Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Education Elite Doubles Down on Common Core

Education Elite Doubles Down on Common Core

May 27, 2016, 11:30 am

Even the left is growing alarmed at a growing achievement gap.

We reported a while back on the growing “achievement gap” between black and white students in Kentucky, which was the first state to hop on board the Common Core Express and therefore the bellwether for the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of the national standards. Now even the Hechinger Report, a propaganda outlet known best for its pro-Common Core exposés and its funding by foundations that embrace Common Core and all things progressive, has noticed the problem in Kentucky. Not surprisingly, Hechinger draws different conclusions — or at least avoids asking the obvious questions.

The results of the 2014-2015 Kentucky testing, Hechinger reports, showed that in the elementary grades, black students lagged behind whites by 25 percentage points in reading proficiency and by 21 percentage points in math. And as Hechinger noted, those gaps have widened since the implementation of Common Core five years ago. Something’s wrong.

But don’t expect Hechinger to challenge the sacred cows of progressive education. It repeats without question the debunked Common Core talking points that the standards have “ramped up academic expectations,” that they are “tougher,” that they require a “deeper level of inquiry.” It quotes approvingly the Kentucky educators who say minority students are especially challenged by these supposedly tougher standards because they more likely come from less privileged backgrounds and so start the academic race behind their white peers. These are the reasons, say the educrats quoted by Hechinger, that black students aren’t keeping up.

So what does the Kentucky education establishment plan to do about it? According to Hechinger, exactly what one would expect them to do when their treasured experiment isn’t working — double down. They will give minority students “extra attention.” They’ll implement programs to “help teachers become more sensitive and culturally attuned to the level of diversity in their classrooms.” With the assistance of private funding, they’ll invest in “kindergarten preparedness.” They’ll pull black kids out of the regular class for more drilling with Common Core methodology.

Regarding this latter point, Hechinger focuses on problems that black students may have with Common Core math. And some of the statements it either makes or repeats about the now-notorious math standards are almost laughable.

Hechinger solemnly reports that the Common Core math standards focus on “cutting out the fluff that bogged down old standards in many states, and focusing instead on learning concepts in a progression that will teach kids what they need to know to master algebra in high school.” Thousands of irate parents might suggest that if Common Core’s requirement that students work math problems with rectangles and lattices isn’t “fluff,” then they don’t know what is. And as for students’ learning algebra in high school, note that high-achieving countries have kids learning algebra in middle school rather than waiting until high school.

The standards were “also intended to add a deeper level of inquiry to math class: making the ability to describe how you arrived at a solution as important as memorizing facts. Teachers are supposed to make children partners in the acquisition of knowledge, helping them to see that math isn’t only — or even mainly — about right answers, it’s about exploration and discovery, and the sort of critical thinking and problem-solving they’ll do in college someday.” This, supposedly, is what makes the math standards “tougher.”

But it apparently never occurs to the “experts” cited by Hechinger that all this “deeper level of inquiry” and “discovery math” nonsense is wrong-headed from the beginning — that this pedagogy actually obstructs students’ development of long-term working memory that would enable the “deeper learning” the experts claim to want.

And as we pointed out in our last piece, Common Core’s progressive pedagogy is especially harmful to disadvantaged students, who start out with less of the academic and cultural resources that form the foundation without which “discovery learning” is dead in the water. This was proven by Project Follow Through, the most extensive government education study in history, which followed 79,000 Head Start participants for years and discovered that they achieved much more, academically, with direct instruction rather than Common Core-type discovery learning.

Another factor that harms disadvantaged students vis-à-vis their wealthier classmates is that, as we’ve shown repeatedly, Common Core math locks students into a slowed-down progression that will leave them unprepared for higher education. Middle- or upper-class families can work around this problem by paying for tutors or supplemental courses. Disadvantaged kids are stuck. The result? An expanding achievement gap.

Until the media and the education establishment, in Kentucky and across the country, begin to examine their pedagogical holy writ and ask some hard questions, public education will continue to decline. And minority kids will continue to suffer the most.

U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan in Louisville in 2015/Flickr-Creative Commons


 



Sent from my iPhone

COMMON CORE: YOUR CHILD IS BEING TAUGHT TO BE AN OBEDIENT GLOBALIST

COMMON CORE: YOUR CHILD IS BEING TAUGHT TO BE AN OBEDIENT GLOBALIST

Commands-of-the-government-1024x6491

“And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” Ephesians 5:11 (KJV)

By now, most people have heard of “Common Core.” Many students and families have been negatively impacted by this so-called “National Education Initiative.” Kids who were  A and B students before Common Core was implemented in their schools, are now struggling and their grades falling.

