America’s School Choice Programs Ranked By Eligibility

http://www.edchoice.org/Blog/January-2015/America-s-School-Choice-Programs-Ranked-By-Eligibi

America’s School Choice Programs Ranked By Eligibility

Universal eligibility—that is, open to every single family—is the Friedman Foundation’s school choice policy goal. To coincide with the 2015 release of The ABCs of School Choice, we’ve ranked the nation’s programs by how close they get to our vision of 100 percent eligibility.

Importantly, as the participation rankings showed, just because a program is open to a lot of families, that doesn’t mean every household will use it. Still, it’s critical families have that safety net should they need it.

And as we’ll show tomorrow, it’s also imperative states give school choice students adequate purchasing power. Although the top seven programs below have 100 percent eligibility, their combined average per-student funding doesn’t even get close to the average $12,608 spent per pupil in America’s public schools in 2012-13.

1. Illinois Tax Credits for Educational Expenses
Tax credit/deduction | 100% eligibility
-the nation’s largest individual tax credit program for educational expenses

2. Iowa Tuition and Textbook Tax Credit
Tax credit/deduction | 100% eligibility

3. Minnesota Education Deduction
Tax credit/deduction | 100% eligibility

4. Ohio Cleveland Scholarship Program
Voucher | 100% eligibility

5. Wisconsin K-12 Private School Tuition Deduction
Tax credit/deduction | 100% eligibility

6. Arizona Original Individual Income Tax Credit Scholarship Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 100% eligibility

7. Arizona "Switcher" Individual Income Tax Credit Scholarship Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 100% eligibility 

8. Colorado Douglas County Choice Scholarship Pilot Program*
Voucher | 95% eligibility 

9. Georgia Qualified Education Expense Tax Credit
Tax-credit scholarship | 94% eligibility 

10. Oklahoma Equal Opportunity Education Scholarships
Tax-credit scholarship| 79% eligibility 

11. New Hampshire Education Tax Credit Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 65% eligibility 

12. Ohio Income-Based Scholarship Program
Voucher | 61% eligibility 

13. Wisconsin Milwaukee Parental Choice Program
Voucher | 58% eligibility 

14. Pennsylvania Educational Improvement Tax Credit Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 56% eligibility 

15. Alabama Education Scholarship Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 55% eligibility 

16. Arizona Low-Income Corporate Income Tax Credit Scholarship Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 52% eligibility 

17. Indiana School Scholarship Tax Credit
Tax-credit scholarship | 50% eligibility 

18. Indiana Choice Scholarship Program
Voucher | 41% eligibility 
-the nation’s largest voucher program

19. Louisiana Scholarship Program
Voucher | 41% eligibility 

20. Louisiana Tuition Donation Rebate Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 41% eligibility 

21. Wisconsin Parental Private School Choice Program (Racine)
Voucher | 39% eligibility 

22. North Carolina Opportunity Scholarships
Voucher | 35% eligibility 

23. Iowa School Tuition Organization Tax Credit
Tax-credit scholarship | 34% eligibility 

24. Virginia Education Improvement Scholarships Tax Credits Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 32% eligibility 

25. Rhode Island Tax Credits for Contributions to Scholarship Organizations 
Tax-credit scholarship | 30% eligibility 

26. D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program
Voucher | 29% eligibility 

27. Florida Tax Credit Scholarship Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 29% eligibility 

28. Arizona Empowerment Scholarship Accounts
ESA | 20% eligibility 
-the nation’s first and largest education savings account program

29. Minnesota K-12 Education Credit
Tax credit/deduction | 18% eligibility 

30. Oklahoma Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarships for Students with Disabilities
Voucher | 15% eligibility 

31. Wisconsin Parental Choice Program (Statewide)
Voucher | 15% eligibility 

32. Louisiana Elementary and Secondary School Tuition Deduction
Tax credit/deduction | 14% eligibility 

33. Kansas Tax Credit for Low Income Students Scholarships**
Tax-credit scholarship | 14% eligibility 

34. Ohio Jon Peterson Special Needs Scholarship Program
Voucher | 14% eligibility 

35. South Carolina Educational Credit for Exceptional Needs Children
Tax-credit scholarship | 13% eligibility 

36. Florida John M. McKay Scholarships for Students with Disabilities Program
Voucher | 13% eligibility 

37. Utah Carson Smith Special Needs Scholarship Program
Voucher | 13% eligibility 

38. Florida Personal Learning Scholarship Account Program
ESA | 12% eligibility 

39. North Carolina Special Education Scholarship Grants for Children with Disabilities
Voucher | 12 % eligibility 

40. Arizona Lexie's Law for Disabled and Displaced Students Tax Credit Scholarship Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 12% eligibility 

41. Georgia Special Needs Scholarship Program
Voucher | 11% eligibility 

42. Indiana Private School/Homeschool Deduction
Tax credit/deduction | 10% eligibility 

43. Pennsylvania Opportunity Scholarship Tax Credit Program
Tax-credit scholarship | 7% eligibility 

44. Louisiana School Choice Program for Certain Students with Exceptionalities
Voucher | 6% eligibility

45. Ohio Educational Choice Scholarship Program
Voucher | 6% eligibility 

46. Alabama Accountability Act of 2013 Parent/Taxpayer Refundable Tax Credits
Tax credit/rebate | 4% eligibility 

47.  Maine Town Tuitioning Program
Voucher | 9% eligibility 

48. Mississippi Nate Rogers Scholarship for Students with Disabilities Program
Voucher | 3% eligibility 

49. Vermont Town Tuitioning Program
Voucher | 3% eligibility 

50. Mississippi Dyslexia Therapy Scholarship for Students with Dyslexia Program
Voucher | 2% eligibility 

51. Ohio Autism Scholarship Program
Voucher | 1% eligibility 

*Program is not currently operating.
**Program is not yet launched.

For a closer look at each program’s eligibility, visit edchoice.org/ABCs.  

 

< More Posts

School superintendent writes ‘warning’ letter on PARCC Common Core test

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/01/26/school-superintendent-writes-warning-letter-on-parcc-common-core-test/

School superintendent writes ‘warning’ letter on PARCC Common Core test

Education Secretary Arne Duncan said  that states can apply for extra time before they use student test scores to judge teachers’ performance. Duncan’s decision acknowledges concerns by teachers’ unions and others that it’s too early to make teacher personnel decisions based on how well students do on new assessments developed under the Common Core standards that will be used in much of the country this school year. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin, File photo)

Superintendent Trisha Kocanda of Winnetka Public Schools in Illinois has written what could be called a “warning” letter to parents, community members and district staff about the PARCC Common Core exam that students in the state will be taking in March and May.  She writes in part:

As we learn more about the assessment, we grow wary. We are concerned about the amount of instructional time it will displace, the impact this will have on students, and the usefulness of the results.

The PARCC test was created by the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, one of two federally funded multistate consortia tasked with creating new Common Core tests with some $360 million in federal funds. (The other is the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium.) In 2010, PARCC had 26 member states, but it has suffered major defections since then, with fewer than a dozen states now committed to using the PARCC exam this year. Mississippi pulled out this month, and Chicago Public Schools, the third-largest system in the country, recently decided to buck a state mandate to give the PARCC to all of its students this school year.

Winnetka, just north of Chicago, is one of the most affluent communities in the country. The Winnetka Public Schools district Web site says that the system has “led the nation in progressive education and served as model for educators who value the development of the whole child.” There are about 2,000 students in the system’s schools, most of whom attend nationally recognized New Trier Township High School.

