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.”




Radical Left Influence Over Education Not Just for Higher Ed Anymore

Radical Left Influence Over Education Not Just for Higher Ed Anymore

In a recent report on The Kelly File, Megyn Kelly and Dinesh D’Souza addressed leftism in education. Many of the topics discussed are issues we cover at College Insurrection.

Watch:

Naturally, this report didn’t sit well with the left.

Brendan James of Talking Points Memo opened by highlighting D’Souza’s recent legal troubles in an obvious effort to discredit him: (Emphasis is mine.)

D’Souza And Kelly: Liberal Professors (And Unions) Brainwash Our Kids (VIDEO)

Fox News host Megyn Kelly joined conservative author and convicted felon Dinesh D’Souza on Friday to warn viewers of a grand left wing conspiracy to infiltrate and control the American education system.

Fighting the liberal grip on college campuses has long been a cause on the right, but on “The Kelly File,” D’Souza argued the rot now goes as deep as secondary and elementary schools, where children are radicalized by anti-American militants.

“They don’t care about parents,” D’Souza said, speaking about liberal teachers and professors on campus. “They just feel unaccountable to legislators, unaccountable to alumni, unaccountable to parents.”

Kelly went on to place blame on “the unions that don’t allow teachers to get fired, no matter how radical, no matter how bad, no matter what they do.”

D’Souza admitted his crime and is paying for it but what does that matter?

Can’t win an argument? Just smear your opponent.

Featured image via FOX News Video.




U.S. Wants Teacher Training Programs to Track How Graduates’ Students Perform

U.S. Wants Teacher Training Programs to Track How Graduates’ Students Perform

The federal Department of Education announced preliminary rules on Tuesday requiring states to develop rating systems for teacher preparation programs that would track a range of measures, including the job placement and retention rates of graduates and the academic performance of their students.

In a move that drew some criticism, the Education Department said the new rating systems could be used to determine eligibility for certain federal grants used by teacher candidates to help pay for their training.

Critics have long faulted teacher training as inadequately preparing candidates for the realities and rigors of the job.

In a conference call with reporters, Arne Duncan, the secretary of education, said that far too many education programs set lower requirements for entry than other university majors.

“The last thing they want or need is an easy A,” Mr. Duncan said. “This is nothing short of a moral issue. All educators want to do a great job for their students, but too often they struggle at the beginning of their careers and have to figure out too much on the job by themselves.”




OUR CHILDREN ARE BEING HIJACKED

Are American class periods too short for Common Core?

By

As districts across the country implement Common Core, educators – such as these in Elverson, PennsylvaniaCalistoga, California, and Wilmington, Delaware – are calling for a restructuring of the school day so that students spend more time in each class. Instead of the typical class period of about 45 minutes, schools are lengthening classes to upwards of 90 minutes to cover all the material and allow teachers to change the way they teach to meet the new requirements.

Common Core, a set of standards in math and English in place in over 40 states, only directs what students should know at the end of each grade, but it’s also affecting how lessons are taught.

Jamie Wall, a math teacher at Brooklawn Middle School in Parsippany, New Jersey, used her state’s shift to Common Core to fulfill a teaching dream – her math students spending the entire period working collaboratively in groups – but says that her school’s schedule isn’t ideal for this kind of teaching.

“From the beginning of my teaching career, I didn’t want to just be up there and teach them,” said Wall. “I wanted to get them into groups and get them talking to each other about math concepts. I wanted them to develop math strategies and solve problems together. That all works very well for Common Core.”

Related: Tennessee’s Common Core backtrack strands teachers, students

“I teach in 40 minute periods,” added Wall. “This type of collaborative learning can be done in 40 minutes, but it’s hard.”

Under the Common Core State Standards, students will be asked to spend more time learning certain math concepts and will skip others. The idea is to give them a stronger foundation for algebra. (Photo: Sarah Garland)

Under the Common Core State Standards, students will be asked to spend more time learning certain math concepts and will skip others. The idea is to give them a stronger foundation for algebra. (Photo: Sarah Garland)

Other Common Core math supporters, often pointing to Japanese classrooms, have suggested that teachers could spend upwards of 15 minutes just discussing the ins and outs of a single problem.

“We haven’t heard a call specifically for block scheduling,” said Donna Harris-Aikens – Director of Education Policy and Practice at the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers union – referring to a scheduling technique that doubles the typical 45-minute class period to 90 minutes.

“But what educators are calling for is more time. More time if we want to have kids do things like work collaboratively but also more time for educators to talk to each other about what changes might need to be made in what is taught and how it is taught,” she added.

Related: Common Core math experts say teachers need to stop using shortcuts and math ‘tricks’

“Most of the high performing schools we have seen do not maintain the 40- or 45-minute block schedule,” said Jennifer Davis, cofounder and president of the National Center on Time and Learning, a non-profit dedicated to redesigning and expanding school time. “In those schools, when you walk into a classroom you see four or five groups of kids, some are getting support through high-quality computer programs, some are working in a small group with a teacher and some are working in small groups just among themselves. It is very difficult to do that kind of rotation in a typical 45-minute block.”

Some see scheduling techniques that reduce the number of class periods a teacher teaches as not just an opportunity to change how classes are taught but as a way to add planning time for teachers.

Davis says this increased planning is critical as schools take on the Common Core.

“Teachers need to be grappling with the standards together,” said Davis. “They need to be sharing lesson plans and reviewing each other’s lesson plans. They need to be coming back together after being in the classroom and sharing what’s working and what’s not working, who got it and who didn’t get it. This kind of collaborative learning on the part of teachers is essential to the success of Common Core implementation.”

Related: What makes a good Common Core math question?

Both Harris-Aikens and Davis say scheduling decisions need to be made at the local level.

“Honestly, I think it is a school-by-school decision,” said Harris-Aikens. “Take a real look at what your kids are doing during the day and think about tweaks like alternating days, block scheduling, or the semester plan.”

Harris-Aikens advises schools to ask parents and students what they think before major schedule changes.

“Students, especially your high school students, will have strong opinions,” she added.

This story was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news website focused on inequality and innovation in education. Read more about Common Core.




Wednesday, November 26, 2014

COMMON CORE TALKInG POINTS


http://ohiorising.org/talk-common-core-over-the-holidays/

Gates and Pearson Partner to Reap Tens of Millions from Common Core

Gates and Pearson Partner to Reap Tens of Millions from Common Core

0

Education · Featured

  • November 25, 2014

Bill Gates Common CoreFollow the money. It all ends up in the hands of a very few. Pearson Foundation is getting the contracts because of its partnership with the Bill Gates Foundation. Greed, secrecy, deceptions, and lies …. and to think Democrats accuse Republicans of the very things, while Democrats are the ones using government to get richer. The deceptions run very deep. It’s time for exposure.

