can be a competitive advantage for the country’s economy in the global marketplace, but only if there are jobs – and good jobs – available, and only if candidates for those jobs are suitably qualified to perform effectively in the workplace.

The first step in making this happen is building a world-class education system that provides the types of skills needed by Saudi’s employers in the public and private sectors, and in industries with the greatest demand. This means fostering capabilities in the areas of mathematics, science, technology and engineering. 

No mention of comprehensive assessment in the above, June 2014, article. However, where there is Pearson, there is a potential assessment market.

As of September 2014, Pearson Country Manager Mohammed Asiri has also added the title, “VP Quality and Standards (Saudi Skills Standards, Ministry of Labor)”– and he is apparently working on standards known as the National Occupational Skills Standards (NOSS) “for all vocational occupations in Saudi Arabia”– and “developing the assessments for every qualification.”

mohammed asiri

It turns out that in his role as Country Manager, Asiri “introduc[ed] Pearson as a potential partner/provider in the Saudi nationwide projects.” Asiri also “buil[t] the legal entity and the sales structure that supports Pearson strategy to offer E-Learning and E-content solutions to the Saudi Market.”

Yep. “Digital solutions” ready to replace teacher judgment and collect unprecedented data on individuals.

Saudi Arabia will be steeped in Pearson, standards and assessments included.

And teacher prep. Pearson will partner with Taweer Company for professional development of Saudi science and math teachers. Pearson will also monitor Saudi English language instruction providers. (Might as well make money off of teacher prep before these teachers are replaced with “E-solutions.”)

It appears that all it took was one strategically-placed Pearson employee with a really flashy title and a knack for sales.

Prior to becoming the top Pearson voice in Saudi Arabia, Asiri was managing education sales accounts for Microsoft. Before that, he was in sales for Cisco Systems. Before that, sales for Al-Rajhi Bank. In fact, Asiri’s professional background is divided between sales and before that, computer programming– not teaching. Not even educational administration. And now, he is in charge of setting standards and assessments for an entire nation.

I had to double-check to see if I were really writing about an American, test-driven education reformer instead.

Saudi Arabia, I feel for you.

pearson logo

______________________________________________

Schneider is a southern Louisiana native, career teacher, trained researcher, and author of the ed reform whistleblower, A Chronicle of Echoes: Who’s Who In the Implosion of American Public Education

previti chronicle pic




Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Jeb Bush’s Common Core Problem

Jeb Bush’s Common Core Problem

Jeb Bush has long advocated for all 50 states to adopt Common Core national standards.

Now that the former Florida governor has all but confirmed his plans to run for president in 2016, the issue threatens to overshadow his likely campaign.

Bush’s name, matched with consistently high polling numbers among potential 2016 Republican candidates, makes landing a seat in the Oval Office feasible. But in order to reach the general election—to perhaps take on Hillary Clinton—Bush must first overcome concerns about Common Core with conservative primary voters.

>>> Here’s How People Reacted to Jeb Bush’s 2016 Announcement, in 36 Tweets

Bush’s longstanding support for Common Core is no secret: Over a year ago, Frederick M. Hess, an education expert at the American Enterprise Institute, predicted that if he decided to run for president, “Common Core could be his Romneycare.”

What is Common Core?

Common Core standards were created by the National Governors Association and Council of Chief State School Officers, and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The goal, supported by the Obama administration, was to increase education standards in America.

Among conservatives, however, the issue one of the most controversial. Several politicians have flip-flopped on the issue, pulling their support or even abandoning the standards in their states.

UD-common-core-status-map

The Heritage Foundation is among the organizations that have rallied against Common Core.

The crux of the argument, as laid out by Heritage’s Lindsey M. Burke and Jennifer A. Marshall, is this:

National standards are unlikely to make public schools accountable to families; rather, they are more likely to make schools responsive to Washington, D.C. Furthermore, a national accountability system would be a one-size-fits-all approach that tends toward mediocrity and standardization, undercutting the pockets of excellence that currently exists.

>>> More: Why National Standards Won’t Fix American Education

Many of Bush’s deep-pocketed GOP allies—so-called “establishment” Republicans like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce—don’t see eye-to-eye with conservatives on the issue.

Federal incentives like Race to the Top grants and No Child Left Behind waivers for states that adopted Common Core topped off what critics call “a national takeover of education policy.”

A reform-minded governor

Bush’s backstory with Common Core standards is two-fold.

During his eight-year tenure as the Sunshine State’s governor, he led one of the most successful education reforms in the country. In fact, his efforts were so effective, education experts are still trying to analyze them to this day.

Schools and districts in Florida are now graded on a straightforward A-to-F scale where parents easily understand that it’s better to have a child in an A-rated school than one that received an F.

Parents also have access to education tax credits, private school choice for special-needs students, virtual education, charter schools and public school choice.

In addition, transparency about school performance enables parents to be well informed, holding schools accountable to parents.

Education experts often argue that no one has a greater, more genuine interest in a student’s education than their parents.

But as Burke, Heritage’s leading expert on education policy pointed out, what worked in Florida might not work on a national scale. She said:

Gov. Bush was a leader on education reform in Florida during his tenure. Florida, in fact, has stood as a model for other states. The challenge for national policymakers is to recognize that what worked well in one state might not work as well in another, and that states need flexibility to find out what works best for the unique students who reside there.

Promoting Common Core

The challenge for national policymakers is to recognize that what worked well in one state might not work as well in another. @lindseymburke

In a 2011 Wall Street Journal op-ed co-authored with former New York City schools chancellor Joel Klein, Bush praised the standards, stating:

The Common Core State Standards define what students need to know; they do not define how teachers should teach, or how students should learn. That is up to each state. And they are built on what we have learned from high-performing international competitors as well as the best practices in leading states.

Over the course of the next three years, Bush, with the Foundation for Excellence in Education, an education policy think tank that Bush founded and chairs, encouraged state legislators to adopt the standards.

For example, in early 2013, Bush and his foundation set out to remind Oklahoma state legislators of the “myths” surrounding Common Core.

commoncoresidebar.png

He sent them an in-depth email, which can be viewed in its entirety here. In it, they wrote:

There is a lot of misinformation flying around about Common Core State Standards. Below is a roundup of recent articles, opinion pieces and posts by policy advisors, debunking Common Core myths and highlighting voices in the transition to these new standards. You’ll also find quotes from teachers weighing in on Common Core and see how state and business leaders are supporting the higher standards.

Bush’s new tone

More recently, Bush has toned down his support.

In a speech last month at the 2014 National Summit on Education Reform—just one week before Thanksgiving when he pondered a presidential run with his family—Bush argued, “The rigor of the Common Core State Standards must be the new minimum in the classrooms.”

But in the same speech, he also made it a point to acknowledge the disagreement on the issue—something he has been criticized in the past for ignoring.

Even if we don’t all agree on Common Core, there are more important principles for us to agree on. We need to pull together whenever we can. It starts with a basic question: If we were designing our school system from scratch, what would it look like?

I know one thing: We wouldn’t start with more than 13,000 government-run, unionized and politicized monopolies who trap good teachers, administrators and struggling students in a system nobody can escape.

We would be insane if we recreated what we have today.

So let’s think and act like we are starting from scratch.

Whether his 2016 campaign will try to downplay his support for Common Core or remain true to his position is not yet clear, but one thing is for certain: A Bush on the 2016 presidential ticket will once again bring education to the forefront of the national debate.