Kocanda’s letter on PARCC discusses how much instructional time is being lost because of the test, notes that the test will make some students unnecessarily nervous and questions how useful the test will be to teachers and students. Here’s the letter she wrote, which appeared in this month’s edition of the Winnetka Wire, the school district’s monthly newsletter:

Superintendent’s Message

Dear Community Members, Parents, and Staff:

There is no doubt that this is an interesting era in public education. I am hopeful that the pendulum will swing back toward center and bring a more balanced approach to improving equity and accountability for school systems. Illinois is currently struggling to find that balance.

For instance, there has been much chatter recently regarding the new state mandated PARCC standardized assessment. These tests, which are replacing the ISAT, will be administered in our District for the first time in March and again in May. As we learn more about the assessment, we grow wary. We are concerned about the amount of instructional time it will displace, the impact this will have on students, and the usefulness of the results.

Our administrative team has diligently worked to stay up-to-date on the PARCC assessment and is committed to sharing key information with our parents and staff. Below is a summary of key PARCC facts that have prompted many of our concerns:

Testing Time:
The PARCC testing experience will take approximately 13-14 hours for students in grades 3-8. By contrast, the ISAT took no more than seven hours to administer.

Test Format:
The test is computer-based and requires students to manage multiple screens, prompts, and tools while typing their responses in a timed situation. By contrast, STAR, a local assessment tool already in place, is taken online but requires a single response on a single screen. The difference in complexity is vast for students.

Instructional Impact:
1) Because only one test unit will be administered per day, this means students will be taking the test over a two-week time period. This results in a number of interrupted instructional days for our children.
2) Although we will not be teaching new content for the test, students will need to familiarize themselves with the new online testing experience and complexities. We estimate that this introduction to the test will take approximately two to three hours.
3) The test will be completed in the computer labs. Most regularly scheduled classes will not take place in these learning spaces for approximately six weeks this spring.

Testing Stress:
Every student will react to the test in a unique way. We anticipate that the length of the test, the excessive rigor, and the extended change to routine will be uncomfortable for some or many of our students.

Speed of Implementation:
PARCC is being administered statewide after a one-year pilot, and closely on the heels of the Common Core State Standards implementation. Materials, including instructions for proctors, sample questions, and technical requirements, are still being revised. Since the preparation window is relatively short, test logistics have been the primary focus of the tech staff, the administrative team, and building principals since late fall.

We recognize the need for assessments and accountability. District 36 is committed to complying with State mandates, including the PARCC. However, we believe that this test continues the over-emphasis on standardized assessments as evaluation tools for students and schools. Our concerns are not unique. In 2010, 26 states committed to using PARCC. Today only 10 states, including Illinois, remain in the consortium.

It is important that we stay informed and understand the impact of reform on our students. We often share stories about District driven goals and initiatives. I believe it is equally important to shed light on State requirements that influence local decisions and ultimately our students’ experiences.

Sincerely,
Trisha Kocanda
Superintendent

(Correction: A previous version incorrectly said all Winnetka students attend New Trier High School. Most of them do; some go to other schools.)

Parents, Refuse Common Core Tests

https://whatiscommoncore.wordpress.com/2015/01/29/michelle-malkin-parents-refuse-common-core-tests/

Michelle Malkin: 

Parents, Refuse Common Core Tests

By Michelle Malkin

Posted with permission from Michelle Malkin; also published at National Review Online. 

Bureaucrats and big business can’t make you let your kids take their exams.

This is National School Choice Week, but I want to talk about parents’ school choice.  Moms and Dads, you have the inherent right and responsibility to protect your children. You can choose to refuse the top-down Common Core racket of costly standardized tests of dubious academic value, reliability and validity.

Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

I’m reminding you of your right to choose because the spring season of testing tyranny is about to hit the fan. Do you object to the time being taken away from your kids’ classroom learning? Are you alarmed by the intrusive data-sharing and data-mining enabled by assessment-driven special interests? Are you opposed to the usurpation of local control by corporate testing giants and federal lobbyists?

You are not alone, although the testing racketeers are doing everything they can to marginalize you. In Maryland, a mom of a nine-year-old special-needs student is suing her Frederick County school district to assert her parental prerogative. Cindy Rose writes that her school district “says the law requires our children be tested, but could not point to a specific law or regulation” forcing her child to take Common Core–tied tests. Rose’s pre-trial conference is scheduled for February 4.

The vigilant mom warns parents nationwide: “While we are being treated like serfs of the State, Pearson publishing is raking in billions off our children.” And she is not going to just lie down and surrender because some bloviating suits told her “it’s the law.”

Pearson, as I’ve reported extensively, is the multibillion-dollar educational-publishing and educational-testing conglomerate — not to mention a chief corporate sponsor of Jeb Bush’s Fed Ed ventures — that snagged $23 million in contracts to design the first wave of so-called “PARCC” tests.

The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers raked in $186 million through the federal Race to the Top program to develop the nationalized tests “aligned” to the Common Core standards developed in Beltway backrooms.

As more families, administrators, and teachers realized the classroom and cost burdens that the guinea-pig field-testing scheme would impose, they pressured their states to withdraw. Between 2011 and 2014, the number of states actively signed up for PARCC dropped from 24 (plus the District of Columbia) to ten (plus D.C.). Education researcher Mercedes Schneider reports that the remaining ten are Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, New Mexico, Ohio, and Rhode Island.

State legislators and state education boards in Utah, Kansas, Alaska, Iowa, South Carolina, and Alabama have withdrawn from the other federally funded testing consortium, the $180 million tax-subsidized Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, which administered field tests last spring to 3 million students in 23 states.

In New Jersey, the parental opt-out movement is “exploding,” according to activist Jean McTavish. Many superintendents have conceded that “they can’t force a student to take a test,” NJ.com reports.

Last week, Missouri withdrew from PARCC, while parents, administrators, and the school board of the Chicago public schools spurned PARCC in the majority of their 600 schools.

In California, the Pacific Justice Institute offers a privacy-protection opt-out form for parents to submit to school districts at pacificjustice.org. PJI head Brad Dacus advises families to send the notices as certified letters if they get ignored. Then, be prepared to go to court. PJI will help. The Thomas More Law Center in Michigan also offers a student-privacy opt-out form at thomasmore.org.

Don’t let the bureaucratic smokescreens fool you. A federal No Child Left Behind mandate on states to administer assessments is not a mandate on you and your kids to submit to the testing diktats. And the absence of an opt-out law or regulation is not a prohibition on your choice to refuse.

Here in Colorado, the state board of education voted this month to allow districts to opt out of PARCC testing. Parents and activists continue to pressure a state task force — packed with Gates Foundation and edu-tech special-interest-conflicted members — to reduce the testing burden statewide. For those who don’t live in PARCC-waivered districts, it’s important to know your rights and know the spin.

In Colorado Springs, where I have a high-schooler whose district will sacrifice a total of six full academic days for PARCC testing this spring, parents are calling the testing drones’ bluff about losing their accreditation and funding.

“The Colorado Department of Education is threatening schools to ensure that 95 percent of students take these tests,” an El Paso County parents’ watch group reports.

Be assured that MANY parents across Colorado — FAR ABOVE 5 percent in many schools — are refusing the tests, and not one school yet is facing the loss of accreditation, funding, etc. As long as schools can show that they gave a “good faith attempt to get 95 percent to test, they can appeal a loss of accreditation” due to parental refusals to test.

You also have the power to exercise a parental nuclear option: If edu-bullies play hardball and oppose your right to refuse, tell them you’ll have your kid take the test and intentionally answer every question wrong — and that you’ll advise every parent you know to tell their kids to do the same. How’s that for accountability?

Be prepared to push back against threats and ostracism. Find strength in numbers. And always remember: You are your kids’ primary educational provider.

——————-

Thank you, Michelle Malkin.