The saga begins on one summer day in 2008, when Gene Wilhoit, director of a national group of state school chiefs, and David Coleman (known as the architect of Common Core), knowing they needed tens of millions of dollars and a champion to overcome the politics that had thwarted previous attempts to institute national standards, approached Bill Gates at his headquarters near Seattle, to convince Gates and his wife to sign on to their idea.  Gates, upon asking if states were serious about common educational standards, was assured that they were. Gates signed on and the remarkable shift in education policy know as Common Core was born.

The Gates Foundation has spent over $170 million to manipulate the U.S. Department of Education to impose the CSSS, knowing it would realize a return on this investment as school districts and parents rush to buy the technology products they’ve been convinced are vital to improving education.  Bill Gates’ Microsoft will make a fortune form the sale of new technology products.  According to the Gates Foundation, CCSS is seen as a “step to greater excellence in education.”

On April 27, 2011 the Gates Foundation joined forces with the Pearson Foundation, a British multi-national conglomerate, representing the largest private business maneuvering for U.S. education dollars. Pearson executives saw the potential to secure lucrative contracts in testing, textbooks and software worth tens of millions of dollars.

Its partnership with the Gates Foundation was to support America’s teachers by creating a full series of digital instructional resources. Online courses in Math and Reading/English Language Arts would offer a coherent and systemic approach to teaching the new Common Core State Standard. The aim: To create an online curriculum for those standards in mathematics and English language arts that span nearly every year of a child’s pre-collegiate education. This aim has already been realized and is in practice in Common Core states.

The Pearson and Gates foundations also fund the Education Development Center (EDC) based in Waltham, Massachusetts. It is a global nonprofit organization that designs teacher evaluation policy.  Both stand to benefit from EDC recommendations. The center is involved in curriculum and materials development, research and evaluation, publication and distribution, online learning, professional development, and public policy development.

Its alignment with the Gates Foundation and Common Core, Pearson dominates the education testing and is raking in profits as school districts are pushed to replace paper textbooks with digital technology.  For example, the Los Angeles school system with 651 students, spent over $1 billion in 2013 to purchase iPads from Pearson.  Additionally, The Los Angeles school purchased Pearson’s Common Core Systems of Courses to provide all the primary instructional material for math and English/language arts for K-12, even though the material were incomplete in 2013.

Pearson’s profits will continue to increase as it has billions of dollars in long-term contracts with education department in a number of states and municipalities to introduce both testing software and the teacher training software and textbooks it claims are necessary to prepare for the tests. For example, Illinois has paid Pearson $138 million to produce standardized tests; Texas, $50 million; and New York, $32 million.

Pearson is really raking in the dough now that Pearson VUE, the assessment services wing of Pearson, has acquired examination software development company Exam Design.  CTS/McGraw-Hill is Pearson’s main competitor in the rise of standardized testing.

Corporations finding they can profit from turning students into unimaginative machines, are newly discovering they can likewise profit from standardizing teachers as well. Starting in May 2014, Pearson Education will take over teacher certification in New York State as a way of fulfilling the state’s promised “reforms” in its application for federal Race to the Top money. The evaluation system known as the Teacher Performance assessment or TPA was developed at Stanford University with support from Pearson, but it will be solely administered and prospective teachers will be entirely evaluated by Pearson and its agents.

A small cloud did fall over the Pearson Foundation (the nonprofit arm of educational publishing giant Pearson Inc) in December of 2013, when a $7.7 million fine was levied for using its charitable work to promote and develop course materials and software to benefit its corporate profit making.  After the investigation begun, Pearson Foundation sold the courses to Pearson for $15.1 million.

New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman determined that the foundation had created Common Core products to generate “tens of millions of dollars” for its corporate sister. According to the settlement: “Pearson used its nonprofit foundation to develop Common Core product in order to win an endorsement from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which helped fund the creation of the Common Core standards, having announced in 2011 that it would work with the Pearson foundation to write reading and math courses aligned with the new standard.”

Since Pearson is the world largest education company and book publisher, with profits of more than $9 billion annually, the $7.7 million fine was not a hardship. Pearson, wasn’t always so big.  As a British multinational corporation Pearson was just starting out in the early 2000’s. Pearson started to grow when it embraced No Child Left Behind as its business plan and began rapidly buying up U.S. companies.

On June 10 of this year, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation announced its support for a two-year moratorium on tying results from assessments aligned to the Common Core State Standards to teacher evaluations or student promotions to the next grade level.

Although the Gates Foundation’s director of college-ready programs stated how Common Core was having a very positive impact on education, teachers do need more time to adjust.

The moratorium was enacted when on June 9, Diane Ravitch, research professor of education at New York University and author of “Reign of Error,” sounded the alarm over the implementation of Common Core and called for a congressional investigation, noting, “The idea that the richest man in [the U.S.] can purchase and — working closely with the U.S. Department of Education — impose new and untested academic standards on the nation’s public schools is a national scandal.”

It would be folly to suggest that either Bill Gates or Pearson, despite the temporary tactical retreat by Gates will not keep pushing for Common Core with its required educational technology. This nation spends over $500 billion annually on K-12 education.  When colleges and career-training programs are included, the education sector represents almost 9 percent of the U.S. gross domestic production.  Companies like Pearson and Microsoft stand to greatly profit as they develop and administer the tests and sell the teacher-training material.

It is not unreasonable to suspect that companies like Pearson stand to gain when tests designed to measure Common Core State Standards make most public schools look bad.  Counting on widespread failure of the Common Core State Standards, school districts and parents will be pushed to purchase even more training technology, teachers in low-ranked schools will be fired, and school will be turned over to private management.

As a text book manufacturer, Pearson Education buckled to the activists demands in Texas and replaced the scientific understanding of climate change with the politically driven claim that humans are causing climate change.    Because Texas is a large state, it does have influence on the national textbook market.

Might Common Core State Standards be the latest in the grand corporate scheme to profit from privatized public education?  In the interim, Bill Gates’ Microsoft and Pearson reap big CCSS profits.  Certainly neither teachers nor students are benefiting.




Tuesday, November 25, 2014

The Warping of Simplicity and Eloquence

The Warping of Simplicity and Eloquence

The video above is a must watch for all parents of young children, who have been questioning what in the world is going on with their children’s math work.   It is the articulate testimony given by the Chair of the Math Department, Mr. Layton Elliott, at Brebeuf Jesuit High School in Indianapolis, before the Indiana General Assembly Legislative Study Committee on September 10, 2013.