This has hit our family personally. Our grandson who is 15, and very smart, has been struggling with the new curriculum since it came out. He was an honor roll student up to that point, and has been talking to me for a couple of years about his frustrations. Today, while speaking with my grandson, he told me that it’s all over social media about Common Core.

I have researched Common Core, and my findings, though shocking and despicable, should not really surprise those of us who know what is happening in this incredibly evil world. And as many of my articles have shown, this too is traced back to the United Nations.

“The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, that there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good.” Psalm 36:1-3 (KJV)

THINGS PARENTS HATE ABOUT COMMON CORE

The senseless infuriating Math. See video on how to add 9 +6:

The Lies

“The American Enterprise Institute’s Rick Hess recently wrote about Common Core’s “half-truths,” which Greg Forster pointedly demonstrated he should have called “lies.” These include talking points essential to selling governors and other state leaders on the project, such as that Common Core is: “internationally benchmarked” (“well, we sorta looked at what other nations do but that didn’t necessarily change anything we did”); “evidence based” (“we know there is not enough research to undergird any standards, so we just polled some people and that’s our evidence“); “college- and career-ready” (“only if you mean community-college ready“); “rigorous” (as long as rigorous indicates “rigid”); and “high-performing nations nationalize education” (so do low-performing nations).”

Obliterating Parent Rights

“Common Core has revealed the contempt public “servants” have for the people they are supposedly ruled by—that’d be you and me. Indiana firebrand Heather Crossin, a mom whose encounter with Common Core math turned her into a nationally known activist, went with other parents to their private-school principal in an attempt to get their school’s new Common Core textbooks replaced.”

Watch Video:

Dirty Reading Assignments

“A red-haired mother of four kids read to our Indiana legislature selections from a Common Core-recommended book called “The Bluest Eyes,” by Toni Morrison. I’m a grown, married woman who enjoys sex just fine, thank you, but I sincerely wish I hadn’t heard her read those passages. I guess some people don’t find sympathetically portrayed rape scenes offensive, but I do. So I won’t quote them at you. If you have a perv-wish, Google will fill you in. Other objectionable books on the Common Core-recommended list include “Make Lemonade” by Virginia Euwer Wolff, “Black Swan Green” by David Mitchell, and “Dreaming in Cuban” by Cristina Garcia.”

Distancing Parents and Children

“A recent study found that the Common Core model of education results in parents who are less engaged in their kids’ education and express more negative attitudes about schools and government. Does it need to be noted that kids desperately need their pre-existing, natural bond with their parents to get a good start in life, and anything that attacks this is bad for both the kids and society?” [1] – source

Much of the findings about Common Core in this article, come from a very gifted and faithful journalist, Alex Newman of newamerican.com. The title of his piece is:

“UN, Obama, and Gates Are Globalizing Education Via Common Core”

“For over a year now, Americans have been up in arms over the Obama administration’s unconstitutional efforts to bribe and bludgeon state governments into surrendering control over K-12 education through the controversial so-called “Common Core” national standards — and the outrage is still growing. A peek beneath the surface, however, reveals that the nationalization of American schools is actually just one component of a much broader global agenda being pushed by the Obama administration, the United Nations, Bill Gates, and others: the globalization of education.”

In fact, just this week, an invitation-only conference hosted by former Florida Governor and pro-Common Core ringleader Jeb Bush entitled “Globalization of Higher Education” took place in Texas. Among the attendees: Hillary Clinton, U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan, former World Bank President Robert Zoellick, UNESCO officials, university presidents, and more. While higher education appears to be the next target of reformers, the globalization of K-12 schooling is on the verge of completion — at least if the American people do not rise up and stop it.” [2] – source

Are you surprised that Jeb Bush is promoting Common Core at every turn? I’m certainly not. I believe that he is following in the footsteps of his father, as an eager participant in ushering in the New World Order. Do NOT let this man fool you.

The globalists at the UN have been very busy, openly plotting to impose what many call the “World Core Curriculum” and at the same time, eugenicists are working to drastically reduce the world’s population. Don’t you find it interesting that these globalists, and their plans for our world, are not exposed by the National news media? I think it’s time for those of us who do care about these NWO initiatives, to state the truth – that the people who report the news are TOLD what to say. They are given the narrative, and commanded to stick to it.