Utah parents:  SAGE testing is Common Core testing.  End of the year SAGE/A.I.R. tests must (by state mandate) be given by schools, but there’s no law that says students or parents have to sit for them.  In fact, by several laws, parents hold the legal authority and freedom to opt out of these tests and anything that the parent does not feel good about.  I advise us to consider opting out of all SAGE related testing and data collections: mid-year (interim) and the SAGE formative tests that Common Core/SAGE “offers” schools.  Opt out of all of it.  Politely, kindly, firmly.

It is time to take a stand against the cartels and politicians who are using our tax dollars and our legislators to make our children their unpaid and disrespected guinea pigs.  It is time to say, politely, “no way” to these secretive, centrally-managed, unviewable, unpiloted  tests that are pushing experimental and controversial academic standards.

Just say no.  Here’s an opt out form.   Or write your own.  You are the parent.  You are the legal authority.  Remember, the  state recognizes that:

(i) a parent has the right, obligation, responsibility, and authority to raise, manage, train, educate, provide for, and reasonably discipline the parent’s children; and

(ii) the state’s role is secondary and supportive to the primary role of a parent.

Teacher: I see the difference in educational privilege every day. I live it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/01/29/teacher-i-see-the-difference-in-educational-privilege-every-day-i-live-it-i-am-disgusted-by-it/

Teacher: I see the difference in educational privilege every day. I live it. I am disgusted by it.

Children are served lunch at Broad Acres Elementary School on Tuesday, Dec. 18, 2012, in Silver Spring, MD. Of the 708 students at the school during that year, 95 percent qualified for a free or reduced-price lunch because of low family income.  (Photo by Matt McClain for The Washington Post)

Here is a post by a Colorado teacher who vividly explains the difference in the lives of fortunate students and the less fortunate students whom she teaches. Her last post on this blog was a nuanced look into the psyche of some students of color who live in poverty, which you can read here. This public school teacher often blogs anonymously under the name Shakespeare’s Sister at Daily Kos. She teaches 11th grade AP Language and Composition in the Denver area.

Here is Shakespeare’s Sister newest post for this blog:

Recently, events in Ferguson and New York have reminded us there are still two very different Americas. What I wish more people were talking about is that there are two American educations: One for the affluent, and one for students living in poverty.

Many of the reports focus on numbers for free and reduced lunches, which is, some say, a “rough proxy for poverty,” but those labeling it in such a way have probably never set foot in a classroom.

Almost every day, I slip food to one of my students. Both of his parents are in prison. Or, one of his parents is in prison and the other is dead. We can’t quite get the full story from him. He lives with his older sister, whom he refers to as his mother because he doesn’t want to explain anything. Or he doesn’t live with her. He won’t say where he’s staying. We’ve attempted home visits but can never get anyone to answer the door.

A senior from a nearby high school spoke at the Colorado Association for Gifted and Talented’s annual conference in Denver this past October. Poised and polished and wearing a suit, he told the assembled teachers and administrators about how he had recently received a $25,000 grant from a company to allow him to continue to develop a thumbprint-activated gun prototype. He takes a special class in a public school—a scientific discovery class—in which he is allowed time to process through his scientifically based ideas. He works with a special adviser from a corporation that helped him set up his own corporation, and continues to help guide the research and development of his prototype. He admitted openly to taking many days off of school in order to work on his projects. He laughed it off, though, because his teachers make a special exception for him because they know he’s gifted, and they know what he’s working on.

My students take several days off of school also. They do it when they have to care for their brothers or sisters because their parents are working. They do it when they have to work so their family can eat. They do it when their parents are in the hospital receiving emergency medical care. Instead of a special exception, my students will eventually get a date in truancy court.

Another student who spoke at the conference, a fourteen-year-old “Indigenous Environmental Activist,” is “committed to standing up and protecting the Earth, Water, Air, and Atmosphere.” He attends a private school on a full-ride scholarship, and travels around the world—by airplane, I should mention—to perform with other activists, fight for the environment, and encourage other people to do the same. He and his siblings have released an album of rap songs about fighting for the health of the planet. My kids fight for the chance to break the oppressive cycle of poverty.

My student comes to school hungry every day. He wears size XXL shirts to hide what we all know is an emaciated frame. A couple of weeks ago, he used a plastic bag—stretched out to its full length—as a belt. He says he doesn’t get to choose the size of clothes he gets so he has to make do with what he has. He tells me I don’t have to buy him food, but I do anyway, because he needs it. He always takes it.

Why do I do it? Is it because it hurts me to see when my students are hungry, to know that they are wanting? That’s one reason, yes. But another reason I do it is because, deep down, I am ashamed of an educational system that provides such privilege to some students, while willfully and purposefully denying it to others.

I am angry that when I attend a conference for gifted children—which, make no mistake, I do have in my classroom, though they do not have the same opportunities as their more affluent counterparts—I see such a stark difference between the opportunities afforded to students in affluent areas, and the opportunities afforded to students in my classroom.

There has been plenty of talk about privilege lately: the difference in racial privilege, the difference in gender privilege.

There’s a difference in educational privilege, too. I see it every day. I live it. I am disgusted by it.

Where there is money, there is education. Where there isn’t money, there is excessive testing, lack of curricular options, and struggle. There is the struggle to give students the tools they need to fight their way through a system that is designed to hold them back from the moment they take their first breath, from the moment they try to write their first paragraph. As /The Washington Post report states: “A growing number of children start kindergarten already trailing their more privileged peers and rarely, if ever, catch up. They are less likely to have support at home, are less frequently exposed to enriching activities outside of school, and are more likely to drop out and never attend college.” They are, overall, less likely to succeed.

When I was at the conference, I heard confidence in the voices of the two students that spoke; their words were steeped in the self-assuredness of privilege.

Instead of self-assuredness, my teenage students’ voices are already wracked with weariness.

So what do my students need, then? Access to the same funding, opportunities, and “exceptions” afforded to privileged, affluent students.

They need a society and educational system designed to actually meet their needs, instead of a society that passes laws to keep them constantly underfoot and an educational system designed to test them to death and tell them how they are inadequate instead of educating them.

Louisiana school choice program gets kids out of desks, onto true callings

http://m.watchdog.org/?utm_source=hoot&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=ss&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwatchdog.org%2F196214%2Fschool-choice-2%2F%3Futm_source%3Dhoot%26utm_medium%3Dtwitter%26utm_campaign%3Dss#2819

Louisiana school choice program gets kids out of desks, onto true callings

By Chris Butler | Louisiana Watchdog

Baton Rouge resident Courtland Benedict said going to school, traditionally involving students sitting in desks all day, always came hard to him.

Benedict, an 18-year-old high school senior, told Louisiana Watchdog he does better standing up, working with his hands.

In Benedict’s case that means learning about welding.

Courtland Benedict hard at work welding.

Now, a new Louisiana school choice initiative gives him the chance to pursue his true calling.

“Take speech, for an example, my freshman year,” Benedict said. “I’m not the kind of person comfortable standing in front of a classroom and talking to people. I’m not a businessman. I couldn’t do that stuff. But what I’m doing now really fits me.”

The program, under the tutelage of the Pelican Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors, based in Baton Rouge, is well into its second year.

If Benedict, a member of the inaugural class, was born only a year earlier he would have missed this opportunity in high school and said he surely would have felt lost.

“I would probably eventually become a welder, but I wouldn’t be as far as I am in my welding today,” Benedict said.

“I would probably graduate in May and then go into the construction industry as a helper and then work my way up. But now that I’m getting out of school I can make top dollar as a welder. I could have come out of school making $12 an hour and now I’m coming out of school making $36 an hour.”

Matthew Campbell, ABC’s director of workforce development, said high school grads who get an early jump in high school with welding can make a six-figure salary.