Thursday, December 11, 2014

Challenging Suburban School Choice in Douglas County, Colorado

Challenging Suburban School Choice in Douglas County, Colorado

“Do not mess with suburbanites, because frankly we're just not gonna take it anymore.”

That closing line from Tom Hanks’ tepidly reviewed comedy “The ‘Burbs” is truer than many realize. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan learned it last year when he criticized “white suburban moms.” Union leaders may soon face the same fate.

In 2011, parents in the Denver suburbs’ Douglas County School District were given the opportunity to choose private schools using their children’s public funds, courtesy of a district-wide voucher program. Opponents of school choice sued to block the program, a case the Colorado Supreme Court will hear Dec. 10. 

Who created school choice in Douglas County and why?

What’s unique about the “DougCo” voucher program is its inception. This school choice opportunity was not granted by the state legislature, as is the case for other voucher programs across the country. 

Members of the Douglas County School Board—from the left, Craig Richardson, Justin Williams, Meghann Silverthorn, Kevin Larsen (president), Doug Benevento (vice president), Judith Reynolds, and Dr. James Geddes—won a high-stakes election in Colorado in 2013 for their support of education reform and school choice. The Douglas County School Board is the only such body in the United States to authorize a school voucher program for district students.

The Douglas County public school board, by unanimous vote March 15, 2011, approved giving district students an opportunity to leave their public schools, with funding, if their parents decided a private school would better meet their needs. No doubt a controversial decision, Superintendent Elizabeth Fagen reasoned that she and the board were tasked to provide a quality education for the children living within their school zone boundaries; if parents determined their child had educational needs better suited for instruction at a private school, then Dr. Fagen and her public school board should make certain the child could access it. 

Who’s suing the program?

On June 21, 2011, opponents of Douglas County’s vouchers filed a lawsuit against the program. In La Rue v. Colorado Board of Education, the ACLU, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, several Colorado organizations, and some taxpayers sued the Douglas County public school board, school district, Colorado Department of Education, and state school board to stop the program. Substantive amicus briefs supporting this lawsuit were filed by union leaders representing the Colorado Education Association, National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, who were unable to oust Douglas County voucher-supporting school board members through the electoral process

Why are they suing?

Those opposing the Douglas County voucher program alleged Colorado’s constitution was violated by allowing parents to pay for private education with a portion of state funds allocated for their children’s education. They oppose parents using those funds at schools with religious affiliations, and oppose state allocated education funds being used at any school other than a public school—drawing a distinction that although the Douglas County school district is a public entity, the fact it allowed funds to be used at schools other than district schools is constitutionally impermissible. 

What lead to this case being heard by the state’s highest court?

In the courts, opponents of the Douglas County voucher program won their case at the district level, though lost in the appellate court. The Colorado Appellate Court said that the three stated purposes of the voucher program—“to provide greater educational choice for students and parents to meet individualized student needs, improve educational performance through competition, and obtain a high return on investment of [District] educational spending”—were public purposes appropriate for public funding. Given that state allocated funds were distributed first to the school district (giving control over those funds to the district), then the school district distributed the funds to parents (giving control over those funds to parents), and then parents made their own personal decisions about which school to choose for their children, there could be no violation of Colorado’s state constitution even if parents chose a school with a religious affiliation. That same reasoning is what led the U.S. Supreme Court to deem vouchers constitutional in 2002.

The Colorado court recognized that the voucher program is neutral toward religion; parents choose, and they may or may not choose a school with a religious affiliation. As stated by Michael Bindas, Institute for Justice attorney representing parents who intervened in defense of the voucher program, “Neutrality and private choice are the hallmarks of a constitutional school choice program, and the Court of Appeals recognized that the Choice Scholarship Program satisfies both of those requirements.” 

Furthermore, the voucher program was permissible because it was an additional method to provide education to children; it did not in any way obstruct the state’s obligation to provide a system of public schools, as opponents alleged. There was no violation of the state constitution’s public school funding provisions.

Although the Colorado Supreme Court will consider the case and hear oral arguments Dec. 10 in Denver, a final ruling is not expected till 2015. A complete record of activity in this case can be found at the Education Policy Center and an amicus brief co-filed by the Friedman Foundation and Independence Institute can be read here

What’s next for school choice in Douglas County…and beyond?

Parents and policymakers across the country are watching this case. It represents a clear tipping point to those who regard student learning as a higher priority than maintaining an education monopoly that is increasingly controlled by national and state bureaucrats and union leaders. Douglas County’s school choice program was created because the families and voters who live in that community recognized a need for vouchers and decided to meet that need. 

It was a purely local decision, by locally elected and appointed policymakers. Their priority was to meet the educational needs of every student living in their community. Although they are proud of their high-performing public schools, they did not allow that pride to stand in the way of children who needed a different school option. They also did not believe it their right to be critical of parents making the decision to access a different educational option.

The Douglas County School Board and Superintendent Fagen trusted parents with the freedom to choose what was in the best interests of their children. The Colorado Supreme Court will soon decide whether parents’ freedom to choose educational options for their children is also supported by Colorado’s state constitution.

The ‘burbs have never been hotter. 


NOTE: We will update this post as news develops, so stay tuned.




Wednesday, December 10, 2014

Obama’s Race to the Top loses all funding in 2015 omnibus spending bill

Obama’s Race to the Top loses all funding in 2015 omnibus spending bill

File: President Obama shakes hands with Education Secretary Arne Duncan. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

President Obama and firstlLady Michelle Obama both would see key initiatives whacked if the $1.01 trillion spending bill unveiled by congressional leaders this week passes without changes in these areas: the president’s chief education initiative, Race to the Top, loses all funding, and the first lady’s effort to nutritionally improve school lunches takes a hit with language that allows schools to take their good old time about meeting a mandate on serving whole grain.

The Education Department would take a slight hit in funding; at $70.5 billion, down $133 million below the fiscal year 2014, but special education grants to states would get $25 million more than last year, up to $11.5 billion. Funding for the somewhat controversial School Improvement Grant program is maintained at $506 million. (It’s somewhat controversial because there are big questions about its overall effectiveness.)

The $4.3 billion-dollar Race to the Top was Obama’s main education initiative, first announced in 2009 as an effort to ensure that every student was “college and career ready” and to achieve “educational equity” by aggressively  “turning around” the lowest-performing schools (or by closing them if they didn’t turn around fast enough.) The program was a competition among states for federal funding, with certain stipulations; states (and later districts) had to promise to implement specific school reforms favored by Education Secretary Arne Duncan in order to win the cash. The Gates Foundation awarded millions of dollars to states that sought its help in designing their Race to the Top contest entries. The program became controversial as some critics said it represented federal intrusion into local education (though states were not required to participate) and critics wondered how a competition among states  – which would create winners and losers — could create educational equity.

There is also no funding for the controversial Common Core State Standards in this legislation. The development of the standards and their implementation was not federally funded, though the Obama administration did provide $360 million to two multi-state consortia that developed new Core-aligned standardized tests, which are being given to students for the first time this school year. That money had been appropriated in previous years. The administration also linked Race to the Top funding to the adoption of common standards; an early version of the first Race competition used the Common Core standards by name but, as my colleague Lyndsey Layton reported here, that was changed out of fear that “some states would consider that unwanted — and possibly illegal — interference from Washington.”