Parents who watch will be relieved to know that they are in good company, in struggling to successfully explain some of  the “fuzzy” methods being used in Common Core math programs.  Mr. Elliott begins his testimony by describing his experience accompanying high school students on a service project, during which they tutored struggling second graders in math.  With over ten years of teaching middle schoolers and high schoolers, Mr. Elliott assumed he would have a successful experience working with the child assigned to him.  Mr. Elliott says that upon looking at the child’s work sheet “[he] was immediately confused…”  Since the adults monitoring the tutoring impressed upon Mr. Elliott that he was not to use the standard algorithm when showing the student how to add two, two digit numbers, he toiled with the preferred method in vain.  He said that when the two hour period was over and the student still had not mastered two digit addition, he “was stunned!”  He felt that he had failed the student, whom he was confident would likely have been able to master the standard algorithm had he been allowed to show it to him.  Perhaps the most poignant portion of Mr. Elliott’s testimony was when he stated the following in relation to his tutoring experience: “Math’s beauty is in its simplicity and elegance.  What is simple and elegant had been horribly warped into something that was needlessly complex.

Every teacher of young children would do well to listen to Mr. Elliott’s testimony and then ask themselves if their students are enjoying the elegance and simplicity of math.  If the answer is no, perhaps they should reconsider just how much they wish to follow along with the Common Core textbook they are most likely required to use.  At a minimum, they should consider supplementing their material with worksheets of arithmetic problems to  provide the much needed practice so frequently absent in most Common Core programs.  Finally, they should take a look at child psychologist Dr. Megan Koschnick’s recent speech at Notre Dame and consider if Mr. Elliott’s unsuccessful experience had more to do with the developmental inappropriateness of the method he was required to use, than it did with his ability to teach or the student’s ability to learn.

While Dr. Koschnick’s speech is primarily about the developmentally inappropriateness of some of the K-1 Common Core standards, there is something to be gleaned for math teachers of students in grades 2-5, as well.  Dr. Koschnick explains that students in these grades are in what is called the “concrete operational” period of brain development.  According to Koschnick, this is the period in which memorizing and performing “concrete operations” is most in sync with what is occurring developmentally in their brains.  As she puts it, these types of rote learning exercises are “fabulous” and “right up the alley” of students this age.

In contrast, while some children in this age group are beginning to be able to think more abstractly, others are not.  Therefore, spending precious class time trying to teach ALL children to demonstrate mastery of understanding an abstract concepts on the front end, before ever using it, can be extremely time-consuming.  Our hardworking teachers have only so much time in the day.  If they are being forced to try and put a square peg through a round hole in some cases, even if they eventually accomplish it, we have to ask at what “cost” does this come.  The answer is two fold: it comes at the “cost” of far slower pacing of normal skills progression and often in the form of less overall time spent practicing performing the given operation.   This is not to say that teachers shouldn’t begin a new lesson with a brief explanation of the concept, but rather that they should consider putting the “horse back before the cart.”  When students are given ample practice, frequently their understanding of the related abstract concept comes naturally, over time, and may not need to be formally “taught” at all.

This is in fact the approach taken by high-perfroming Asian countries, such as Singapore, Japan, and Finland, who outperform the U.S. on tests such as the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS).   Research comparing the math content standards of these three countries against the Common Core’s, shows that the biggest difference is that approximately 75% of theirs involves “perform procedures,” whereas only 38% of the Common Core’s do.  The incredibly slow pacing of skills progression under Common Core math standards is one of the reason Stanford Mathematician, and Common Core Validation Committee member, James Milgram testified that Common Core will place American students two years behind their counterparts in high performing countries, by the end of 8th grade.  Can or should we really slow students’ mathematic progression down in order to train them to “regurgitate” explanations of abstract concepts?  Or, is it leaving them standing in place, under the guise of “deeper learning,” rather than allowing them to move on and learn the next logical mathematical operation?  I maintain that for some students it is needlessly confusing and frustrating, for others it simply a waste of time, and for all it retards their potential progress.   All teachers, principals, and administrators should rethink this lopsided bargain!




FUTURE READY SCHOOLS

Future Ready

Future Ready builds on the momentum of the President’s ConnectED Initiative with the launch of the Future Ready Pledge. The pledge recognizes the importance of building human capacity within schools and districts for effectively using increased connectivity and new devices to transform teaching and learning.

Featured Video

Are we preparing our students to be Future Ready? Ben Grey, Assistant Superintendent for Innovation & Communication for CCSD 59, tells his district's Future Ready story.

Upcoming Events

Future Ready Regional Summits

The Future Ready Regional Summits will focus on a comprehensive set of issues that drive student learning. The summits will highlight the experiences of districts in each region and offer district leaders tangible ways to build capacity among their teams and throughout their districts.

Future Ready Pledge Signers

District superintendents representing millions of students from across the U.S. have signed the Future Ready Pledge. Has your district leader signed the pledge?

Featured Resources

Featured Image

Future Ready Schools: Professional Learning Toolkit

November 2014

The toolkit provides rubrics, checklists and examples to assist district teams as they develop, refine, and evaluate professional learning plans that align with their capacity, learning goals, and standards of professional learning. In particular, the toolkit focuses on how districts can use technology to connect educators and provide tailored professional learning experiences.

Future Ready Hangouts

What are Future Ready schools and classrooms?

How do we support Future Ready teaching?

How do we measure Future Ready progress?




White House "ConnectED to the Future" Convening Attendees

White House "ConnectED to the Future" Convening Attendees

Superintendents being recognized for their leadership of #FutureReady Schools:

Albemarle County Public Schools, VA – Pam Moran
Alton Community School District #11, IL – Kenneth Spells
Arkadelphia Public Schools, AR – Donnie Whitten
Arlington ISD, TX – Marcelo Cavazos
Arlington Public Schools, VA – Patrick Murphy
Avonworth School District, PA – Thomas Ralston
Ballico-Cressey Elementary School District, CA – Bryan Ballenger
Barrington 220 School District, IL – Brian Harris
Beaver Area School District, PA – Carrie Rowe
Bristol Township School District, PA – Samuel Lee
Butte County Office of Education, CA – Tim Taylor
Camas School District, WA – Jeff Snell
Charlottesville Cty Public Schools, VA – Rosa Atkins
Chelmsford Public Schools, MA – Frank Tiano
Chester County School District, SC – Agnes Slayman
Chula Vista Elementary School District, CA – Francisco Escobedo
Clarke County School District, GA – Philip Lanoue
Clayton County Public Schools, GA – Luvenia Jackson
Clinton Community School District, IA – Deborah Olson
Coachella Valley Unified School District, CA – Darryl Adams
Community Consolidated School District 59, IL – Art Fessler
Corcoran Unified School District, CA – Rich Merlo
Corona-Norco Unified School District, CA – Michael Lin
Cumberland County Public Schools, VA – Amy Griffin
Dripping Springs ISD, TX – Bruce Gearing
Dysart Unified School District, AZ – Gail Pletnick
East Noble School Corporation, IN – Ann Linson
El Haynes Public Charter School, DC – Jennifer Niles
El Paso ISD, TX – Juan Cabrera 
Elizabeth Forward School District, PA – Bart Rocco
Elizabeth Public Schools, NJ – Olga Hugelmeyer
Eminence Independent Schools, KY – Buddy Berry
Evergreen School District, CA – Katherine Gomez
Fairfield-Suisun Unified School District, CA – Kris Corey
Fall Creek School District, WI – Joe Sanfelippo
Freehold Regional High School District, NJ – Charles Sampson
Freehold Township Schools, NJ – Ross Kasun
Fullerton School District, CA – Robert Pletka
Galt Joint Union Elementary School District, CA – Karen Schauer
Godfrey-Lee Public Schools, MI – David Britten
Goochland County Public Schools, VA – James Lane
Gurnee School District 56, IL – John Hutton
Haddonfield School District, NJ – Richard Perry
Hall County Schools, GA – Will Schofield
Harlingen Consolidated Independent School District, TX – Arturo Cavazos
Hawaii Public Schools, HI – Kathryn Matayoshi
Hickory City Schools, NC – Walter Hart
Highline School District, WA – Susan Enfield
Houston ISD, TX – Terry Grier
Howard County Public School System, MD – Renee Foose
Howard-Winneshiek CSD, IA – John Carver
Ithaca City School District, NY – Luvelle Brown
Jackson County School District 9, OR – Cynda Rickert
Jacksonville City School District, AL – Jon Campbell
Kent School District, WA – Dr. Edward Lee Vargas
Kentucky Valley Educational Cooperative, KY – Jeff Hawkins
Lakeville Area Public Schools, MN – Lisa Snyder
Lawrence Public Schools USD 497, KS – Jerri Kemble
Lewisville ISD, TX – Stephen Waddell
Lindsay Unified School District, CA – Thomas Rooney
Madison-Grant United School Corporation, IN – John Trout
Maricopa County Education Service Agency, AZ – Don Covey
McAlester Public Schools, OK – Marsha Gore
McGuffey School District, PA – Erica Kolat
Mentor Exempted Village, OH – Matthew Miller
Metropolitan School District of Wabash County, IN – Sandra Weaver
Miami-Dade County Public Schools, FL – Alberto Carvalho
Middletown City School District, NY – Kenneth Eastwood
Mineola Union Free School District, NY – Michael Nagler
Nash-Rocky Mount Public Schools, NC – Anthony Jackson
New Braunfels ISD, TX – Randy Moczygemba
North Boone CUSD 200, IL – Steven Baule
Northwest ISD, TX – Karen Rue
Oceanside Unified School District, CA – Duane Coleman
Onslow County Schools, NC – Rick Stout
Palisades School District, PA – Bridget O’Connell
Paoli Community School Corporation, IN – Casey Brewster
Pascack Valley Regional High School District, NJ – P. Erik Gundersen
Piedmont City, AL – Matt Akin
Pomona Unified School District, CA – Richard Martinez
Porter Township School Corporation, IN – Stacey Schmidt
Portola Valley School District, CA – Dr. Lisa Marie Gonzales
Poway Unified School District, CA – John Collins
Presidio ISD, TX – Dennis McEntire
Regional School District No. 6, CT – Edward Drapp
Revere Public Schools, MA – Paul Dakin
Reynoldsburg City Schools, OH – Tina Thomas-Manning
Roanoke County Public Schools, VA – Lorraine Lange
Saint Helena Unified School District, CA – Marylou Wilson
School District of Philadelphia, PA – William Hite
Seminole County Public Schools, FL – Walt Griffin
Sioux City Community School District, IA – Paul Gausman
Sitka School District, AK – Mary Wegner
Somerville Public Schools, NJ – Timothy Purnell
South Fayette Township School District, PA – Bille Rondinelli
Spartanburg 07 School District, SC – Russell Booker
St. Vrain Valley Schools, CO – Don Haddad
Summit Public Schools, NJ – Julie Glazer
Summit Public Schools, CA – Diane Tavenner
Talladega County Schools, AL – Suzanne Lacey
Union Public Schools, OK – Kirtis Hartzler
Urbana School District #116, IL – Donald Owen
USD No. 448–Inman Schools, KS – Kevin Case
Utica Community Schools, MI – Christine Johns
Vista Unified School District, CA – Devin Vodicka
Warsaw Community Schools, IN – David Hoffert
Washington Township, IN – Nikki Woodson
Wauwatosa School District, WI – Phillip Ertl
Wayzata Public Schools, MN – Chace B. Anderson
West Ada, ID – Linda Clark
West Morris Regional High School District, NJ – Mackey Pendergrast
West Warwick Public Schools, RI – Karen Tarasevich
Westminster Community Charter School, NY – Ayinde Rudolph
Westside Community Schools, NE – Blane McCann
Yorktown Community Schools, IN – Jennifer McCormick
For more information visit tech.ed.gov/FutureReady



Monday, November 24, 2014

Poll Shows Common Core Dissent Growing

Poll Shows Common Core Dissent Growing

 88  49  5 Reddit0  106  261

Many conservatives have known from the get-go that Common Core was a bad idea, but it appears that public school parents from all walks of life are starting to get the message. A new poll from Gallup shows that 35% of parents now have a negative view of the standards. That’s a seven percent increase since April, which can’t come as welcome news to the federal government.

Unfortunately, this still leaves the majority of parents with a favorable view of the standards. Worse, 65% still believe in national education standards as a concept, meaning we could see Common Core replaced with something just as bad once the heat gets too ferocious to ignore.

All of this points to a failure on the part of conservatives and Republicans to get the message across clearly. While you’ll never convince big-government liberals that Common Core is the wrong choice for our public schools, it’s astounding that it still has this much support from independents and the apolitical. This is federal intrusion at its worst, and it has damning ramifications for our students, our teachers, and the independence of our states.

