Common Core Quick Facts Brochure

Thursday, August 29, 2013

Common Core Assessments Give Federal Government Access to Your Child's Data

From Truth In American Education

Federal Government to have Access to your Child's Data Via Common Core Assessments

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) assessments will provide the federal government access to information about your child. Yes, that is right. And you were never asked as a parent if this is okay with you, were you? How did this happen? Who authorized this?
If your state has adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and will be using either the Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) or Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) assessments the federal government will have access to your child’s individual data. Let’s explore this a bit.
First, the CCSS are a set of standards identifying what students are expected to learn. The standards themselves do not require any data to be shared with anybody. If that is the case, why do some people claim the Common Core State Standards require states to share student data with the federal government?
The Race to the Top (RTTT) Assessment Program awarded grants to PARCC and SBAC to develop assessments aligned to the CCSS. They each have an identical cooperative agreement. For PARCC, it is called the Cooperative Agreement Between the U.S. Department of Education and the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness of College and Careers. For SBAC, it is called the Cooperative Agreement Between the U.S. Department of Education and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and the State of Washington (fiscal agent). You can download the Cooperative Agreements from the Race to the Top Assessment Program Awardspage.  Consortia member states are bound by the terms of these agreements. Are there terms in these agreements parents should be concerned about? YES!
Let’s look at the terms that may concern parents having to do with data. You are encouraged to check the cooperative agreement documents for yourself to verify these terms are actually n the agreements. It is established early in the document that ED stands for U.S. Department of Education. Grantee refers to the grant recipient—either PARCC of SBAC. Item 5 on page 3 says:
5) Comply with, and where applicable coordinate with the ED staff to fulfill, the program requirements established in the RTTA Notice Inviting Applications and the conditions on the grant award, as well as to this agreement, including, but not limited to working with the Department to develop a strategy to make student-level data that results from the assessment system available on an ongoing basis for research, including for prospective linking, validity, and program improvement studies; subject to applicable privacy laws.
This establishes that the agreement is referring to student-level (individual) data when it mentions data. The document says nothing about aggregate data.
Item 5(b) on page 11 reads:
(b) Producing all student-level data in a manner consistent with an industry-recognized open-licensed interoperability standard that is approved by the Department during the grant period;
Item 6 on page 10 reads:
6) The Grantee must provide timely and complete access to any and all data collected at the State level to ED or its designated program monitors, technical assistance providers, or researcher partners, and to GAO, and the auditors conducting the audit required by 34 CFR section 80.26.
 Continue Reading at Truth In American Education

Here is the direct link to the Cooperative Agreement Between the U.S. Department of Education and the SMARTER BALANCED ASSESSMENT CONSORTIUM  of which South Dakota is a governing member.

Is this ok with you? Did they ask your permission to share this data with the US Government?

Wednesday, August 28, 2013

The Caustic Costs of Common Core

A Lesson In Larceny for Taxpayers

Jordan Mason, South Dakota Campaign for Liberty, breaks down the Caustic Costs of Common Core specific to South Dakota.

Jordan was not aware before this presentation that the Common Core requires testing three times per year. Beginning, middle and end of year. So, as you can see from his reaction, it changed the numbers.

The following link is the documentation of students being tested 3 times per year, not once per year like NCLB. I thought one of the complaints about NCLB was too much high stakes testing. .

Governor Daugaard (0:14) "This system will not just test students at the end of the year and measure them against an arbitrary bar instead we will test students at the beginning of the year in the middle of the year and again at the end of the year"

NCLB Experience and Government Overreach

From Idahoans For Local Education

 My First Experience with NCLB and Why I am Fearful of Common Core
Guest Post by Mila Wood
The first time I remember having to come to the realization that public school could be dangerous to society as a whole was when my now Junior in high school was in fourth grade. I had always been an active parent, volunteering lots of time for the classes my kids were in. I went on every field trip, and brought extra supplies when they needed, and signed up with excitement for every class project that involved frosting or glitter. But, one day I happened to be in my sons fourth grade class correcting spelling tests. Literally half of the papers I graded only had 10 words, while the other half had the usual 25. After I finished grading, I asked the teacher why that was. She explained that it was NCLB, and that they just altered ( I call it dumbing down) the reuirements for the kids that couldn’t do the whole, long list. She then handed me the sliding scale used to put the actual letter grade on top of the paper. You can imagine my surprise when I realized that the kids who only had 10 words were still able to get the same letter grade of “A”, if they got all 10 correct. There was absolutely nothing taken off the grade to account for doing less than half the words!!!! When I asked the teacher about that, she said that it worked out great for the teachers, because they were not “dinged” on their performance or pay due to holding anyone back. wow.
That was my first real experience with NCLB, and when I am asked why I was NOT more vocal in 2001 when it was implemented, I simply say; I had a four year old, and a two year old at home, I did not go back to work, and I spent my days coloring, digging in the dirt, threading beads, collecting bugs, reading to my kids and making sure they were safe, napped with regularity, and had lots of opportunity to play with friends and family. Basically, I was at home, doing my best as a mom. Looking back, I wish I would have made more of an effort to fight back, but, also in retrospect, I had NO internet, and lived in a very rural setting. PLUS, I trusted my teachers and administrators would never stay silent on such a seemingly asinine program. Where were those professionals? Why were they not raising a stink? job security?
Continue Reading at Idahoans for Local Education 

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

New Math

Letter: Common Core 'misinformation' a matter of perception

Joy Pullmann of the Heartland Institute responds to the Argus Leader article State counters Common Core 'misinformation'.