In fiscal year 2014, Race to the Top was given $250 million, according to this legislation summary, for competitive awards to states to develop or grow early childhood programs for children from low- and moderate-income families.  Obama’s fiscal year 2015 budget proposal included $300 million for a proposed “Race to the Top-Equity and Opportunity.” While Race to the Top gets no funding in the 2015 omnibus bill, the administration’s Preschool Development Grants program gets $250 million for 2015.

The House and Senate congressional summaries of education-related funding in the 2015 omnibus bill highlight different things. The Republican-led House notes that Race to the Top is being eliminated, while the Senate version doesn’t mention it. And while the Senate version notes the $250 million for Preschool Development Funds, the House version says that “the bill does not include the creation of a new account to fund preschool grants.”

Washington Post summary of the bill’s highlights by my colleague Ed O’Keefe includes these two education-related items says:

 ‘The school lunch nutritional changes sought by First Lady Michelle Obama take a hit. The bill allows more flexibility to school districts to implement new whole grain nutrition standards “if the school can demonstrate a hardship” when buying whole grain products, according to Republicans. The bill also relaxes new sodium standards until they are “supported by additional scientific studies.”

Here’s information about education funding from a House Appropriations Committee summary on its 2015 omnibus spending bill:

Early Childhood Education and Care – Administration for Children and Families (ACF) – The bill provides $17.8 billion in discretionary resources for the ACF, which is a $108 million increase. This includes a $75 million increase for activities within the Child Care and Development Block Grant to improve the quality and safety of infant and toddler care. The bill also continues increased funding provided in fiscal year 2014 for the expansion of the Early Head Start program, providing additional early education opportunities for toddlers from low-income families throughout the country.

and

Department of Education – The bill funds the Department of Education at $70.5 billion. This is $133 million below the fiscal year 2014 enacted program level.

• Title I Program – These basic grants to local school districts to help children become proficient in reading and math are funded at $14.4 billion, an increase of $25 million above the 2014 level.
• Pell Grants – As per existing statute, the maximum Pell Grant award is increased to $5,830, funded by a combination of discretionary and mandatory funds. This funding increase is outside of the jurisdiction of the Appropriations Committee.
• Special Education – Special Education grants to states are funded at $11.5 billion in the legislation – $25 million above the 2014 level.
• No Funding for Newly Proposed Administration Initiatives – The bill does not include the creation of a new account to fund preschool grants, and eliminates the President’s controversial Race to the Top initiative.

And here’s information about education funding from a Senate Appropriations Committee summary on its 2015 omnibus spending bill:

High-quality early childhood care and education has been proven to have positive, lasting effects for children and families. It also supports the nation’s long-term economic security by preparing our next generation of workers, entrepreneurs and business leaders. This bill supports the key 33 federal investments in early childhood care and education, for children and their families from before birth through age five, including:

Development Block Grant (CCDBG)—The bill includes $2.435 billion, a $75 million increase, for the CCDBG. In November, Congress overwhelmingly passed the CCDBG Act of 2014, the first reauthorization of the program since 1996. This reauthorization included key updates and reforms, including requiring states to strengthen health and safety standards. Improving the quality of child care programs while maintaining working families’ access to quality child care options will require significantly more resources, but the increase in funding for the CCDBG is an important step in helping states implement these key reforms and support working families’ access to quality, affordable child care.

Head Start—The bill includes $8.598 billion for Head Start, maintaining support for key investments in Head Start and Early Head Start, including Early Head Start-Child Care Partnerships, made last year.

Preschool Development Grants—The agreement provides $250 million to continue support for Preschool Development Grants. The Departments of Education and Health and Human Services (HHS) awards $250 million to states through grants designed to help states initiate or implement high-quality public preschool programs for low- and moderate-income families. The funding in this bill will support the second year of what is expected to be four year awards. Research is clear that the benefits of high-quality early childhood education programs exceed costs by varying but significant amounts.

Responds to Emerging and Changing Needs

Unaccompanied children (UC) program—The number of children fleeing escalating gang and drug violence in Central America, seeking sanctuary in the United States, began to significantly increase in 2012. In total in fiscal year 2014, more than 57,000 children were apprehended by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and transferred to HHS care, more than double the number of children in fiscal year 2013.

This bill includes $948 million for the UC program, $80 million more than the fiscal year 2014 enacted level. This will allow HHS to continue to provide vital health, mental health and education services for children when they first arrive in the United States. It will also support legal services for children as they seek safety in the United States from extreme violence and abuse in their home countries. In addition, given the uncertainty in this program, the bill provides expanded transfer authority to help HHS respond to sudden or urgent needs in the future.

The agreement also includes $14 million in new funding for schools that have experienced a significant increase in the number of immigrant children enrolled in the current school year. These funds will help schools provide academic instruction and support to such students, without reducing support for existing student populations.

and

Not-for-Profit Student Loan Servicing—The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 eliminated the mandatory funding source that supported not-for-profit student loan servicer contracts. The bill provides $1.397 billion, an increase of $230.924 million, for the Student Aid Administration, to prevent disruption of student loan servicing for millions of borrowers.

and

Increases Access to Higher Education and Addresses College Affordability

Pell Grants—The bill provides $22.475 billion for the Pell Grant program, which provides $4.063 billion more than is needed to maintain the maximum discretionary award level at $4,860 for the 2015-2016 school year. Combined with mandatory funding, the total maximum award is estimated to increase by $100 to $5,830. There will be approximately 8.7 million Pell Grant recipients during the 2015-2016 school year, an increase of 142,000 students. The $4.063 billion surplus will carryover and help pay for the cost of the program in fiscal year 2016.

Federal Work Study (FWS)—The bill includes $989.728 million, an increase of $15 million, for the FWS program to help needy students meet the cost of their education through part-time employment. At this funding level, an additional 8,900 students will receive FWS awards.

Career Pathways—The bill includes a new provision reinstating financial aid eligibility for students without high school diplomas enrolled in career pathway programs at community colleges. Research shows that when low-skilled adults are enrolled in these programs, which provide education, training, counseling and supportive services concurrently, they are more likely to earn college credits and workforce credentials and to receive higher wages than their peers.

Adult Education State Grants—The bill includes $568.955 million, an increase of $5 million, for Adult Education State Grants. Thirty-six million adults lack basic literacy and numeracy skills and are not well-positioned to compete for living wage jobs in the 21st century economy. The increase in funding above the fiscal year 2014 level helps to address this persistent challenge.
Aid for Institutional Development—The bill includes $530.014 million, an increase of $8.715 million, for the Aid for Institutional Development programs, which are designed to strengthen institutions of higher education that serve high percentages of minority students and students from low-income backgrounds. The bill also includes a new provision allowing community 36
colleges and Minority-serving Institutions to continue using income earned from endowments for student scholarships.

TRIO—The bill includes $839.752 million for TRIO, an increase of $1.5 million, to help low-income and first generation college students plan for, prepare for and succeed in college. The bill also includes a new provision ensuring TRIO Student Support Services grants are awarded to institutions in a timely manner.

Centers of Excellence for Veteran Student Success—The bill includes $5 million to establish Centers of Excellence for Veteran Student Success on college campuses. These centers provide a single point of contact to help veterans integrate into the university community by providing comprehensive support services, including counseling, academic advising and the coordination of federal student aid and veterans benefits. This program last received funding in fiscal year 2010.