Federal Education Standards Are Liberalism In Practice

The evidential support for federal education standards is nonexistent. Even if such evidence did exist, it certainly couldn’t be used to argue in favor of Common Core. One of the worst set of standards ever devised by man, the system is especially dangerous for elementary school students. Against all available scientific evidence, Common Core launches an ocean’s worth of information onto kindergartners, leaving many students frustrated, confused, and desperate.

It’s not surprising that liberals would support Common Core. It is based on the same “humans are statistics” approach to philosophy that enables liberalism to exist at all. The focus on improving education needs to be directed towards hiring excellent teachers who can be trusted to do their jobs. Common Core takes the individualism out of education, pushing kids through a system designed for Mr. Average.

“Voluntary” Standards

Supposedly, Common Core standards are voluntary. States may opt out if they choose. Of course, the voluntary nature of the standards is undercut when there is federal money hanging in the balance. States that desperately need those funds can’t afford to tell the feds to take a hike. Furthermore, with college exams being redesigned to reflect the same standards, students who aren’t being taught to the tests will be at a decided disadvantage. All of this without a single drop of evidence that this is what’s best for the future of education.

I’m not sure when politicians are going to realize this, but there is no magic formula that’s going to give us the best education system in the world. Even if there was, we seem to be doing our best to ignore what has worked in other countries. Hint: higher-paid, more qualified teachers and year-round school schedules are among the most promising. Instead, every ten years or so we get some new crap that’s supposed to turn things around. It won’t.

Common Core is awful, but until we recognize that any federal standards are just so much political nonsense, the debate over what to do about education will continue to rage on.




Truly Frightening’ Thing a Texas Teacher Allegedly Told One Mother


The ‘Truly Frightening’ Thing a Texas Teacher Allegedly Told One Mother

Cassidy Vines was so horrified by what a teacher in Texas allegedly told her that she is planning on home-schooling her daughter after Christmas break.

Vines told Glenn Beck on Monday that she recently began noticing a change in her daughter’s behavior. Her daughter — who is in kindergarten — started to “snap” at her when she corrected her homework, saying “I’m her mommy, not her teacher.”

Vines said a few days after her daughter first snapped at her, she started pronouncing a word incorrectly. Vines corrected her daughter “in the most gentle way possible,” but she said her daughter broke down crying, saying “that’s how she was taught, and I can’t tell her something different because I’m a mommy, not a teacher.”

Vines said she was horrified and asked, “Is somebody telling you this at school?”

“She said, ‘Yes, I’m only allowed to learn from my teacher,’” Vines remarked.

Glenn Beck speaks with Cassidy Vines, a concerned parent in Texas, on his radio program November 24, 2014. (Photo: TheBlaze TV)

Glenn Beck speaks with Cassidy Vines, a concerned parent in Texas, on his radio program November 24, 2014. (Photo: TheBlaze TV)

Vines requested to meet with the teacher several times, but said she never got a response. So she went to her routine parent-teacher conference “armed with a slew of questions,” hoping her daughter had misunderstood what was being said at school.

“I was prepared to listen to what the teacher had to say, just in case my daughter was maybe stretching the truth a bit,” Vines said. “I kept that in the back of my mind to bring up with the teacher, but I was more concerned at the time with her new attitude that she brought home from school.”

Vines said she explained what was happening, and kept waiting for the teacher to deny it, but it never happened.

“[The teacher] goes on to tell me that they try to discourage parents from introducing contradictory concepts to ‘our’ children,” Vines said. “Our children. As in the school’s children? I was a little baffled. And so when I started talking about my daughter, I emphasized my daughter. So I asked her, ‘Am I not allowed to help her with her homework?’”

Vines was shocked when the teacher allegedly responded that they “don’t want parents confusing the kids.”

Vines wrote on Glenn Beck’s Facebook wall about the incident, sharing how, in the same parent-teacher conference, the teacher allegedly said the pilgrims were “essentially America’s first terrorists.”

“Oh my gosh,” Beck said Monday, hearing Vines explain the whole story. “How old was this teacher?”

“She’s probably in her 30s,” Vines said. “She doesn’t look much older than me. I’m 27.”

“I don’t even know what to say about this,” Beck said. “I get so uptight about this stuff. This is the stuff that enrages me.”

Beck saluted Vines for making the decision to home-school her daughter, but asked how much longer parents will even have the option to home-school.

“If they’re already saying ‘These are our children’ and ‘Don’t listen to mommy and daddy’ — do you know what this is? You remember the Al Gore speech?” Beck said. “It was right after the election … when he called everyone in and would not allow any parents, any adults in there. It was just teenagers. … And what he said was, ‘Look, there are some things that your parents don’t know, that you just instinctively know.’”

Stu Burguiere added that MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry seemingly feels the same way, and once said in an MSNBC commercial: “We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.”

“I’m sorry,” Beck said. “But this is Hitler youth stuff. It is.”

Beck said the Department of Education must be “shut down,” and Vines’ story was “truly frightening.”

Complimentary Clip from TheBlaze TV

The full episode of The Glenn Beck Program, along with many other live-streaming shows and thousands of hours of on-demand content, is available on just about any digital device. Click here to watch every Glenn Beck episode from the past 30 days for just $1!




Increase in Homeschooling Linked to Common Core Implementation

http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/3724/Increase-in-Homeschooling-Linked-to-Common-Core-Implementation.aspx

Increase in Homeschooling Linked to Common Core Implementation

- See more at: http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/3724/Increase-in-Homeschooling-Linked-to-Common-Core-Implementation.aspx#sthash.Ursrbuxk.dpuf

home






Evidence shows that parents are choosing to homeschool their children in order to escape the Common Core State Standards, two leaders in the Catholic homeschooling field told The Cardinal Newman Society.

Recent findings in several states indicate that there has been a significant increase in parents who choose to homeschool their children in order to avoid the Common Core standards being implemented in public and private schools, according to reports by Heartlander Magazine and EAGnews.org.

“Common Core has become a major concern for some parents in North Carolina, a state where homeschooling grew by 14 percent during the last academic year,” Heartlander reported. “More and more private traditional schools are choosing to align to the Standards,” a North Carolina parent stated toHeartlander. As a result, parents are reportedly “escaping Common Core Standards via home education because the traditional system is failing their families.”

EAGnews reported that Virginia “has seen homeschooling rates nearly double over the last decade,” with the amount of the student-age population being home-schooled growing from 1.8 percent in 2002 to 2.7 percent in 2013.

Sylvia Diaz, coordinator of the Tri-State Homeschoolers Association, told EAGnews that the Common Core “has wreaked havoc with a lot of parents, and they say their children are confused and anxious.”