We hear people say that George Soros controls the news. That is not here say – it’s TRUTH! The billionaires DO control what is divulged to the public. The useful idiots are there to do the bidding for those who own them. If you are not using the Internet, and credible websites to get the REAL news — you are deluded.

COMMON CORE WAS PUT IN PLACE FOR KIDS TO FAIL

That’s a pretty strong statement, right? I will prove this to be true.

On January 22 of this year, the Washington Post ran a story on a teacher who is finally speaking out about Common Core. Jennifer Rickert is a 6th grade teacher of 22 years in NY State. She has had it with the curriculum, and she is speaking her mind. She may very well pay a high price for doing so. I have the utmost respect for this woman.

The title of the article in the Washington Post is:

TEACHER: COMMON CORE TEST SET KIDS UP TO FAIL

“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.”

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.” [3] – source

SEE VIDEO OF TEACHER HERE:

COMMON CORE – GREEN, GLOBAL AND SO POLITICALLY CORRECT

“As the Obama administration, Bill Gates, the United Nations,…and other forces seek to finalize the decades-old effort to nationalize – and even globalize – education by bribing and bludgeoning state governments to impose Common Core, one of the key agendas behind the deeply controversial standards has been largely overlooked.

In essence, official UN documents and statements by top administration officials reveal a plan to transform American children, and students around the globe, into what globalists refer to as “global citizens” ready for the coming “green” and “sustainable” world order.” [4] – source (Emphasis mine)

MOLDING THE CHILDREN OF AMERICA TO BE GLOBALISTS

You see, Common Core is all about molding and re-shaping the children of America to be “obedient globalists.” The rights and interests of the individual are pushed aside, and the students are being indoctrinated and brainwashed to believe that they must only consider themselves part of the greater good.

We know that this “greater good” is the coming New World Order. Global warming and Green energy are merely a means to an end. The “end” here refers to the sustainable world order; a world where the population is controlled (under 500 million) and the minds of the people are also controlled by the coming One World Government.

This is why faith in God is in direct conflict with Agenda 21 and Common Core Initiative. Why would a government which plans to control the people, want to compete with a belief in, and allegiance to God? That is why all communist governments demand that their people be atheists. They want complete CONTROL over the masses.

“To prepare humanity for their vision, however, requires a new form of “education,” globalists admit. UNESCO calls it “Education for Sustainable Development.”

On its website, UNESCO, the self-styled global education agency, actually boasts of its plans. “The UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014) seeks to mobilize the educational resources of the world to help create a more sustainable future,” the UN outfit explains.

“Many paths to sustainability… exist and are mentioned in the 40 chapters of Agenda 21, the official document of the 1992 Earth Summit. Education is one of these paths. Education alone cannot achieve a more sustainable future; however, without education and learning for sustainable development, we will not be able to reach that goal.” Before the term “sustainability” was in vogue, the late UN Deputy Secretary General Robert Muller, the architect of UNESCO’s “World Core Curriculum,” also offered some insight into the purpose of UN-led, globalized pseudo-education.

The goals: “Assisting the child in becoming an integrated individual who can deal with personal experience while seeing himself as a part of ‘the greater whole.”

In other words, promote growth of the group idea, so that group good, group understanding, group interrelations and group goodwill replace all limited, self-centered objectives, leading to group consciousness.”
Put another way, smash individualism and notions of individual rights, replacing them with collectivism.” [5] – source

WHY WOULD THE U.N. WANT CHILDREN TO FAIL?

“In a stunning admission posted directly on UNESCO’s website in a document about the agency’s “Education for Sustainable Development” machinations, the outfit makes that abundantly clear.

“Generally, more highly educated people, who have higher incomes, consume more resources than poorly educated people, who tend to have lower incomes,” the UN “toolkit” for global “sustainable” education explains.

“In this case, more education increases the threat to sustainability.”

Read that sentence again, and again. More education threatens their vision of “sustainability” (as do freedom, prosperity, humans, and more).” [2] – source

Are you beginning to see the vision of the U.N. and the horrific impact it is already having on children in our public schools??

Brethren, the evil of this shakes me to my core – no pun intended. I wrote this article, in hopes that people wake up! GO to your PTA meeting and open up a dialogue about Common Core. Write letters to the Board of Education of your school district. Write to your State Senators!! Write letters to the editor of your town newspapers!