First in the World (FITW)—The bill includes $60 million to implement the second year of the FITW initiative. FITW provides grants to colleges and universities to support innovative strategies that make college more affordable and improve educational outcomes. In fiscal year 2014, 24 colleges and universities received FITW grants. With the funding provided in fiscal year 2015, the Department of Education will make new awards through a second grant competition.

National Center for Information and Technical Support for Postsecondary Students with Disabilities (National Center).—The bill includes $2.5 million to support a new National Center that increases the access to and completion of postsecondary education for students with disabilities. The National Center will help students with disabilities make the transition from high school to college by providing information on accommodations and transition programs available at institutions of higher education. The National Center will also provide training to college faculty and staff on how to improve services and provide accommodations for students with disabilities.




ESEA and NCLB Waivers The Constitution and the Supreme Court’s Interpretations

ESEA and NCLB Waivers
The Constitution and the Supreme Court’s Interpretations

The Framers created a limited federal government.  This means that, unless the Constitution delegates a particular power to the federal government, that power is “reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”  Education policy-making is not one of the delegated powers of the federal government.

So how does the federal government get around that limitation?  It relies on Supreme Court case-law interpretations holding that the federal government can condition the receipt of federal money on whether a state adopts a particular policy.  See, e.g., U.S. v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936); Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548 (1937).  Through that carrot-and-stick approach, the federal government holds out cash to the states as a lure for the states to abdicate their decision-making and, most importantly, the will of their citizens.

State Budgets

State Government Tricks the People with a Sleight-of-Hand

The federal government lures the states with quick cash.  In return for the money, it often requires the recipient states to make certain policy changes.  As a general measurement, the federal government provides about ten percent of a state’s education funds.  By tying that money to policy, the federal government exerts enormous influence over a significant piece of the policy-making pie.

The federal government exploits another systematic weakness in the states.  The federal government pays the states funds (tied, of course, to policy changes), which seemingly help the states on their budget bottom-lines.  However, the strings tied to the federal money often require the states to spend money in subsequent years.  Because most states operate on one- or two-year budgets, the full fiscal impact of the federal money is not part of the political discussions in the states.  Such fiscal irresponsibility is one of the many negative consequences of the Race to the Top program and Common Core Standards Initiative.

Federal Statutes

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA):

  • ESEA is the most far-ranging federal statute and first became law in 1965 as part of President Johnson’s “War on Poverty”.
  • Congress originally intended EASA as a block-grant (cash payment with relatively few strings attached) funding mechanism so that poor localities would have comparable education funding with wealthier communities.
  • ESEA banned federal authorities from mandating or directing education policy, which was considered the domain of the states and the people and explicitly prohibited any establishment of a national curriculum.
    • These prohibitions have remained in all subsequent reauthorizations of ESEA including the No Child Left Behind Act.
  • The Act must be periodically “re-authorized” (re-enacted) by Congress.
  • Increasingly, ESEA began to push desired policy by tying funding to certain desired outcomes.

ESEA Reauthorizations – No Child Left Behind (NCLB)

“No Child Left Behind” (NCLB) is the name attached to the ESEA re-authorization, co-sponsored by Senator Edward Kennedy, that President Bush shepherded through Congress and signed into law in 2002.  With respect to education policy, NCLB changed the status of states from being state sovereigns to essentially having a de facto contracting relationship with the federal government.  States receive money from the federal government and, in return, have to produce certain results for the federal government.

Because public education has been, under American tradition and the Framers’ intent, a matter of local control, the NCLB had the effect of centralizing education.  In order to comply with the federal scheme, states had to move power and authority away from parents and localities and centralize it with state bureaucracies so that they could be responsive to the federal government’s grant (or contract) demands, as opposed to the demands of parents.  NCLB required:

  • State-created centrally-managed academic standards, thus substantially changing the American tradition that education decision-making is a matter for parents and localities
  • Administration of state-wide standardized tests every year by all public schools receiving federal funding
  • Federal determination of a school’s effectiveness based on the results of state’s standardized test
  • Implementation of school level changes if a school fails to show “Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for two or more years based on the results of the standardized test:
    • Schools that do not show AYP for a second consecutive year must develop a two-year plan.  Students in that school are given the option to transfer to another school in the school district.
    • Missing AYP in the third year requires the school to offer free tutoring and other supplemental education services to struggling students.
    • If a school misses AYP for a fourth consecutive year, the school governing authority must institute “corrective actions” such as the wholesale replacement of staff, introduction of new curriculum, or extending students’ class-room time.
    • If a school misses AYP for a fifth consecutive year, the governing authorities must develop a plan to restructure the entire school and then implement that plan if the school fails to show AYP for a sixth year.  Restructuring options include closing the school, turning the school into a charter school, hiring a private company to run the school, or having direct administration by the state department of education.

Proposed ESEA Reauthorization—A Blueprint for Reform

A Blueprint for Reform is the name of the proposed (2011) reauthorization of ESEA/No Child Left Behind.  A Blueprint for Reform says it builds on four areas of The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.  Those four areas are:

1)    Improving teacher and principal effectiveness to ensure that every classroom has a great teacher and every school has a great leader.

2)    Providing information to families to help them evaluate and improve their children’s schools, and to educators to help them improve their students’ learning.

3)    Implementing college and career ready standards and developing improved assessments aligned with those standards.

4)    Improving student learning and achievement in America’s lowest-performing schools by providing intensive support and effective interventions.

Source:

A Blueprint for Reform:  The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.  (201, March).  United States Department of Education.
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/blueprint.pdf




Osceola Co. teachers resign en masse over Common Core demands

Osceola Co. teachers resign en masse over Common Core demands

More than 20 teachers have resigned or decided to retire from the Osceola County School District in just the past month -- and the district already had a shortage with more than 50 vacant teaching jobs.
 
The teachers’ union told Channel 9’s Deneige Broom that some of them quit because they're fed up with standardized testing.
 
At Kissimmee Elementary, they need to fill two spots. At the nearby middle school, three spots are open. 
 
The union president believes many of the now vacant spots are because of testing. 
 
Apryl Jackson fights to help Osceola County teachers, but said the education association's latest fight should concern parents, too.
 
“Ultimately, the problem that we're having now is the quality of education that our students is getting is not what it should be," said Jackson with the Osceola County Education Association.
 
In November, about 20 teachers resigned or retired from the school district. 
 
Jackson said that's higher than they typically see and several teachers claim the way they're forced to teach now and the stress of Common Core were the deciding factors in leaving.
 
"They're required to do more and more in their classrooms in less time," Jackson said.
 
Those resignations include more than 50 teaching positions open throughout the district. 
 
It has left substitute teachers in classrooms, sometimes for an entire school year, and also could mean additional students are added to classes. 
 
Jackson said teachers are doing all they can. 
 
Channel 9’s Ray asked Osceola County School Board member Jay Wheeler if the district could end up suing the state's Department of Education over Common Core like other districts have. 
 
"If we sue the Department of Education, that's taxpayers suing taxpayers,” Wheeler said. “That's not a good use of resources."
 
Wheeler hopes they can get lawmakers on their side.
 
"The state needs to get out of the teacher evaluation business,” Wheeler said.




Osceola Co. teachers resign en masse over Common Core demands

Osceola Co. teachers resign en masse over Common Core demands

More than 20 teachers have resigned or decided to retire from the Osceola County School District in just the past month -- and the district already had a shortage with more than 50 vacant teaching jobs.
 