Laura Berquist, founder and director of the Catholic distance homeschooling program Mother of Divine Grace School based in Ojai, Calif., indicated that there is a strong link between increased homeschooling and Common Core implementation.

“Significant numbers of parents have told our office staff that they are enrolling to get away from the Common Core,” Berquist told the Newman Society. “In addition, a consideration of our enrollment statistics for the past two years shows a swift upswing in enrollments that matches up with the timeline of the increase in dialogue relating to institution of the Common Core standards.”

“Parents are concerned, rightly, that the quality and content of their children’s education will suffer as a result of Common Core,” Berquist noted, adding that she has seen “an admirable level of concern among parents relating to the federal government’s involvement in setting national standards.”

“This is not a role that should belong to the federal government,” Berquist stated. “Education has always been better handled at a more local level, and best handled by parents, who actually know and love their individual students.”

Berquist continued:

These parents also know that Common Core advocates, by their own admission, want a utilitarian education that prepares children for a job, not an education that is about goodness, truth, and beauty. As believers, our parents know that an education centered solely on this life and getting a job is not going to prepare their children for the most important (and longest) part of their lives: eternity.

Dr. Mary Kay Clark, director of Seton Home Study School, reported similar findings to the Newman Society. “There is no question that the implementation of Common Core into the classrooms of America has been a strong reason for more parents to choose home schooling,” Clark explained. “More educated parents are realizing that Common Core is intended to limit parental influence and to separate students from parental values.”

“The public school system is dedicated to teaching certain social values,” Clark continued. “Over the past decades, we have seen these values change from the Judeo-Christian values, upon which our nation was founded, to something quite different.”

Clark noted that the key for parents to ensure the proper academic and spiritual formation of their children is to maintain their involvement. “One of the best ways to do this is to teach children at home,” Clark stated. “The natural consequence of this has been the strengthening of Catholic home schooling families.”

Catholic Education Daily is an online publication of The Cardinal Newman Society. Click here for email updates and free online membership with The Cardinal Newman Society.

- See more at: http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/3724/Increase-in-Homeschooling-Linked-to-Common-Core-Implementation.aspx#sthash.Ursrbuxk.dpuf
➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖➖

When reprinting/reposting, please include the author's name, a link to our website, and the following text: "Originally published by Catholic Education Daily, an online publication of The Cardinal Newman Society." - See more at: http://www.cardinalnewmansociety.org/CatholicEducationDaily/DetailsPage/tabid/102/ArticleID/3724/Increase-in-Homeschooling-Linked-to-Common-Core-Implementation.aspx#sthash.Ursrbuxk.dpuf

Sunday, November 23, 2014

How Bill Gates pulled off the swift Common Core revolution

How Bill Gates pulled off the swift Common Core revolution

Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates is taking heat from education groups, which say the Gates Foundation’s philanthropic support comes with strings attached. Here, he responds to his critics in an interview with The Washington Post’s Lyndsey Layton. (Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post)

The pair of education advocates had a big idea, a new approach to transform every public-school classroom in America. By early 2008, many of the nation’s top politicians and education leaders had lined up in support.

But that wasn’t enough. The duo needed money — tens of millions of dollars, at least — and they needed a champion who could overcome the politics that had thwarted every previous attempt to institute national standards.

So they turned to the richest man in the world.

On a summer day in 2008, Gene Wilhoit, director of a national group of state school chiefs, and David Coleman, an emerging evangelist for the standards movement, spent hours in Bill Gates’s sleek headquarters near Seattle, trying to persuade him and his wife, Melinda, to turn their idea into reality.

Coleman and Wilhoit told the Gateses that academic standards varied so wildly between states that high school diplomas had lost all meaning, that as many as 40 percent of college freshmen needed remedial classes and that U.S. students were falling behind their foreign competitors.

The pair also argued that a fragmented education system stifled innovation because textbook publishers and software developers were catering to a large number of small markets instead of exploring breakthrough products. That seemed to resonate with the man who led the creation of the world’s dominant computer operating system.

“Can you do this?” Wilhoit recalled being asked. “Is there any proof that states are serious about this, because they haven’t been in the past?”

Wilhoit responded that he and Coleman could make no guarantees but that “we were going to give it the best shot we could.”

After the meeting, weeks passed with no word. Then Wilhoit got a call: Gates was in.

What followed was one of the swiftest and most remarkable shifts in education policy in U.S. history.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation didn’t just bankroll the development of what became known as the Common Core State Standards. With more than $200 million, the foundation also built political support across the country, persuading state governments to make systemic and costly changes.

Bill Gates was de facto organizer, providing the money and structure for states to work together on common standards in a way that avoided the usual collision between states’ rights and national interests that had undercut every previous effort, dating from the Eisenhower administration.

The Gates Foundation spread money across the political spectrum, to entities including the big teachers unions, the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association, and business organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — groups that have clashed in the past but became vocal backers of the standards.

Money flowed to policy groups on the right and left, funding research by scholars of varying political persuasions who promoted the idea of common standards. Liberals at the Center for American Progress and conservatives affiliated with the American Legislative Exchange Council who routinely disagree on nearly every issue accepted Gates money and found common ground on the Common Core.

One 2009 study, conducted by the conservative Thomas B. Fordham Institute with a $959,116 Gates grant, described the proposed standards as being “very, very strong” and “clearly superior” to many existing state standards.

Gates money went to state and local groups, as well, to help influence policymakers and civic leaders. And the idea found a major booster in President Obama, whose new administration was populated by former Gates Foundation staffers and associates. The administration designed a special contest using economic stimulus funds to reward states that accepted the standards.

The result was astounding: Within just two years of the 2008 Seattle meeting, 45 states and the District of Columbia had fully adopted the Common Core State Standards.

The math standards require students to learn multiple ways to solve problems and explain how they got their answers, while the English standards emphasize nonfiction and expect students to use evidence to back up oral and written arguments. The standards are not a curriculum but skills that students should acquire at each grade. How they are taught and materials used are decisions left to states and school districts.

The standards have become so pervasive that they also quickly spread through private Catholic schools. About 100 of 176 Catholic dioceses have adopted the standards because it is increasingly difficult to buy classroom materials and send teachers to professional development programs that are not influenced by the Common Core, Catholic educators said.

And yet, because of the way education policy is generally decided, the Common Core was instituted in many states without a single vote taken by an elected lawmaker. Kentucky even adopted the standards before the final draft had been made public.

States were responding to a “common belief system supported by widespread investments,” according to one former Gates employee who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid antagonizing the foundation.