“These are four- or five-star jobs which are in the highest demand now. There’s no slowing down in the demand over the next decade,” Campbell said of this particular school choice program.

That’s especially important considering a good portion of Louisiana kids who attend a state college are known to take jobs out-of-state once they graduate.

Matthew Campbell

But that’s not likely to happen with future welders and electricians in the ABC program, Campbell said.

“There are a lot of people who aren’t supposed to be in college who don’t do well their freshmen year. They were pushed there through the school system because that’s the way everything was,” Campbell said. “Now we are seeing a rebuilding of these types of careers because there are more choices.”

A Louisiana Department of Education press release says welding is one of the most popular courses under the Course Choice program.

Contact Christopher Butler at cbutler@watchdog.org   

Follow Louisiana Watchdog and receive regular updates throughand

Like Watchdog.org? Click HERE to get breaking news alerts in YOUR state!

THE END GAME OF ASSESSMENT

Stop Common Core

http://youtu.be/Jc_G5GmigkY

Joe Wilson's Common Core Fight Against Obama Joined by Florida Congressmen

http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/florida-congressmen-join-joe-wilsons-fight-against-obama-common-core

Joe Wilson's Common Core Fight Against Obama Joined by Florida Congressmen

Tom Rooney, Barack Obama, Joe WilsonHide

Conservatives in Congress are launching an effort pushing back against President Barack Obama on Common Core standards with members of the Florida delegation -- including Tom Rooney -- backing the effort.

U.S. Rep. Joe Wilson’s, R-S.C., “Local Control of Education Act” would stop the Obama administration from making states “adopt a specific curriculum, and would void any previous federal requirements established for states that have already adopted Common Core.” The Senate version is being backed by U.S. Sen. David Vitter, R-La.

Around the State

In Columbia, S.C., on Monday, Wilson made his case against Common Core and why his bill was needed.

“The quality of our children’s education is too high a priority to rely on a one-size-fits-all approach,” Wilson said. “What works in New York or California may not work here in South Carolina, and the federal government’s overreach into our state’s school system is unprecedented.

“Over the past several years, the Obama administration has used a combination of education grants and waivers to coerce states into adopting Common Core State Standards, which has increased federal control over our schools’ instructional content, academic standards, and assessments,” Wilson added. “Currently, states that have adopted these standards face losing their waivers should they choose to repeal Common Core – meaning states and the taxpayer dollars they depend on are held at the mercy of bureaucrats in Washington.

“My bill would return control over education to the states by prohibiting the federal government from using grants or waivers to mandate, incentivize, or coerce states into adopting Common Core,” Wilson continued. “For states that have already adopted Common Core, it would ensure that any previous requirements for waivers would be void, and the U.S. secretary of education would be prohibited from requiring states to agree to any new conditions in order to keep their existing waiver.”

Wilson’s bill has drawn more than 30 co-sponsors including three Republican congressmen from Florida: U.S. Reps. Curt Clawson, Ron DeSantis and Tom Rooney.

Rooney explained why he was backing Wilson’s bill on Monday.

“The federal government has no constitutional business setting the curriculum for a teacher in a Florida classroom,” Rooney said. “If states, of their own volition, want to adopt a certain set of standards, then that’s their prerogative. I believe in states’ rights. However, the federal government should not be using carrots and sticks to coerce states into adopting Common Core or any other curriculum passed down from on high in Washington.

“I believe Florida’s teachers, principals and parents know our students and their needs better than any bureaucrat in Washington does, and decisions about education and curriculum need to be made as close to the student and teacher as possible,” Rooney added. “Our bill restores local control over education by prohibiting the federal government from using grants or waivers to coerce, mandate or incentivize states into adopting Common Core or other similar standards.”

Rooney said the Obama administration has used waivers from No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top funds to push states into embracing Common Core.

Reach Kevin Derby at kderby@sunshinestatenews.com or follow him on Twitter: @KevinDerbySSN

Democrats favor school choice in Vermont, nationwide

http://m.watchdog.org/?utm_source=hoot&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=ss&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwatchdog.org%2F195183%2Fschool-choice-democrats%2F%3Futm_source%3Dhoot%26utm_medium%3Dtwitter%26utm_campaign%3Dss#2535

Democrats favor school choice in Vermont, nationwide

      

CIVIL RIGHTS: Kevin Chavous, founding board member and executive counsel for the American Federation for Children, calls education choice “the civil rights issue of the 21st century.”

By Bruce Parker | Vermont Watchdog

A national survey of likely voters has found that nearly 70 percent of Americans support school choice, including a large majority of Democrats.

The results mirror support for the concept in Vermont, the birthplace of school choice.

The survey , conducted this month by Democratic polling firm Beck Research, shows 69 percent of Americans say parents should have the right to use education tax dollars to send their child to the public or private school that best serves their needs. Just 27 percent opposed the idea.

Results show the issue is popular across party lines. According to the survey, 60 percent of Democrats and 67 percent of independents favor school choice. A full 81 percent of Republicans approve the idea.

The findings mirror statewide polling conducted in Vermont in 2009 , which found that 65 percent of Democrats and 62 percent of independents support town tuitioning, Vermont’s 145-year-old school-choice tradition.

Kevin Chavous, executive counsel of the American Federation for Children, hailed the survey as proof “Americans overwhelmingly believe a ZIP code should not dictate a child’s future.”

Chavous, a Democrat, said he witnessed the transformative impact of choice while serving as a Washington, D.C., city councilman.

“During my time on the D.C. council, I faced firsthand the results of our failing to educate all children. Educational choice has become a lifeline for far too many residents here in the District of Columbia who should be getting what they are entitled to with their neighborhood public school but frankly do not,” he said.

“Based on our robust charter school movement, our D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, many predominantly minority children are able to attain the riches of American society and receive the education they deserve.”

Since 1869, Vermont has had school choice. The state’s town tuitioning model originated as a way to educate students in rural areas that lacked a public school.

Today, Vermonters in 93 towns have the option to send their children to the independent school, or nearby public school, of their choice. Parents in these towns receive a tuition voucher averaging $14,055 per student. Approximately 5 percent of K-12 students receive the voucher.

Town tuitioning is a highly efficient system for delivering quality education. Compared to the cost of tuition for independent schools, the per-pupil cost of education in Vermont’s government-run schools will reach $19,752 in 2016 — the highest expense in the nation.

Since Act 60 was passed in 1997, Vermont’s K-12 spending has risen from $780 million to nearly $1.5 billion. During that same time, student enrollment has plummeted from 104,000 students down to about 82,000.

Instead of cutting back education spending to stay in line with the student population, the Legislature has continued to approve education budget increases year after year, sending property taxes soaring.

      

MORE FOR LESS: Head of School Tom Martin says the Village School of North Bennington costs less to operate now that it has made a switch from public to independent.

Based on recent examples, school choice may be the most effective way to cut costs while delivering the high quality of education Vermonters expect.

In 2013, the public elementary school in North Bennington switched to an independent school to participate in the town tuitioning program. Within one year, the school’s budget shrunk from $2.1 million down to about $1.8 million . Head of School Tom Martin said town tuitioning enabled teachers and administrators to offer the same great education, but without the bureaucratic overhead related to state supervisory union services.

Vermont state Rep. Michael Hebert, R-Vernon, a member of a newly organized school choice caucus, said choice is a solution everyone can embrace.

“If you survey the general public, regardless of party affiliation — Democrat, Republican, Progressive, independent — the numbers are in the 60 to 65 percent range. It has nothing to do with party. We here in the Legislature need to recognize that,” Hebert said.

According to Hebert, expanding school choice must become part of the solution to Vermont’s education financing crisis.