The teachers’ union told Channel 9’s Deneige Broom that some of them quit because they're fed up with standardized testing.
 
At Kissimmee Elementary, they need to fill two spots. At the nearby middle school, three spots are open. 
 
The union president believes many of the now vacant spots are because of testing. 
 
Apryl Jackson fights to help Osceola County teachers, but said the education association's latest fight should concern parents, too.
 
“Ultimately, the problem that we're having now is the quality of education that our students is getting is not what it should be," said Jackson with the Osceola County Education Association.
 
In November, about 20 teachers resigned or retired from the school district. 
 
Jackson said that's higher than they typically see and several teachers claim the way they're forced to teach now and the stress of Common Core were the deciding factors in leaving.
 
"They're required to do more and more in their classrooms in less time," Jackson said.
 
Those resignations include more than 50 teaching positions open throughout the district. 
 
It has left substitute teachers in classrooms, sometimes for an entire school year, and also could mean additional students are added to classes. 
 
Jackson said teachers are doing all they can. 
 
Channel 9’s Ray asked Osceola County School Board member Jay Wheeler if the district could end up suing the state's Department of Education over Common Core like other districts have. 
 
"If we sue the Department of Education, that's taxpayers suing taxpayers,” Wheeler said. “That's not a good use of resources."
 
Wheeler hopes they can get lawmakers on their side.
 
"The state needs to get out of the teacher evaluation business,” Wheeler said.




Tuesday, December 9, 2014

Bill Would Help States Get Out of Common Core

Sen. David Vitter, R-La., has drafted legislation to prohibit the federal government from “mandating, incentivizing or coercing” states to adopt the national education standards known as Common Core, The Daily Signal has learned.

The intent of Vitter’s bill is to enable states to more easily exit the national standards, which more and more parents and educators have come to oppose, by voiding requirements attached to previously issued waivers from federal law.

States likely could retain their waivers from the law, called No Child Left Behind, even if they chose to pull out of Common Core.

Opponents have criticized the Obama administration for “incentivizing” states to sign on to the Common Core standards by offering $4.35 billion in grants and waivers under its “Race to the Top” program.

Of his bill, Vitter, a former supporter of Common Core, told The Daily Signal:

I’ve fought tooth and nail for local control of education and against the enormous growth of federal power under President Obama. That includes prohibiting the federal government from mandating, coercing or bribing states to adopt Common Core or its equivalent.

Vitter quietly filed his legislation, the Local Control of Education Act, as a standalone bill last week but intends to propose it as an amendment to the spending bill that Congress must pass this week.

The bill aims to “prohibit the federal government from mandating, incentivizing or coercing states to adopt the Common Core state standards or any other specific academic standards, instructional content, curricula, assessments, or programs of instruction.”

Vitter, who intends to run for Louisiana governor in 2015, changed his position on the Common Core standards. Four months ago, in an interview with C-SPAN, the Republican lawmaker said he “strongly supports” the standards.

 Of his reversal, Vitter said in a Dec. 1 press release:

After listening to literally thousands of parents, teachers and others since then, I don’t believe that we can achieve that Louisiana control, buy-in and success I’m committed to if we stay in Common Core. Instead, I think we should get out of Common Core/PARCC and establish an equally or more rigorous Louisiana system of standards and testing.

PARCC, which stands for the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, is a group of states working to develop a set of assessments in math and English to measure whether students from kindergarten through 12th grade are on track to succeed in college and career.

Vitter joins Louisiana’s current governor, fellow Republican Bobby Jindal, in challenging Common Core.

>>> Bobby Jindal Explains Why He ‘Flipped’ on Common Core

In June, Jindal bypassed the state legislature and issued a series of executive orders withdrawing Louisiana from Common Core and all federally subsidized standardized tests.

Jindal also filed a lawsuit against the Department of Education alleging that the U.S. Department of Education, under President Obama, used the $4.35 billion grant program and waiver policy to trap states in a federal “scheme” to nationalize school curriculum.

Louisiana’s Board of Elementary and Secondary Education teamed with a group of parents to challenge the legal groundwork for that lawsuit. In filing a countersuit against the governor, they left the status of Common Core in Louisiana murky.

Meanwhile, Louisiana continues to use PARCC, the federally funded Common Core testing and assessments group.

Stafford Palmieri, assistant chief of staff to Jindal, told The Daily Signal:

The federal government’s actions are in violation of the Constitution and federal law, which is why we filed a lawsuit to fight Common Core in federal court. We also joined our state legislators in a state court suit against Common Core, and we will work next legislative session to create high Louisiana standards that are best for our children and keep education left to local control.

Vitter, with his eye on Jindal’s job, wants to see states be eligible for federal grants regardless of whether they signed on to Common Core.

Lindsey M. Burke, The Heritage Foundation’s Will Skillman fellow in education policy, said Louisiana is home to some of the most innovative school choice options in the country. For  parents there, she said, “retaining control of education decisions is critically important for ensuring that type of innovation and customization can continue in the future.”

Burke added:

National standards and tests are a threat to the welcome proliferation of school choice, which Louisiana has been a big player in advancing in recent years.

>>> Commentary: It’s Not Too Late for States to Reject Common Core

Michael Brickman, national policy director at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an education policy think tank that supports Common Core, said he “absolutely agrees” with efforts to separate federal funds from implementation—although most of the Race to the Top grants have been distributed.

In a telephone interview, Brickman said:

The federal government should not be in this business of incentivizing standards, but just because the federal government is incentivizing them doesn’t mean they’re bad—anymore than charter schools are bad, which were incentivized in the exact same grants. Nobody’s saying we should stop having charter schools just because the federal government is incentivizing them.

The National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers first developed the idea of Common Core standards in 2009 as a way to boost education standards across the board. In the years since, parents, politicians and political organizations have become deeply divided on how the standards and tests are implemented in their states.

In addition to Louisiana, three states—Indiana, Oklahoma and South Carolina—acted to pull out of Common Core this year. More than a dozen others either have exited or downgraded their involvement with the assessment component.

Critics argue the adoption of Common Core surrenders control of the content taught in local schools to political organizations and bureaucrats in Washington. They say the standards are not likely to improve student performance in comparison to other nations.

Champions argue that Common Core sets better education standards without dictating curriculum. They say states are free to opt in or out, or make adjustments as they see fit.

“Louisiana has the option to change the Common Core if it wishes,” Fordham Institute’s Brickman says. “Other states have made changes to Common Core or opted not to use the standards at all.”

But Palmieri, who has been deeply involved in Jindal’s education battle in Louisiana, dismissed as a “smokescreen” the narrative that Common Core is simply academic standards. She told The Daily Signal:

Curriculum is the product of standards and assessments—and educators know that what’s tested is what’s taught. And what’s tested is controlled by the federally funded testing consortia, PARCC and Smarter Balanced, and states held hostage by federal grants like Race to the Top. The bottom line is that Common Core is about controlling curriculum. These are big government elitists that believe they know better than parents and local school boards.

>>> What’s in Common Core National Standards?

With reading proficiency in the early grades at a dismal 23 percent in Louisiana, the debate over Common Core standards is likely to persist as a top issue in the race for governor.

Regaining local control of education is essential, Vitter said:

In Louisiana, we need a system in place that truly prepares our children to be successful in higher education and the workplace that is as or more rigorous than Common Core.