The movement grew so quickly and with so little public notice that opposition was initially almost nonexistent. That started to change last summer, when local tea party groups began protesting what they viewed as the latest intrusion by an overreaching federal government — even though the impetus had come from the states. In some circles, Common Core became known derisively as “Obamacore.”

Since then, anti-Common Core sentiment has intensified, to the extent that it has become a litmus test in the Republican Party ahead of the GOP’s 2016 presidential nomination process. Former Florida governor Jeb Bush, whose nonprofit Foundation for Excellence in Education has received about $5.2 million from the Gates Foundation since 2010, is one of the Common Core’s most vocal supporters. Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, who, like Bush, is a potential Republican presidential candidate, led a repeal of the standards in his state. In the past week, Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R), a former advocate of the standards, signed a law pulling her state out, days after South Carolina’s Republican governor, Nikki Haley, did the same.

Some liberals are angry, too, with a few teacher groups questioning Gates’s influence and motives. Critics say Microsoft stands to benefit from the Common Core’s embrace of technology and data — a charge Gates vehemently rejects.

A group calling itself the “Badass Teachers Association,” citing opposition to what it considers market-based education reform, plans a June 26 protest outside the Gates Foundation’s headquarters in Seattle.

In an interview, Gates said his role is to fund the research and development of new tools, such as the Common Core, and offer them to decision-makers who are trying to improve education for millions of Americans. It’s up to the government to decide which tools to use, but someone has to invest in their creation, he said.

“The country as a whole has a huge problem that low-income kids get less good education than suburban kids get,” Gates said. “And that is a huge challenge. . . . Education can get better. Some people may not believe that. Education can change. We can do better.”

“There’s a lot of work that’s gone into making these [standards] good,” Gates continued. “I wish there was a lot of competition, in terms of [other] people who put tens of millions of dollars into how reading and writing could be improved, how math could be improved.”

Referring to opinion polls, he noted that most teachers like the Common Core standards and that those who are most familiar with them are the most positive.

Gates grew irritated in the interview when the political backlash against the standards was mentioned.

“These are not political things,” he said. “These are where people are trying to apply expertise to say, ‘Is this a way of making education better?’ ”

“At the end of the day, I don’t think wanting education to be better is a right-wing or left-wing thing,” Gates said. “We fund people to look into things. We don’t fund people to say, ‘Okay, we’ll pay you this if you say you like the Common Core.’ ”

Whether the Common Core will deliver on its promise is an open question.

Tom Loveless, a former Harvard professor who is an education policy expert at the Brookings Institution, said the Common Core was “built on a shaky theory.” He said he has found no correlation between quality standards and higher student achievement.

“Everyone who developed standards in the past has had a theory that standards will raise achievement, and that’s not happened,” Loveless said.

Jay P. Greene, head of the Department of Education Reform at the University of Arkansas, says the Gates Foundation’s overall dominance in education policy has subtly muffled dissent.

“Really rich guys can come up with ideas that they think are great, but there is a danger that everyone will tell them they’re great, even if they’re not,” Greene said.

Common Core’s first win

The first victory for Common Core advocates came on a snowy evening in Kentucky in February 2010, when the state’s top education officials voted unanimously to accept the standards.

“There was no dissent,” said Terry Holliday, Kentucky’s education commissioner. “We had punch and cookies to celebrate.”

It was not by chance that Kentucky went first.

The state enjoyed a direct connection to the Common Core backers — Wilhoit, who had made the personal appeal to Bill and Melinda Gates during that pivotal 2008 meeting, is a former Kentucky education commissioner.

Kentucky was also in the market for new standards. Alarmed that as many as 80 percent of community college students were taking remedial classes, lawmakers had recently passed a bill that required Kentucky to write new, better K-12 standards and tests.

“All of our consultants and our college professors had reviewed the Common Core standards, and they really liked them,” Holliday said. “And there was no cost. We didn’t have any money to do this work, and here we were, able to tap into this national work and get the benefits of the best minds in the country.”

“Without the Gates money,” Holliday added, “we wouldn’t have been able to do this.”

Over time, at least $15 million in Gates money was directed both to the state — to train teachers in Common Core practices and purchase classroom materials — and to on-the-ground advocacy and business groups to help build public support.

Armed with $476,553 from Gates, the Kentucky Chamber of Commerce’s foundation produced a seven-minute video about the value and impact of the Common Core, a tool kit to guide employers in how to talk about its benefits with their employees, a list of key facts that could be stuffed into paycheck envelopes, and other promotional materials written by consultants.

The tool kit provided a sample e-mail that could be sent to workers describing “some exciting new developments underway in our schools” that “hold great promise for creating a more highly skilled workforce and for giving our students, community and state a better foundation on which to build a strong economic future.”

The chamber also recruited a prominent Louisville stockbroker to head a coalition of 75 company executives across the state who lent their names to ads placed in business publications that supported the Common Core.

“The notion that the business community was behind this, those seeds were planted across the state, and that reaped a nice harvest in terms of public opinion,” said David Adkisson, president and chief executive of the Kentucky chamber.

The foundation run by the National Education Association received $501,580 in 2013 to help put the Common Core in place in Kentucky.

Gates-backed groups built such strong support for the Common Core that critics, few and far between, were overwhelmed.

“They have so much money to throw around, they can impact the Kentucky Department of Education, the U.S. Department of Education, they can impact both the AFT and the NEA,” said Brent McKim, president of the teachers union in Jefferson County, Ky., whose early complaint that the standards were too numerous to be taught well earned him a rebuke by Holliday.

The foundation’s backing was crucial in other states, as well. Starting in 2009, it had begun ramping up its grant-giving to local nonprofit organizations and other Common Core advocates.

The foundation, for instance, gave more than $5 million to the University of North Carolina-affiliated Hunt Institute, led by the state’s former four-term Democratic governor, Jim Hunt, to advocate for the Common Core in statehouses around the country.

The grant was the institute’s largest source of income in 2009, more than 10 times the size of its next largest donation.

Bill Gates sat down with The Post’s Lyndsey Layton in March to defend the Gates Foundation’s pervasive presence in education and its support of the Common Core. Here is the full, sometimes tense, interview. (Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post)

With the Gates money, the Hunt Institute coordinated more than a dozen organizations — many of them also Gates grantees — including the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, National Council of La Raza, the Council of Chief State School Officers, National Governors Association, Achieve and the two national teachers unions.