“It’s a very important piece of changing how education gets delivered in this state. It’s just another method of delivery.”

However, he added it will take courage and a bipartisan effort to change the status quo.

“We’ve got to be willing to put all options on the table. There can be no sacred cows,” he said.

Chavous said many lawmakers are unwilling to put school choice on the table, due to politics.

“Unfortunately the politics of education has become a major barrier to educational choice. Far too many elected officials run away from the issue because of the pressure put on them by the proverbial status quo environment,” he said.

Even so, Chavous, a black American who calls education choice “the civil rights issue of the 21st century,” said the 2014 election marked a sea change.

“The 2014 midterm elections saw that nearly every pro-school-choice candidate around the country … who campaigned on that issue won. It sends a loud and clear message, particularly to the two largest teachers unions that invested $100 million in those races, only to fall short in the vast majority of them.”

Hebert said lawmakers should give Vermonters what they want.

“This is what our constituents want on a very broad base, and it’s something we have to strive to do. We can’t let political affiliation stand in our way.”

Contact Bruce Parker at bparker@watchdog.org

Episode 51: Psychological Consequences of Common Core

http://www.thegreateducationstruggle.com/51/

Episode 51: Psychological Consequences of Common Core

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

How does Common Core and its associated assessments affect students? It’s a major psychological issue for many. Join this weeks’ guest, Mary Calamia, a licensed psychotherapist who has witnessed first hand the mental burdens placed upon New York students and the results thereof, and the making of the of American government widget maker.

Mary Calamia is a psychotherapist practicing on Long Island. After testifying to the New York State Assembly Forum on Education about the mental health consequences of the Common Core, Mary took on a leadership role in the grassroots fight against the controversial CCSS initiative.

Mary speaks at educational forums and advocates tirelessly with legislators to eliminate Common Core. She is also one of the contributors to the book, Common Ground on the Common Core.

United Nations education initiative mentioned: Education for Sustainable Development (ESD)

Contact Mary at: 631-585-2612.

Watch Mary’s testimony before the Suffolk County Education Forum hosted by the New York State Assembly Minority Education Committee

---

Great way to support the podcast is to check out my book now in paperback and Kindle.

Sent from my iPhone

Washington State Democratic Party Committee Votes to Reject Common Core - Living in Dialogue

http://www.livingindialogue.com/washington-state-democratic-party-committee-vote-rejects-common-core/

Washington State Democratic Party Committee Votes to Reject Common Core - Living in Dialogue

By djournednthony Cody.

The Central Committee of the Washington State Democratic Party has passed a resolution that roundly condemns the Common Core standards. This is the first time a statewide Democratic Party committee has taken a public position against the Common Core, and it happened in the back yard of the Gates Foundation, which has provided the funding that made the national standards project possible. This could signal a sea-change for the beleaguered standards, because up until now, political opposition has been strongest in the Republican party.

More than 200 delegates representing 49 legislative districts, from 29 counties, gathered at the Red Lion Inn in the state capital, Olympia on Saturday, Jan. 24, where there was a showdown between “new Democrats” and a scrappy coalition of education and labor activists. Activists mixed in with the delegates, and carried homemade signs expressing their opposition to the Common Core. They also arrived early and made sure there were flyers on each chair carrying their message.

David Spring is a leader of the Democratic Party for East King County near Seattle. He helped organize for the vote, and says,

This was a huge victory for the children, parents, and teachers of Washington State to have the Washington State Democratic Party – the first Democratic Party in the nation to vote against Common Core. It is our hope that this is the beginning of the end for Bill Gates in the Common Core scam. This was the grassroots – the rank and file of the Democratic Party – who said NO to Common Core. They deserve all the credit, along with you teacher activists.

Senator Marilyn Chase, reached at her home during the legislative session in Olympia, said she supports the resolution. She explained, “I love kids. I don’t like high stakes testing and I don’t like Common Core.” David Spring said her support was of great value. “Marilyn Chase is a leader of the Washington Democratic Party and she represents North Seattle in the Washington State Senate and this was huge to have Marilyn supporting a resolution.”

Seattle area teacher Susan DuFresne describes how teachers organized for the vote:

We got to speak to the members before the meeting convened. We carried our signs around and spoke to members who were on the fence. We also handed out copies of Common Core: Ten Colossal Errors, with “what to do” on the other side. [downloadable here: CommonCoreflyer] This tipped the scales in our favor.

Three delegates spoke in favor of the resolution, and three against. Brian Gunn, state committee man from 31st legislative district and chair of the Progressive Caucus, speaking to the assembly, said,

We have to take into account corporations are looking at our children as commodities. This is a moral issue. We’re allowing corporations that produce these materials and sponsor these tests to treat our children as sources of income. So I think it is very important that we look at that aspect of this, because everything that is part of the commons — things that everyone needs — is looked at to a large extent as a source of profit. And that source of profit is our own children. What is at stake is their education and their opportunity to have a good life — to make a decent standard of living in their future lives.  We have to see that as a moral issue, and not cede that responsibility away from the place where it belongs, which is hopefully our state schools and our state teachers — and allow THEM to make the choices about what the standards should be (applause).

When the vote was taken, roughly two thirds of the delegates voted in favor of Resolution 707.

Update, Jan. 25, 2015: Some of those who made this happen have posted a useful article entitled “How to get your State Democratic Party Committee to Oppose Common Core.”

Below is the text of the resolution that was passed, in its entirety.

Resolution Opposing Common Core State Standards

WHEREAS the copyrighted (and therefore unchangeable) Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are a set of controversial top-down K-12 academic standards that were promulgated by wealthy private interests without research-based evidence of validity and are developmentally inappropriate in the lowest grades; and

WHEREAS, as a means of avoiding the U.S. Constitution’s 10th Amendment prohibition against federal meddling in state education policy, two unaccountable private trade associations–the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO)–have received millions of dollars in funding from the Gates Foundation and others to create the CCSS; and

WHEREAS the U.S. Department of Education improperly pressured state legislatures into adopting the Common Core State Standards and high-stakes standardized testing based on them as a condition of competing for federal Race to the Top (RTTT) stimulus funds that should have been based on need; and

WHEREAS as a result of Washington State Senate Bill 6669, which passed the State legislature on March 11, 2010, the Office of the Superintendent of Instruction (OSPI) adopted Common Core State Standards (CCSS) on July 20, 2011; and

WHEREAS this adoption effectively transfers control over public school standardized testing from locally elected school boards to the unaccountable corporate interests that control the CCSS and who stand to profit substantially; and

WHEREAS the Washington State Constitution also calls for public education to be controlled by the State of Washington through our elected State legislature, our elected State Superintendent of Public Instruction and our elected local school boards; and

WHEREAS implementation of CCSS will cost local school districts hundreds of millions of dollars to pay for standardized computer-based tests, new technology, new curricula and teacher training at a time when Washington is already insufficiently funding K-12 Basic Education without proven benefit to students; and WHEREAS some states have already withdrawn from CCSS;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we call upon the Washington State legislature and the Superintendent of Public Instruction to withdraw from the CCSS and keep K-12 education student-centered and accountable to the people of Washington State.

Submitted by Sarajane Siegfriedt, Resolutions Chair.

 What do you think of this resolution in the state of Washington?

Featured photo by Keitha Bryson.

HSLDA: Common Core Issues

http://www.hslda.org/commoncore/

HSLDA: Common Core Issues

Common Core proponents offer upbeat descriptions of utopian educational goals along with detailed practical lists of what students should know and be able to do in grades K–12 in mathematics and English language arts. But those goals and standards are just two facets of the conglomeration of federal funding, preschool–workforce invasive student tracking, and one-size-fits-all computer-based learning that has become the Common Core.