Sent from my iPhone

Monday, December 8, 2014

Why Did He ‘Flip’ on Common Core? Gov. Bobby Jindal Explains

Why Did He ‘Flip’ on Common Core? Gov. Bobby Jindal Explains
 

Why did Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal withdraw his support for Common Core national education standards and tests? In the hot seat yesterday on “Fox News Sunday,” Jindal — a potential 2016 presidential candidate — explained to host Chris Wallace what led him to change his position and whether the move was politically motivated.

>>> How Jindal’s 7-Year-Old Son Outsmarted Common Core

>>> Jindal Suit Says Obama ‘Scheme’ Forced Common Core Education on Louisiana



Sent from my iPhone

Tuesday, December 2, 2014

Liberals Running the Classroom, Teaching Flag Stomping and Islamic Laws (MUST WATCH)


WHOA! Liberals Running the Classroom, Teaching Flag Stomping and Islamic Laws (MUST WATCH)

Fox News’ Megyn Kelly just released this shocking new documentary about how serious liberal indoctrination is inside America’s public schools. If it wasn’t clear how far the left has gone in taking over educating our children and how much Islamic culture is taught in the classroom, this will change that.

Watch (above) as Kelly gives examples of a high school teacher stomping on the American flag and another school which said a pledge to the country of Mexico! In one 6th grade class, President George Bush was compared to Adolph Hitler. And in another, the teacher’s lesson of Islam went so far that female students were asked to wear burkas.

TRACE GALLAGHER, FOX NEWS CORRESPONDENT: During a lesson about symbols and their meaning, a South Carolina high school English teacher decided to stomp on the American flag saying the physical flag was symbolic but was only a piece of cloth, and his actions would have no ramifications. He was wrong. Parents protested, the teacher was placed on leave and eventually agreed to resign for an $85,000 payout.

At Lumberton High School, Texas, as part of a world geography lesson on Islam, some female students dressed up and were photographed wearing burkas. Their parents were bothered by the pictures but more concerned about the emphasis on Islam.

APRIL LEBLANC, PARENT: They had touched on, you know, they started with Israel and start talking about Palestine but they went straight onto the nation of Islam and they focused on it and (INAUDIBLE) really focused on Islam, never touched on Christianity.

This is outrageous! Students should be learning math, English, science, and the skills needed to succeed in life. Please share this, if you oppose liberal indoctrination in schools!

H/T: Fox News

Share




Jeb: 'I've Lost Patience' with Common Core Complaints

Jeb: 'I've Lost Patience' with Common Core Complaints

Former Governor of Florida Jeb Bush (R-FL) participated in a wide-ranging interview with the Wall Street Journal Monday night and addressed many of the issues he will face if he goes forward with a run for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, as many suspect he will

Bush is often criticized by grassroots conservative groups for his participation in creating the Common Core education standards that have affected so many public school curriculums across the country. Bush addressed the complaints head-on and said he's "lost patience" on the issue: 

He reiterated his support for higher academic standards—whether they are the Common Core national standards or other equally rigorous benchmarks—and for testing to measure whether students are meeting them. “If you don’t measure, you really don’t care,” he said.

“I’ve lost my patience on this,” Mr. Bush said, referring to what he described as an unwillingness among special interests to improve public education.

Bush also sought a moderate middle-ground with newly-elected Republicans who might seek a showdown with the White House over funding for programs like Obamacare and the President's Executive Amnesty for illegal immigrants: 

Quit trying to “make a point,” Mr. Bush said, and forge compromises to pass legislation. Stop seeking to repeal the Affordable Care Act, he suggested, and offer alternative health-care proposals.

“We don’t have to make a point any more as Republicans,” he said. “We have to actually show that we can, in an adult-like way, we can govern, lead.”




Monday, December 1, 2014

Common Core, a common concern for parents and educators

SPECIAL REPORT: Common Core, a common concern for parents and educators : News : FOX21News.com

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO. -- Colorado's new assessment standards are the source of an explosive debate among parents, teachers and state administrators regarding our education system.

The topic is not isolated to just Colorado, but the national implications of Common Core teaching and testing affect our school districts, teachers, students and parents.

Colorado adopted Common Core in 2010, with more than 40 other states across the country. Since then, several states have dropped out. Colorado is known as a "Plus 15" state, choosing to add an additional 15 percent on top of the core practices offered. This is the first year Colorado will test Common Core standards.

PearsonAccess is the group organizing testing practices known as PARCC, or Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, and students will test twice a year.

There is a major campaign to reverse Common Core within our schools. Parents speak out with concerns of unhealthy secrecy, intrusive data collection, pressure on students and schools with big money behind molding our children's learning potentials. Many educators are too afraid to comment, fearing corporate backlash.

Common Core is a new set of standards. New ways of teaching, learning and now, testing. It was developed by a consortium of states in a response to a request from the government, that we provide some sort of systematic way of educating kids across state lines. It creates the same educational path for assessment.

Now, Common Core is becoming more of a common concern.

"We do have a say in how and what and why you teach our kids," said Larry Marcus, a parent of three students at James Irwin Charter Schools."I have a lot of problems with the standards. I think that it's going to in effect dumb them down."

"I understand that fear, that we're taking the standards and bringing them down to the lowest common denominator. I would just argue, that is not the case. We're challenged by these new standards," said Eric Mason, Director of Assessment for District 11. "There will be a lot of focus on critical thinking and problem solving. Asking students to look at not just can you calculate this in your head or on paper, but can you figure this out in real life?"

Marcus believes they make it sound great, and they make it sound so rigorous with the students learning so much. But he added, "They're more concerned with the process than they are the right answer."

Many parents from town hall style meetings throughout the school districts are worried about their child's educational needs. Will educators focus solely on teaching to the test, or fulfill more learning objectives?

"That's the balance. That's the biggest concern absolutely. And that's the thing that both our principals and teachers have to be increasingly aware of. Not teaching to the test. Teaching to the standards," said Mason.

Parents and students can choose to opt out of testing, but schools will have a negative reflection.

"Schools do feel that opt out because the state does judge our performance based on participation. How many students took the test? Because the law says test all children. And so we have to reach a 95 percent testing rate. If we don't, it can hurt our school performance framework. If a school falls below a certain rating, it starts a clock. And when that clocks ticks year after year, if you can't get your performance rating up, there are some pretty significant penalties that can be put in place by the state, such as taking over that school, and we don't want that clock to start on any of our schools because of participation. We just have to be very cognizant of the fact the state is watching because of the federal law," said Mason.

The District 11 Director of Assessment believes we are in a massive transition time. Everybody's going to have to take a look at what happens this year with this first big PARCC test. Then take a step back, and recalculate how we teach, educate and asses students.

District 11 did request a testing waiver for its students. They're concerned with the amount of testing driving decisions locally, and pressure on its teachers. They were declined by the state.

If you would like to voice your concerns both for and against Common Core, comments are welcomed by the following agencies below:

Colorado Standards and Assessments Task Force 

Colorado State Legislators 

Denver Alliance (Survey on testing within schools)




Sunday, November 30, 2014

'WOMB-TO-WORKFORCE' DATA-MINING SCHEME SPARKS REVOLT

'WOMB-TO-WORKFORCE' DATA-MINING SCHEME SPARKS REVOLT

140809studentsclassroom

Privacy advocates are calling for a moratorium on the Pennsylvania school system’s sweeping data-collection program, which they say is part of the federal government’s goal of being able to track the development of every child “womb to workforce.”