I want to give a special thanks to Alex Newman. He has become a friend and provided me with additional information for this article. He is also a brother in Christ! Alex co-wrote a book which is called “Crimes of the Educators” published by WND Books, and is available now in your local Christian bookstores and on Amazon. It is a MUST read for all parents who have their children in public schools.

MARANATHA!!



Sent from my iPhone

Saturday, May 28, 2016

Common Core PARCC tests gets an “F” for Failure

BREAKING NEWS – Common Core PARCC tests gets an “F” for Failure

May 27

jonpeltoCommon CoreEducation ReformPARCCSmarter Balanced Assessment TestStandardized Testing  1 Comment

Stunning assessment of the data reveals Common Core test not a successful predictor of college success. 

What does this mean for Connecticut and other SBAC states?

Common Core PARCC tests gets an “F” for Failure – By Wendy Lecker and Jonathan Pelto

The entire premise behind the Common Core and the related Common Core PARCC and SBAC testing programs was that it would provide a clear cut assessment of whether children were “college and career ready.”

In the most significant academic study to date, the answer appears to be that the PARCC version the massive and expensive test is that it is an utter failure.

William Mathis, Managing Director of the National Education Policy Center and member of the Vermont State Board of Education, has just published an astonishing piece in the Washington Post. (Alice in PARCCland: Does ‘validity study’ really prove the Common Core test is valid? In it, Mathis demonstrates that the PARCC test, one of two national common core tests (the other being the SBAC), cannot predict college readiness; and that a study commissioned by the Massachusetts Department of Education demonstrated the PARCC’s lack of validity.

This revelation is huge and needs to be repeated. PARCC, the common core standardized test sold as predicting college-readiness, cannot predict college readiness. The foundation upon which the Common Core and its standardized tests were imposed on this nation has just been revealed to be an artifice.

As Mathis wrote, the Massachusetts study found the following: the correlations between PARCC ELA tests and freshman GPA ranges from 0.13-0.26, and for PARCC Math tests, the range is between 0.37 and 0.40. Mathis explains that the correlation coefficients “run from zero (no relationship) to 1.0 (perfect relationship). How much one measure predicts another is the square of the correlation coefficient. For instance, taking the highest coefficient (0.40), and squaring it gives us .16. “

This means the variance in PARCC test scores, at their best, predicts only 16% of the variance in first year college GPA.  SIXTEEN PERCENT!  And that was the most highly correlated aspect of PARCC.  PARCC’s ELA tests have a correlation coefficient of 0.17, which squared is .02. This number means that the variance in PARCC ELA scores can predict only 2% of the variance in freshman GPA!

Dr. Mathis notes that the PARCC test-takers in this study were college freshman, not high school students. As he observes, the correlations for high school students taking the test would no doubt be even lower. (Dr. Mathis’ entire piece is a must-read. Alice in PARCCland: Does ‘validity study’ really prove the Common Core test is valid?)

Dr. Mathis is not an anti-testing advocate. He was Deputy Assistant Commissioner for the state of New Jersey, Director of its Educational Assessment program, a design consultant for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and for six states.   As managing director for NEPC, Dr. Mathis produces and reviews research on a wide variety of educational policy issues. Previously, he was Vermont Superintendent of the Year and a National Superintendent of the Year finalist before being appointed to the state board of education. He brings expertise to the topic.

As Mathis points out, these invalid tests have human costs:

“With such low predictability, you have huge numbers of false positives and false negatives. When connected to consequences, these misses have a human price. This goes further than being a validity question. It misleads young adults, wastes resources and misjudges schools.  It’s not just a technical issue, it is a moral question. Until proven to be valid for the intended purpose, using these tests in a high stakes context should not be done.”

PARCC is used in  New Jersey, Maryland and other states, not Connecticut. So why write about this here, where we use the SBAC?

The SBAC has yet to be subjected to a similar validity study.  This raises several questions.  First and most important, why has the SBAC not be subjected to a similar study? Why are our children being told to take an unvalidated test?

Second, do we have any doubt that the correlations between SBAC and freshman college GPA will be similarly low?  No- it is more than likely that the SBAC is also a poor predictor of college readiness.

How do we know this? The authors of the PARCC study shrugged off the almost non-existent correlation between PARCC and college GPA by saying the literature shows that most standardized tests have low predictive validity.

This also bears repeating: it is common knowledge that most standardized tests cannot predict academic performance in college.  Why , then, is our nation spending billions developing and administering new tests, replacing curricula, buying technology, text books and test materials, retraining teachers and administrators, and misleading the public by claiming that these changes will assure us that we are preparing our children for college?