We’ve taken a closer look at how the Common Core got started, who’s behind it, and what it will mean to homeschoolers:

• FAQs: Everything you need to know about the Common Core at a glance! >>
• Timeline: Where did the Common Core come from? >>
• Glossary: Who are the major players & what do those abbreviations mean? >>
• Analysis: For those who want more—our in-depth research behind the FAQs. >>
• Get involved: How you can make a difference! >>
• Recommended resources: For those who would like even more information. >>

Years of federal spending have proven that centralized education does not work. The only way to give students a better education is to return control to parents and local schools!

What is the status of Common Core in my state?

  Click to choose state  Alabama  Alaska  Arizona  Arkansas  California  Colorado  Connecticut  Delaware  District of Columbia  Florida  Georgia  Hawaii  Idaho  Illinois  Indiana  Iowa  Kansas  Kentucky  Louisiana  Maine  Maryland  Massachusetts  Michigan  Minnesota  Mississippi  Missouri  Montana  Nebraska  Nevada  New Hampshire  New Jersey  New Mexico  New York  North Carolina  North Dakota  Ohio  Oklahoma  Oregon  Pennsylvania  Rhode Island  South Carolina  South Dakota  Tennessee  Texas  Utah  Vermont  Virginia  Washington  West Virginia  Wisconsin  Wyoming 

Sent from my iPhone

Teacher: Common Core tests set kids up to fail

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2015/01/22/teacher-on-common-core-testing-i-am-a-broken-woman/

Teacher: Common Core tests set kids up to fail

Jennifer Rickert is a sixth-grade teacher who has worked for 22 years in the Ichabod Crane Central School District in New York State. She just gave a powerful, detailed speech to her Board of Education about her objections to the state’s English Language Arts Common Core test and her decision not to administer it this spring.

New York is part of a multi-state consortium known as the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Career, which is auditioning its newly designed Common Core tests this school year. But New York education officials were so eager to start testing students on the Common Core State Standards that it didn’t wait for the consortium to finish its work but paid millions of dollars to Pearson to design Core-aligned tests, which were first given to students in 2013. Problems with the content and administration of the exam led thousands of parents to opt their children out of the test in 2014.

Now teachers, at the risk of losing their jobs, are speaking up, saying why they have decided not to administer it.

This week, Rickert gave some detailed testimony about problems with the test being given to 11- and 12-year-olds, and concluded it by saying:

“I have the greatest job.  I am a teacher.  I, today, am standing up for my students.  Finally.”

Here is the video (done by Mert Melfa) and beneath that is the text of her speech:

Here is Jennifer Rickert’s testimony:

​I have the greatest job on earth. I’m a teacher.  This year, I began my 22^nd year at the Ichabod Crane Central School District, where I have taught Grades 2, 5, and 6.  I love my students and I am very passionate about teaching.  I also stay involved with educational shifts and new strategies.  I try to exemplify this in the leadership roles I assume as Grade Level Chair, English/Language Arts Liaison, and Middle School Student Mentoring Coordinator.  I have always thought of myself as somewhat “old-school” because I respect the chain of command, respect my elders, and consider myself patriotic.  I am a rule follower.

For these reasons, I have complied enthusiastically with the implementation of the Common Core Learning Standards and all of the instructional shifts, professional development, and student testing required due to the adoption of the CCLS.  Instrumental in our school district’s adoption of a CCLS aligned English/Language Arts program, I have stayed the course, attempting to reach the lofty goals set forth for our students.  I have facilitated professional development and department meetings, reassuring my department that “it will all work out if we keep moving forward.”  I have told parent upon parent that “the testing is only one measure of your child’s success,” and “we are seeing some gaps, but let’s keep trying.”

Over the last few years, I have seen many parents cry about their child’s New York State test scores, and I have seen students cry because they can’t complete the tests.  I began to question the validity of the assessments as they became more and more daunting for my students, but I believed that if I continued to incorporate the Common Core Learning Standards and provide the highest quality instruction, my students would be evaluated fairly.  During this period, I kept the faith in our great state of New York and our educational leaders, hoping that there would be a fair resolution for the children.

Optimistically, I thought that if I remained professional, continuing to comply with the mandates, eventually things would change.  So, I remained quiet.

​Today, I am a broken woman.

I read the “New York State Testing Program’s Educator Guide to the 2015 Grade 6 Common Core English Language Arts Test,” and I sobbed.  I am so disturbed by the descriptions of the test in this guide that I find myself in deep moral conflict regarding the administration of the 2015 Common Core English Language Arts Test to my students.

My students are 11- and 12-years-old.  They are at the cognitive level that Jean Piaget, revered cognitive theorist, characterized as “concrete-operational,” meaning they can think logically about concrete events but have difficulty understanding abstract or hypothetical situations.  Yet in the guide, it states that students will “evaluate intricate arguments.”

In addition, “students will need to make hard choices between fully correct and plausible, but incorrect answers that are designed specifically to determine whether students have comprehended the entire passage.”  This is not developmentally appropriate for my students, and I find it cruel and harmful to suggest that it is.  I do not believe in knowingly setting my students up for failure.  I cannot remain silent for one more day without speaking up for my students.

​The reading passages on the 2015 Common Core test will be “authentic passages.”  Well, that sounds great until you consider  11-year-old reading passages from texts like “A Tree Grows in Brooklyn” and “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer,” which include “controversial ideas and language some may find provocative.”  This is not okay with me.  The students I work with every day are still children.  It is not my business to subject them to “provocative language” in sixth grade.   In addition, 11-year-old children do not have the capacity to understand these themes.  They do not have a context for these time periods in history until they have had more exposure to New York State and United States history.  The majority of students do not receive this exposure until they are in Grades 7 and 8.

The guide also indicates that students will be reading difficulty levels, or Lexiles, as high as 1185, which is the level eleventh-grade students are required to understand.  When children read, if the difficulty level significantly exceeds their instructional level, the lack of fluency causes a dramatic breakdown in comprehension.

Clearly, this is a set-up for the kids to fail.  As students learn, they make sense out of new information through schema.  Schemata are cognitive frameworks to which they can add to, or modify, as they learn new information.  One could compare the requirement for children to understand these passages to expecting them to master algebra before establishing number sense; there is no foundation to build knowledge upon.

If a student has no context, they are not likely to comprehend the text at the deep level required to distinguish fully correct answers from plausible, but incorrect answers.  In addition to these inappropriate, unfamiliar concepts and time periods, students will be expected to sift through authors’ use of “intentionally incorrect grammar and/or spelling” and “passages drawn from works commonly taught in higher grades.”  Finally, in the guide it states that “Students will be required to negotiate plausible, text-based distractors.  A distractor is an incorrect response that may appear plausible.”

In summary, we are going to ask 11-year-olds to read and comprehend passages that are taken from higher grades, some at 5 years above their level, with controversial and provocative language, based on abstract literature and historical documents that the students have not learned about yet, and choose an answer from several plausible choices?  We are going to have our students spend nine hours of seat time, allowing extra time for our Special Education students, on these inappropriate tests? (Add another nine hours for math.)

And after all is said and done, we will reduce each child to a number: 4, 3, 2, or 1, based on their performance, providing the teachers and parents with little to no information about what they can and cannot do?

No.  No, I cannot.

With all due respect to my students, their parents, my administration, and Board of Education, I must go on record as strongly objecting to this test.  I respectfully request reassignment on the dates of the 2015 Common Core ELA Assessment.

As I said, I have the greatest job.  I am a teacher.  I, today, am standing up for my students.  Finally.