All 50 states have been mandated by the U.S. Department of Education to establish inter-connected “longitudinal databases” accumulating information on every student from pre-kindergarten through college.

Two groups, Parents Against Common Core and Pennsylvanians Restoring Education, are asking Gov. Tom Corbett to place a moratorium on data collection in the Pennsylvania Information Management System or PIMS. The system gathers information on students in all 500 school districts across the state and some schools have started collecting behavioral data that goes beyond testing for academic knowledge, according to the two organizations.

The two groups are also asking the state attorney general’s office to launch an investigation into possible violations of student privacy laws.

“We are asking the governor to rescind all contracts and written agreements that the Pennsylvania Department of Education has with any commonwealth entity and any outside contractor who can access personally identifiable information on our children in violation of federal law, state policy, and Chapter 4 (state code) regulations,” reads a statement issued by Pennsylvania Restoring Education and Pennsylvania Against Common Core.

While Pennsylvania has become ground zero in the backlash against what is seen as an increasingly invasive student tracking system, all 50 states are in the process of expanding and digitizing their student records under the direction of the U.S. Department of Education. The goal is to have all state systems plugged into a centralized database storing sensitive student information.

The expanded data collection has been enabled by federal stimulus grants issued as far back as 2010. Growth in the student data-mining industry has also been buoyed by President Obama’s 2011 executive order weakening the rules against releasing student data, which is regulated by the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act. Obama’s proposed rule change showed up in the Federal Register in April 2011 and took effect in January 2012, setting the stage for the development of a nationwide data-collection system capable of tracking individual students throughout their school and college careers.

The administration sold the policy as an advancement in “personal learning” with some vague parameters spelled out in a January 2012 press release.

But Obama’s executive order allowed more than just personal learning. At the stroke of a pen, it opened access to highly sensitive student data to third-party contractors, as reported by WND in May. That story also reported the growing backlash among parents in several states who are now “opting their children out” of standardized tests. The number of such tests being administered in public schools has exploded since the implementation of Common Core while the scope and nature of the testing has also been greatly expanded to include skills outside the traditional academic realms of math, social studies and language arts.

But the full scope of the data being scooped up is even more breathtaking than previously thought. It goes beyond standardized testing to include surveys, observations of student behavior and other subjective analyses made primarily by teachers. The more advanced a school is in the process of digitizing records, the more likely they are to require teachers to feed data into the system documenting attitudes, beliefs, values, dispositions. These are known as “interpersonal skills” or  “soft skills.”

Each student assigned a ‘unique’ number

Activists in Pennsylvania led by Anita Hoge have gathered documents that show the state is allowing contracts with third-party vendors who have access to confidential student records without the informed written consent of parents. Hundreds of data points are connected to each individual student through a “unique number” assigned to the student in direct violation of state law, said Hoge, a member of Pennsylvanians Restoring Education and an expert on the student assessment industry.

The information gathered can be used to create a psychological profile on each student, said Hoge.

“We are well documented and we have parents who are ready to come forward and demand access to all of the data that has been collected on their children,” Hoge told WND.

She said each teacher under this system is also assigned a unique identification number to ensure that they are inputting the required data on their students.

“Innovation Lab Network piloted the program and they said the teachers were the key to the whole thing,” Hoge said.

Tim Eller, press secretary and director of communications for the Pennsylvania Department of Education, told WND in an email that the department “does not collect anything outside of what is required by law.”

Hoge disagrees.

Even though Obama weakened FERPA, the data-collection system still violates the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment to the General Education Provisions Act, Hoge said.

Code 22, chapter 4, of Pennsylvania law also forbids the Department of Education from giving out students’ personally identifiable information. The law states that only aggregate information may be released to certain third parties.

“All of those contracts they have with outside providers will have to be rescinded,” Hoge said. “So they’re in violation of Chapter 4. They can’t give out that information. That’s why we are asking for the attorney general to investigate.”

The two groups issued the following statement to WND:

“We demand a moratorium on the collection of data because of contracts that have been discovered and are signed by the Pennsylvania Department of Education to disclose personally identifiable information, which is personal data on the students and his/her family, without the parent’s knowledge or consent. This includes information on every student’s personality, attitudes, values, beliefs, and disposition, a psychological profile, called Interpersonal Skills Standards and Anchors. This data has been illegally obtained through deceptive means without the parents’ knowledge or consent through screening, evaluations, testing, and surveys. These illegal methods of information gathering were actually fraudulently called ‘academic standards’ on the Department of Education website portal.”

Hoge said two members of Pennsylvanians Restoring Education and a parent of school-aged children met Oct. 20 with state officials in Harrisburg.

“This is when we exposed the contracts,” she said.

Present at the meeting were several legislative-aide attorneys, a state legislator and a representative of the governor’s office.

Two days later, Hoge received an email stating that the list of “interpersonal skills” had been scrubbed from the state Department of Education website portal called Standards Aligned System or SAS. Hoge’s group is now demanding all curriculum aligned to the “illegal psychological standards” also be removed from the classroom.

The state has notified all 500 school districts that the portal had been cleansed of all “affective domain standards” that had nothing to do with academic content.

This is a “temporary fix,” Hoge said. Just because they have been removed from the website does not mean they are no longer being used in the classroom.

“These standards and interventions continue to be forced on students and remediated in the classroom every day. A search on the SAS portal reveals over 2,394 lesson plans that align to these now repudiated ‘standards,’” Hoge said. “The parents of Pennsylvania want all affective domain standards, all curriculum and related lesson plans expunged from the classrooms, as well as from the website portal.

“Parents are demanding that Gov. Corbett and the Pennsylvania Department of Education cease collecting and disclosing personally identifiable information on Pennsylvania students and their families immediately.”

A model for the nation

Hoge, a longtime education activist, said her investigation concluded that Pennsylvania’s system is a model for the nation. The goal is to develop a dossier on each U.S. citizen feeding into a national database, she said. The local school is the head of the beast, the place where data collection begins on each child.

But before such an all-inclusive data system could be implemented, there needed to be a national ID number created for each student, a number that would follow the child from pre-K through college and into the work force.

Enter eScholar of White Plains, New York. This data-management firm was awarded a contract to create a unique tracking number for every one of Pennsylvania’s 1.8 million students. It performed the task within six months in 2006, apparently without the knowledge of any of the students’ parents.

The system eScholar created “allows the Pennsylvania Department of Education to track and share data for students from pre-kindergarten all the way through their post-secondary education,” according to a summary of the contract on the firm’s website.

State officials started laying the groundwork for the system in 1999. That’s when the Pennsylvania Department of Education commissioned a study to determine the feasibility of implementing a statewide student identification system.

“The study concluded that because of the strong local-control sentiment in the state, there would never be such a system. But that was before No Child Left Behind (NCLB),” according to an analysis of Pennsylvania’s system by eScholar.

The eScholar document goes on to describe how it took several years to build support for the creation of such an all-inclusive student-tracking system. But a system of this nature would eventually be seen as necessary to comply with President Bush’s No Child Left Behind education initiative.