And where is the accountability of these test makers, who have been raking in billions, knowing all the while that their “product” would never deliver what they promised, because they knew ahead of time that the tests would not be able to predict college-readiness?

When then-Secretary Arne Duncan was pushing the Common Core State Standards and their tests on the American public, he maligned our public schools by declaring: “For far too long,” our school systems lied to kids, to families, and to communities. They said the kids were all right — that they were on track to being successful — when in reality they were not even close.” He proclaimed that with Common Core and the accompanying standardized tests, “Finally, we are holding ourselves accountable to giving our children a true college and career-ready education.”

Mr. Duncan made this accusation even though there was a mountain of evidence proving that the best predictor of college success, before the Common Core, was an American high school GPA.  In other words, high schools were already preparing kids for college quite well.

With the revelations in this PARCC study and the admissions of its authors, we know now that it was Mr. Duncan and his administration who were lying to parents, educators, children and taxpayers. Politicians shoved the Common Core down the throat of public schools with the false claim that this regime would improve education.  They forced teachers and schools to be judged and punished based on these tests.  They told millions of children they were academically unfit based on these tests. And now we have proof positive that these standardized tests are just as weak as their predecessors, and cannot in any way measure whether our children are “college-ready.”

The time is now for policymakers to stop wasting hundreds of millions of dollars, and thousands of school hours, on a useless standardized testing scheme;   and to instead invest our scarce public dollars in programs that actually ensure that public schools are have the capacity to support and prepare students to have more fulfilling and successful lives.



Sent from my iPhone

Tuesday, May 24, 2016

Gates Foundation Admits Bungling Common Core, But Vows To ‘Double Down’

Gates Foundation Admits Bungling Common Core, But Vows To ‘Double Down’

The head of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has admitted in the organization’s annual letter that the roll-out of Common Core, which it heavily promoted, has been bungled in a way that created major difficulties.

Sue Desmond-Hellman is the CEO of the Gates Foundation and wrote the organization’s annual letter, published Monday. The letter touches upon a wide array of the massive foundation’s activities, from anti-smoking efforts to a campaign against sleeping sickness in Africa, but one area that receives significant attention is Common Core. The Gates Foundation played a major role in the creation of Common Core several years ago, donating tens of millions of dollars both to finance the creation of the standards and to promote their adoption across the United States.

Now, over half a decade later, Common Core remains in place across most of the country, but in a beleaguered position. Repeal efforts continue around the country, and states like New York are still seeing major boycotts of Common Core-aligned standardized tests.

In her Monday letter, Desmond-Hellman issues a mea culpa for Common Core’s difficulties, saying the Gates Foundation badly underestimated how difficult implementing Common Core would be, leading to substantial difficulties for teachers. She also admits the Gates Foundation failed to properly win over parents early on, implying this failure contributed to an ongoing grassroots backlash against the Core.

“Unfortunately, our foundation underestimated the level of resources and support required for our public education systems to be well-equipped to implement [Common Core,]” Desmond-Hellman says in the letter. “We missed an early opportunity to sufficiently engage educators – particularly teachers – but also parents and communities so that the benefits of the standards could take flight from the beginning.”

But Desmond-Hellman says this “tough lesson” only makes the Foundation more determined to stay behind Common Core and try to ensure ultimate success. She argues in Kentucky, one of the first states to adopt Common Core, there is evidence the standards are increasing college readiness among high schoolers. To reap these benefits, she says, schools and teachers just have to make it through the challenging years of implementation.

“Far too many districts report that identifying or developing Common Core-aligned materials is a challenge, meaning that teachers spend their time adapting or creating curriculum, developing lessons, and searching for supplemental materials,” she says. “So, we’re doubling down on our efforts to make sure teachers have what they need to make the most of their unique capabilities.”

To that end, Desmond-Hellman says the Gates Foundation was dedicating a portion of its vast resources to facilitating the development of Common Core-aligned curricula and instructional materials, in the hopes teachers will have an easier time teaching Common Core.

Follow Blake on Twitter

Send tips to blake@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.



Sent from my iPhone

How Bill Gates pulled off the swift Common Core revolution

How Bill Gates pulled off the swift Common Core revolution

Five questions with Bill Gates

Play Video2:59

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.

Full interview: Bill Gates on the Common Core

Play Video27:54

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.

Local Politics Alerts

Breaking news about local government in D.C., Md., Va.

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



Sent from my iPhone