Jennifer Rickert

1/21/15

–
You may also be interested in:

A ridiculous Common Core test for first graders

A disturbing look at Common Core tests in New York

What new Common Core test scores really show

Huckabee: Common core is dead, but common sense shouldn't be

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/huckabee/transcript/huckabee-common-core-dead-common-sense-shouldn039t-be

Huckabee: Common core is dead, but common sense shouldn't be

Published December 07, 2013 | Huckabee | Mike Huckabee

I'm going to give you a sampling of some things that people have posted on my Facebook page lately --

Quote -- "I hear you support Common Core education standards -- I'll never watch your show again."

Another said -- quote -- "If you support Common Core, you've lost my trust."

Or here's another one -- quote -- "You need to learn the truth about Common Core."

Well, I guess the person who said that he'd never watch my show again isn't going to hear this and that's too bad.

I want to cut right to the chase -- I don't support what Common Core has become in many states or school districts. Look, I'm dead set against the federal government creating a uniform curriculum for any subject. I oppose the collection of personal data on students that would identify them and track them and any effort to give that personal information to the federal government. I am steadfast in my belief that parents should ultimately decide the best venue for their children's education, whether public schools, private schools, religious schools or homeschools.

I believe education is a local or state function -- not a federal one.

Sadly, the very label Common Core has come to be associated with things I detest, like agenda driven curriculum that indoctrinates instead of educates.

I'm convinced that the term Common Core needs to disappear from the lexicon of education policy. It's a toxic term because it's come to mean things that most of us can't stomach, like top-down federal intrusion into the local schools where you live.

But Common Core as it was designed had nothing to do with the federal government. It was conceived and controlled by elected governors and state school chiefs to keep the federal hands from interfering.

It only dealt with two subjects -- math and English; and in those two subjects, established only state-initiated standards in those subjects, and intentionally didn't write or even suggest curriculum.

It set voluntary goals -- voluntary goals that were controlled by local school boards.

Unfortunately, the locally controlled and very simple creation of standards in math and English, created so that students would be measured by comparable standards, regardless of geography -- well, that has been hijacked by those who took the label Common Core and applied it to curriculum, subjects other than math and English, and even unrelated things as personal data collection.

As a result, Common Core as a brand is dead and hopefully the perversions of it will die as well. Now what I hope does not die is setting higher standards for students, keeping score to see just how well they are doing, and then having accountability for the results.

Educational bureaucrats have long fought against honest assessments and sometimes fought against accountability, often being satisfied with underperforming students who were far behind their peers in other states or other countries.

The Wall Street Journal reported this week that schools in the U.S. were performing below those in Vietnam, Lithuania, Russia, and Hungary; that our 15-year-olds haven't seen improvement in over a decade compared to other nations. Now, for those who think I embrace Common Core, I don't embrace or even want to tolerate what it's come to mean in too many locations. Yes, it's been hijacked, and I don't support the hijackers or the destination, but I don't blame the airplane for getting hijacked.

I just hope that we aren't willing to accept mediocrity as a standard. Let's kill the name Common Core and all the nonsense that's been tacked on to it.

But let's insist that if we continue to spend the most money in education, that we demand that the end result is achievement.

See, I think every governor should take the wheel and then steer his or her state to adopt strict and rigorous standards. I suggest doing what Gov. Terry Branstad did in Iowa -- recraft it into a state specific initiative. Keep it simple; name it whatever you want to. Don't let anyone corrupt the goals by adding things that aren't part of the goals.

Common Core is dead, but common sense shouldn't be.

THE FRUIT IF A NATION THAT FORGETS GOD

Great video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2XoiasV6hU

Science Says Your Classroom Needs More Dance Parties

http://teacherpop.org/2015/01/science-says-your-classroom-needs-more-dance-parties/

Science Says Your Classroom Needs More Dance Parties

Perhaps it’s the Ron Clark in me that loved a good classroom dance party during my time as a teacher and TFA corps member. On a bad day, happy day, or any day really, there was something therapeutic (for my students and for me!) about blasting the Kidz Bop version of some popular rap song and busting a move. Some of my happiest memories with my students are the moments we spent dancing…on our chairs, around the cafeteria, and occasionally, past the principal’s office.

Dance parties were a big part of my classroom for a laundry list of reasons. They served as a powerful incentive for my students—and a free one, at that! They breathed life into my ELA block on rainy days. They improved my classroom culture. I could go on and on, but it wasn’t until after my time in the classroom that I discovered the science behind why my students seemed so much more engaged after we got our hearts pumping.

Dr. Laura Chaddock-Heyman, research scientist at the University of Illinois-Champaign, specializes in how exercise and fitness relate to the developing brains of children. Her research is ground-breaking because in addition to looking at the academic performance and cognitive ability of children, she has used functional MRI (fMRI) to look at how physical activity changes the structure, communication, and neural functions of kids’ brains.

According to Chaddock-Heyman’s research, physical activity actually causes the brain to light up differently when looking at fit vs. unfit kids. As a once-educator, I find her research astounding. Little did I know that all of those Kidz Bop dance parties were actually causing my students’ brains to function more efficiently, leading to improvements in focus, cognitive control, and performance.

Laura’s research is extensive, but here are three highlights from her studies that prove your classroom needs more dance parties:

1. Brain structure. Higher fit children have larger brain volumes in the hippocampus and basal ganglia, which relate to superior performance on tasks of memory and cognitive control, compared to their lower fit peers.
2. Structural integrity. Higher fit children show greater white matter structural integrity, which is associated with faster and more efficient communication of signals throughout the brain.
3. Brain function. The brain scans of fit vs. unfit kids show differences in brain activation during activities requiring concentration. The scans showed how the brain “lights up” differently while more active children performed the same activities as less active children.

So why not increase physical activity inside of our schools, inside of our classrooms? This research makes the case to fight for recess, P.E., and in-classroom physical activity breaks (AKA brain breaks).

To learn more about Dr. Chaddock-Heyman’s research, check out the Neuroscience for Teachers series on the GoNoodle blog. And whether you’re the dance party type or not, check out GoNoodle for a wide variety of brain breaks that make it simple for elementary teachers to bring more movement (and more brain power) to the classroom in five minutes or less. Sign up for free at GoNoodle.com.

State ed board tweaks Common Core. Will critics be satisfied?

http://getschooled.blog.ajc.com/2015/01/15/todays-state-board-tweaks-to-common-core-will-they-end-criticisms/

State ed board tweaks Common Core. Will critics be satisfied?

In an effort to preserve the Common Core State Standards in Georgia and appease critics, the state Board of Education approved changes today that reflect input gathered at a series of public hearings around the state over the last few months.

Minor changes were made to the language arts and math standards, the only Common Core Standards in place in Georgia

Most of the revisions are in math and clarify language and sequence. As the AJC reported:

There are a few additions and some rearranging of standards in the proposed revisions, but mostly the changes clean up language and terminology. For example, in analytic geometry, the standard “prove that all circles are similar” is changed to “understand that all circles are similar.”

Georgia adopted Common Core in 2010 with little fanfare. Somehow, Common Core became an explosive political issue last year. Many critics admitted they hadn’t read the standards but opposed them on principle because they represented a federal initiative and intrusion.

Critics were not persuaded by repeated declarations the standards originated with the nation’s governors, including Sonny Perdue of Georgia who co-chaired the effort.

Neither were opponents assuaged when a majority of Georgia teachers said in surveys they supported Common Core

Contrary to what opponents said at public hearings, most teachers surveyed didn’t find the standards confusing and felt they would improve student learning. (Which ought to be our No. 1 concern, but somehow hardly seems to matter in debates at the Legislature where scoring political points is the success metric.)

What I find most interesting about the disdain for the feds having any presence in education is that the federal government plays a leading role in medical research and advancement.