The document states:

“It took a few years before state education agencies realized the impact of the data requirements for NCLB. (Pennsylvania) was no different. However, it soon became apparent that the way data were collected and managed was about to change forever. It was virtually impossible to meet the reporting and accountability requirements of NCLB without a longitudinal data system. A longitudinal data system required some way of tracking students from year to year, a student identification system. Governor Rendell responded during the first year of his administration by launching the Pennsylvania Information Management System (PIMS) initiative. In 2004, a statewide advisory council of education and government stakeholders was formed to help move PIMS forward and help build support.”

All 50 states involved in massive student data project

Hoge said the 50 states are at varying stages of designing and implementing their own statewide longitudinal databases.

“Some have them set up, some are in the process of setting them up, it depends on the state and how much money they have,” she said.

The first two federal grants to Pennsylvania exceeded $20 million.

“The contracts are huge, absolutely huge, to implement this system,” Hoge said. “So you had to have a state department of education that was willing to take the lead and set up the entire system.”

Pennsylvania’s former secretary of education, Gerald Zahorchak, was among the first state education chiefs to take the millions in federal money and run with the program. For his efforts, he received a national leadership award in 2008.

Pennsylvania was one of 20 states that initially received a combined $250 million in federal stimulus funds to develop and implement data systems capable of tracking student progress from early childhood through college graduation.

“The Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) grants will help deliver much-needed data into the hands of educators and policymakers,” according to a Pennsylvania Department of Education press release from 2010.

All 50 states submitted applications for the database grants in late 2009.

“In three short years, we have gone from having no comprehensive SLDS (database) to becoming a national leader in this regard,” former Pennsylvania Gov. Edward Rendell said in the state’s grant application. “In 2008, the Data Quality Campaign, a national collaborative campaign to improve the collection, availability and use of high-quality education data, awarded Governor Rendell and former Secretary of Education Gerald Zahorchak its annual Leadership Award.”

To help school districts get acclimated to the intensive data-mining system Pennsylvania bureaucrats established a statewide electronic help desk.

“They set up the whole system with a huge help desk because the data has to be entered perfectly and if any of the districts are having problems entering the data they can call the help desk,” Hoge said. “It’s the whole package: The national ID with ‘womb to workplace’ tracking and the model curriculum from Common Core. And the teacher also has a unique ID so they can make sure the teacher is teaching from the model curriculum. We can prove it now. We can prove what they are doing. We have the documents.”

She said the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics “has its fingerprints all over this system.” In one of its grant contracts the state of Pennsylvania actually used the term “womb to workforce” to describe the statewide database that will track each of its young citizens.

“PDE (Pennsylvania Department of Education) has made great strides designing a comprehensive K-12 data system and creating a solid foundation for a ‘womb to workplace’ information system,” states Pennsylvania’s 2009 grant application with the National Center for Education Statistics, a copy of which has been obtained by WND.

The state’s application goes on to boast that it had already stored two years of data in a “state data warehouse.”

“Equally important, we have successfully fostered a data-rich culture, supporting continuous educational improvement at all levels of the system,” the application explained.

Hoge says Pennsylvanians Restoring Education has documented evidence of a “systemic collusion” between the Pennsylvania Department of Education and the National Center for Education Statistics to create a national ID without the knowledge of citizens.

The next step for the education database is to link it with the Department of Labor with the addition of the last five digits of the student’s Social Security number or link to the unique ID created by eScholar, she said, citing written correspondence between former Pennsylvania Secretary of Education Zahorchak and former Secretary of Labor Sandi Vito, a copy of which has been obtained by WND.

The flow chart above is from the U.S. Department of Labor showing how data on students will be used and shared.

The flow chart above is from the U.S. Department of Labor showing how data on students will be used and shared.

Creating a modern ‘Stasi’

“This creates a database of human capital — your worth, or non-worth — to the economy,” Hoge said. “The government wants to know how you think and what you think and everything about you. This is a government intelligence operation using education to create a dossier on every family in this country. Attitudes and practices of each family are unwittingly revealed in the students’ responses in the classroom and on tests through the “Special Ed Student Snap and Student Snap.” (Source: Pennsylvania State University, PennData Grant: Project Number 062-14-0-042: Federal Award Number: HO27A130162)

Every person age 28 and under, schooled in Pennsylvania, has a psychometric profile, an intelligence profile kept by the state of Pennsylvania, Hoge said.

“In 10 years, every Pennsylvania schooled person, age 38 and under….In 20 years, every person age 48 and under…In 30 years, Pennsylvania will have a complete psychographic on every person in the workforce and on every child born thereafter in the workforce,” she said. “This is an American electronic model eerily similar to East Germany Stasi of yesteryear.”

Common Core as the vehicle

The Common Core national standards are the “vehicle” used to standardize the data collection as the autonomy of the local school district is stripped away and teachers in the classroom are reduced to virtual automatons, Hoge said.

“The individual mandate, similar to the Obamacare individual mandate for health care, requires students to conform to this national agenda,” she said. “There is no privacy.”

She described the system as a top-down form of federal control that bypasses state legislatures. The goal is to standardize the entire nation’s educational system.

Teachers must “remediate” each child to ensure he or she is absorbing the attitudes, values, beliefs and dispositions required by the system.

And teachers are constantly monitored by the system to make sure they are doing just that.

This turns teachers into virtual psychologists, despite the fact they are not state-licensed practitioners and vulnerable to malpractice issues, Hoge said. If students don’t meet the required proficiency in “interpersonal skills,” teachers can be threatened with reprisals including possible termination, according to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act “flexibility waiver” issued by the Obama administration. These waivers absolved school systems from certain requirements of President Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act, but exacted a heavy toll in the form of states losing their autonomy over classroom instruction.

An organized, ‘national system of surveillance and monitoring’

The contracts uncovered in Pennsylvania refer to Common Core as the “model curriculum.”

Common Core provides 2,394 fool-proof validated scripts with which to “remediate” each child to achieve proficiency  in the “interpersonal skills.”

“We have also discovered that these Interpersonal Skills Standards are also embedded in other academic areas of Career Education and Work, Family and Consumer Sciences, and Health Safety and Physical Education,” according to the statement from Pennsylvanians Restoring Education. “The test contract in Appendix B for the Keystone Exams states, ‘The diagnostic assessments are intended to be easily administered online and provide immediate feedback of students ‘strengths and weaknesses.’”

This is nothing more than a sophisticated method of brainwashing, Hoge said.

“Clearly this data-collection system has utilized education funds to set up a national system of surveillance and interventions on our students that is structured from the federal level down into each classroom,” she said. “Huge amounts of our taxpayer money have been used to fund this system of surveillance creating a dossier on each student and their family for the purpose of creating the worker desired by big business and enforced by the arbitrary, authoritative state.”

She said the plan to transform America’s school into factories that churn out “human capital” began in 1990 when the U.S. Department of Labor established the Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills or SCANS. ACT was awarded the contract to develop the list of skills seen as necessary for the 21st century global economy. This skill list formed the basis of what would later become Common Core State Standards, which was copyrighted by the Council of Chief State School Officers and adopted by 43 states.

In 2013, the Council decided to add non-academic “soft” skills to the list.

“We are requesting Gov. Corbett to stop the data collection, stop the invasion of privacy… We want legislation NOW, to protect our families, protect our children, and protect our children’s future,” stated Pennsylvanians Restoring Education.

The group ended its statement with a chilling conclusion.

“America used to educate its children and let them create their own world. Now, we are creating their world and forcing them to live in it.”