The Hunt Institute held weekly conference calls between the players that were directed by Stefanie Sanford, who was in charge of policy and advocacy at the Gates Foundation. They talked about which states needed shoring up, the best person to respond to questions or criticisms and who needed to travel to which state capital to testify, according to those familiar with the conversations.

The Hunt Institute spent $437,000 to hire GMMB, a strategic communications firm owned by Jim Margolis, a top Democratic strategist and veteran of both of Obama’s presidential campaigns. GMMB conducted polling around standards, developed fact sheets, identified language that would be effective in winning support and prepared talking points, among other efforts.

The groups organized by Hunt developed a “messaging tool kit” that included sample letters to the editor, op-ed pieces that could be tailored to individuals depending on whether they were teachers, parents, business executives or civil rights leaders.

Later in the process, Gates and other foundations would pay for mock legislative hearings for classroom teachers, training educators on how to respond to questions from lawmakers.

The speed of adoption by the states was staggering by normal standards. A process that typically can take five years was collapsed into a matter of months.

“You had dozens of states adopting before the standards even existed, with little or no discussion, coverage or controversy,” said Frederick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute, which has received $4 million from the Gates Foundation since 2007 to study education policy, including the Common Core. “People weren’t paying attention. We were in the middle of an economic meltdown and the health-care fight, and states saw a chance to have a crack at a couple of million bucks if they made some promises.”

The decision by the Gates Foundation to simultaneously pay for the standards and their promotion is a departure from the way philanthropies typically operate, said Sarah Reckhow, an expert in philanthropy and education policy at Michigan State University.

“Usually, there’s a pilot test — something is tried on a small scale, outside researchers see if it works, and then it’s promoted on a broader scale,” Reckhow said. “That didn’t happen with the Common Core. Instead, they aligned the research with the advocacy. . . . At the end of the day, it’s going to be the states and local districts that pay for this.”

Working hand in hand

While the Gates Foundation created the burst of momentum behind the Common Core, the Obama administration picked up the cause and helped push states to act quickly.

There was so much cross-pollination between the foundation and the administration, it is difficult to determine the degree to which one may have influenced the other.

Several top players in Obama’s Education Department who shaped the administration’s policies came either straight from the Gates Foundation in 2009 or from organizations that received heavy funding from the foundation.

Before becoming education secretary in 2009, Arne Duncan was chief executive of the Chicago Public Schools, which received $20 million from Gates to break up several large high schools and create smaller versions, a move aimed at stemming the dropout rate.

As secretary, Duncan named as his chief of staff Margot Rogers, a top Gates official he got to know through that grant. He also hired James Shelton, a program officer at the foundation, to serve first as his head of innovation and most recently as the deputy secretary, responsible for a wide array of federal policy decisions.

Duncan and his team leveraged stimulus money to reward states that adopted common standards.

They created Race to the Top, a $4.3 billion contest for education grants. Under the contest rules, states that adopted high standards stood the best chance of winning. It was a clever way around federal laws that prohibit Washington from interfering in what takes place in classrooms. It was also a tantalizing incentive for cash-strapped states.

Heading the effort for Duncan was Joanne Weiss, previously the chief operating officer of the Gates-backed NewSchools Venture Fund.

As Race to the Top was being drafted, the administration and the Gates-led effort were in close coordination.

An early version highlighted the Common Core standards by name, saying that states that embraced those specific standards would be better positioned to win federal money. That worried Wilhoit, who feared that some states would consider that unwanted — and possibly illegal — interference from Washington. He took up the matter with Weiss.

“I told her to take it out, that we didn’t want the federal government involvement,” said Wilhoit, who was executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers. “Those kinds of things cause people to be real suspicious.”

The words “Common Core” were deleted.

The administration said states could develop their own “college and career ready” standards, as long as their public universities verified that those standards would prepare high school graduates for college-level work.

Still, most states eyeing Race to the Top money opted for the easiest route and signed onto the Common Core.

The Gates Foundation gave $2.7 million to help 24 states write their Race to the Top application, which ran an average of 300 pages, with as much as 500 pages for an appendix that included Gates-funded research.

Applications for the first round of Race to the Top were due in January 2010, even though the final draft of the Common Core wasn’t released until six months later. To get around this, the U.S. Department of Education told states they could apply as long as they promised they would officially adopt standards by August.

On the defensive

Now six years into his quest, Gates finds himself in an uncomfortable place — countering critics on the left and right who question whether the Common Core will have any impact or negative effects, whether it represents government intrusion, and whether the new policy will benefit technology firms such as Microsoft.

Gates is disdainful of the rhetoric from opponents. He sees himself as a technocrat trying to foster solutions to a profound social problem — gaping inequalities in U.S. public education — by investing in promising new ideas.

Education lacks research and development, compared with other areas such as medicine and computer science. As a result, there is a paucity of information about methods of instruction that work.

“The guys who search for oil, they spend a lot of money researching new tools,” Gates said. “Medicine — they spend a lot of money finding new tools. Software is a very R and D-oriented industry. The funding, in general, of what works in education . . . is tiny. It’s the lowest in this field than any field of human endeavor. Yet you could argue it should be the highest.”

Gates is devoting some of his fortune to correct that. Since 1999, the Gates Foundation has spent approximately $3.4 billion on an array of measures to try to improve K-12 public education, with mixed results.

It spent about $650 million on a program to replace large urban high schools with smaller schools, on the theory that students at risk of dropping out would be more likely to stay in schools where they forged closer bonds with teachers and other students. That led to a modest increase in graduation rates, an outcome that underwhelmed Gates and prompted the foundation to pull the plug.

Gates has said that one of the benefits of common standards would be to open the classroom to digital learning, making it easier for software developers — including Microsoft — to develop new products for the country’s 15,000 school districts.

In February, 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. That product allows Microsoft to compete for school district spending with Apple, whose iPad is the dominant tablet in classrooms.

Gates dismissed any suggestion that he is motivated by self-interest.

“I believe in the Common Core because of its substance and what it will do to improve education,” he said. “And that’s the only reason I believe in the Common Core.”

Bill and Melinda Gates, Obama and Arne Duncan are parents of school-age children, although none of those children attend schools that use the Common Core standards. The Gates and Obama children attend private schools, while Duncan’s children go to public school in Virginia, one of four states that never adopted the Common Core.

Still, Gates said he wants his children to know a “superset” of the Common Core standards — everything in the standards and beyond.

“This is about giving money away,” he said of his support for the standards. “This is philanthropy. This is trying to make sure students have the kind of opportunity I had . . . and it’s almost outrageous to say otherwise, in my view.”

More from this series:

How Google is transforming power and politics

A powerhouse donor turned state bureaucrat