Would any sane person argue Georgia should eschew medical innovations or cancer treatments developed via the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Defense, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, the Department of Health and Human Services or the Food and Drug Administration?

No. Because Georgians would not tolerate people outside of the medical profession substituting their uninformed judgments for those of doctors and health care researchers. And we all want the most effective medical treatments when our kids or parents are ill.

Yet, we give credence to the indictment of education standards by people outside the field who just don’t like them because they believe – incorrectly – the U.S. Department of Education had a hand in crafting them.

And we wonder why meaningful education reform is so hard to achieve here in Georgia.

Here is the official release from DOE:

The State Board of Education has approved revisions to the Common Core Georgia Performance Standards (CCGPS) in English language arts and math. Those standards were posted for a 60-day public comment period on November 12.

“We have taken care to hear the concerns of educators, parents, and other stakeholders, and to make changes on the basis of that feedback,” State Board Chair Helen Rice said. “These revisions ensure that our standards are responsive to the needs of Georgia students and educators.”

The standards were revised based on a formal review and evaluation process, as directed by an executive order from Governor Nathan Deal. That process included several survey opportunities, along with legislative and state Board of Education listening sessions. Finally, the public was invited to comment on the proposed revisions for 60 days following their proposal by the State Board.

“I am committed to ensuring the very best standards for our students, and the Governor and State Board of Education share that goal,” State School Superintendent Richard Woods said. “The proposed revisions are a step in that direction. However, we must retain the authority to make changes to the standards, which we will do when educators tell us changes are necessary.”

As part of the review process, survey feedback was collected and analyzed by the University System of Georgia. A working committee representing Georgia public school teachers, post-secondary staff, parents, and instructional leaders made revisions to the standards based on public feedback and recommendations from survey results for standards with less than 90 percent approval. ELA and Mathematics Advisory Committees then reviewed the recommended changes and provided additional suggestions based on public feedback. Members of the public were then invited to comment on the proposed revisions for 60 days.

Note: Some survey respondents, as well as the Academic Review Committee, felt that certain standards needed to also be emphasized in the teacher guidance documents developed by the Department of Education for each grade/course and subject. Some of the recommendations to be emphasized in Guidance and Professional Learning include: phonics instruction; cursive writing; literature and informational text; traditional computing methods; and the memorization of addition, subtraction, and multiplication facts.

See More Posts

Gov. Deal names Education Reform Commission members

http://getschooled.blog.ajc.com/2015/01/21/gov-deal-names-education-reform-commission-members-a-notable-bunch/

Gov. Deal names Education Reform Commission members. A notable bunch.

From the Governor’s Office today:

Gov. Nathan Deal, shown here at his recent 2015 Inaugural Gala, has chosen his Education Reform Commission members. (Curtis Compton/ccompton@ajc.com)

Gov. Nathan Deal today named the individuals who will serve on the Education Reform Commission that he announced during his State of the State address.

The commission will study the state’s education system, including its funding formula, and provide recommendations intended to improve the system, increase access to early learning programs, recruit and retain high-quality instructors and expand school options for Georgia’s families.

“My vision for K-12 education in Georgia is a system driven by student need that provides local school and district leaders with real control and flexibility,” said Deal.

“With this commission now in place, it is my hope that we will work together to make education more accessible and effective in preparing our state’s students for the rigors of college and the workforce. Georgia families depend on our classrooms, and now it’s time we take the responsibility in full to provide the high-quality, technologically advanced education they so deserve. I fully anticipate this commission will help bring my vision to reality and I’m grateful for the members’ willingness to serve.”

The commission will convene throughout the year to comprehensively review the state’s education system and QBE funding formula in order to provide recommendations on possible executive, legislative and agency fixes.

The recommendations will be sent to Deal by Aug. 1 of this year, with some going into effect as early as the 2016-2017 school year. Chuck Knapp, former president of the University of Georgia, will chair both the commission and the subcommittee on funding reform.

Commission members are listed below:

Name

Madelyn Adams,  Director of Community Benefit, Kaiser Permanente of Georgia

Matt Arthur, Deputy Commissioner, Technical College System of Georgia

Robert Avossa, Superintendent, Fulton County Schools

Greg Beadles, Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative and Financial Officer AMB Sports and Entertainment

Brad Bryant, Director, REACH Scholarship program

Brooks Coleman, Chairman, House Education Committee, Georgia General Assembly

Tom Dickson, Chairman, House Education Appropriations Subcommittee, Georgia General Assembly

Mike Dudgeon, State Representative, Georgia General Assembly

Kent Edwards, Superintendent, Carrolton City Schools

Terry England,  Chairman, House Appropriations Committee, Georgia General Assembly

Tina Fernandez, Partner, Bellweather Education Partners

Mike Glanton, State Representative, Georgia General Assembly

Barbara Hampton, Sixth Congressional District Member, State Board of Education

Tyler Harper, Chairman, Senate Public Safety Committee, Georgia General Assembly

Hannah Heck,  Attorney, Vice Chair and Founding Board Member Westside Atlanta Charter School

Jack Hill, Chairman, Senate Appropriations Committee, Georgia General Assembly

Kylie Holley, Principal/Superintendent, Pataula Charter Academy

Bonnie Holliday, Executive Director,, Georgia Charter Schools Commission

Amy Jacobs, Commissioner, Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning

Audrey King, South Region External Affairs Manager, Georgia Power Company

Cynthia Kuhlman, Director of Educational Achievement, Cousins Family Foundation, Inc.

Fran Millar, Chairman, Senate Higher Education Committee,  Georgia General Assembly

Nels Peterson, Vice Chancellor for Legal Affairs, University System of Georgia

Hunter Pierson, Vice Chairman, New Schools New Orleans, co-founder of Young Professionals for Education Equity

Noris Price, Superintendent, Baldwin County Schools

Elizabeth Rhodes Retired Teacher, Educators First

Will Schofield, Superintendent, Hall County Schools

Freddie Powell Simms, State Senator, Georgia General Assembly

Lindsey Tippins, Chairman, Senate Education and Youth Committee, Georgia General Assembly

Anthony Townsend, Principal, Locust Grove Middle School, Henry County

Alvin Wilbanks, Superintendent, Gwinnett County Schools

Pam Williams,  2011 Georgia Teacher of the Year, Appling County High School

Dick Yarborough, Columnist, retired BellSouth Corporation executive, managing director of the Atlanta Committee for the Olympic Games

See More Posts

Common Core Need Not Apply At Shimer College

http://www.thegreateducationstruggle.com/50/?cb=015829027933068573

Episode 50: Common Core Need Not Apply At Shimer College

---

Are you looking for a college that doesn’t use the Common Core aligned SAT or ACT as part of their entrance requirements? Well then you will want to listen to this week’s conversation with James Bowers, Admission Director of Shimer College for they do not care what Common Core architect David Colman thinks.

James Bowers grew up in the mountains of East Tennessee. He earned his BA from Duke University, worked in professional school admission for Duke, and then earned a law degree from Duke as well. After spending almost a decade in New York City practicing law, he decided to return to working with students.

Shimer College
Located minutes from the Loop in Chicago, Shimer College is an independent, four-year liberal arts college that enrolls approximately 150 students. Founded in 1853 as the Mount Carroll Seminary, Shimer today provides a comprehensive, regularly-reviewed core curriculum that brings foundational books of the liberal arts to bear on the pressing problems of our time. Shimer College is committed to a primary-source, textbook-free curriculum, seminars of twelve or fewer students, and an ethos of community and service within a diverse group of students, teachers, scholars, and staff.

Email James: j.bowers@shimer.edu
Phone: 312-235-3543

Article mentioned in the program: Shimer College Doesn’t Give a ***** About what David Coleman Thinks?