There is, indeed, a lot of “misinformation” about Common Core floating around. I would wager it’s largely from differences over ways to view the same events.
For example: Was adopting Common Core “voluntary,” as the Argus Leader writes? Not if you believe it coercive for the Obama administration to, as it did, tell states their chances of getting federal stimulus money partly depended on them adopting Common Core. Not if you think it’s coercive for the administration to similarly condition No Child Left Behind federal waivers on also adopting Common Core. Sure, states could do whatever they want, but it would cost them a shot at millions during a time of recession and big budget cuts.
It’s also a little frustrating that folks charging “misinformation” (the article quotes the word at least three times — it must have been on the state list of recommended communication techniques), at least in the article, nowhere say exactly what things Common Core detractors are wrong about. That severely detracts from the public’s ability to consider this important question of who decides what children will learn.
Joy Pullmann, education research fellow
Heartland Institute
 Letter: Common Core 'misinformation' a matter of perception
Joy Pullmann is a research fellow of The Heartland Institute and managing editor of School Reform News, a national monthly publication. In that capacity, she has interviewed and produced podcasts with many of the leading figures in school reform. She previously was the assistant editor for American Magazine at the American Enterprise Institute.

A Warning About Common Core

This woman's native country was a Communist country. Please listen to her warning against Common Core! 

Dr Bill Evers Shares Concerns About the Common Core

Dr Bill Eversa research fellow at the Hoover Institution and US assistant Secretary of Education for policy from 2007-2009, participated in a Common Core Forum in Thousand Oaks, California. Dr Evers is a man who is on the inside track of education in America. 

In this 7 minute clip he shares a wealth of information. The standards themselves, who wrote the standards, the teaching methods of the Common Core, and the ultimate goals of the Common Core. Of particular interest are his final statements. 

Thank-you Dr Evers for standing with the families and children of the United States. 

You can watch the full video of the forum here.

Sunday, August 25, 2013

South Dakota Common Core Conference - Rapid City

If you were unable to attend the Common Core Conference In Rapid City on August 24, 2013, here are a few videos of some of the days events and speakers. 

The first one is Jane Robbins, JD, of American Principles Project. Many of you are familiar with Jane from the Stop Common Core Videos. Thank-you Jane Robbins for traveling to South Dakota to share with us.

This is the video of Kitty Werthmann of SD Eagle Forum. She grew up in Austria during the time of Hitler's rise to power. Thank-you Kitty for sharing your story. This is a must watch.

This is video of the eleven member panel taking question from the audience at the Rapid City Conference

This video is one of the workshops held during the conference. Jordan Mason, South Dakota Campaign for Liberty, breaks down the Caustic Costs of Common Core specific to South Dakota.

We want to thank South Dakota Citizens for Liberty for hosting this great conference. We also want to thank the sponsors of this event: Guardians of the Constitution, Life Liberty Group, Northern Hills Patriots, Concerned Women for America, Family Policy Council, Eagle Forum, Family Heritage Alliance, Campaign for Liberty, The Sioux Falls 9.12 Project, The Mitchell 9.12 Conservative’s Project, and The Madison 9.12 Project.

Thank-you American Clarion for recording and posting the great videos for everyone to share.

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

Why Common Core is a Bad Idea That Will Have Bad Consequences

Speaking at a Common Core forum in Edmond, Oklahoma, Dr. Everett Piper makes the case that Common Core State Standards are indeed 'common' and that a true liberal arts education has no place for 'common'. Ideas have consequences. Ideas matter. Every human and every human institution is blessed or cursed by their guiding principals - by the importance they place on their ideas. In many ways, we inevitably do practice what we preach.

Some highlights from this speech:
  • I am against Common Core. I am against it because I am a believer. I believe in academic freedom: Freedom to pursue the uncommon, the exceptional, the unpopular, and freedom to not be constrained by the consensus or the crowd.
  • I am against Common core because I believe in intellectual integrity: The integration of head and heart and fact and faith that is directed by the student’s thirst for truth and not the State’s hunger for control.
  • I am against Common Core because I believe in the Liberal arts. I believe in Liberty and liberation and freedom: a free mind and free man rather than one held in bondage by politics and power and what is popular or common.
  • I am against Common Core because I believe in the humility of the student rather than the arrogance of the State.
  • I am against common core because I don’t believe all paths are “common” or that they all lead to the same summit. I believe that some paths lead to danger and death and some lead to safety and salvation and as an educator I believe it is my obligation to help my students and my culture distinguish between one and the other. I am against Common Core because I believe that it is antithetical to the history of liberal education and I, therefore, refuse to celebrate a mindless march of lemmings careening over a cliff of commonality.
  • I am against Common Core because I believe the Pied Piper’s tune of Popular Opinion can be one of “common” deception rather than one of personal discernment.
  • I am against Common Core because I am tired… very tired of the politically correct and boringly predictable ad hominem attacks used by the Left to call the questioning voice, such as mine, stupid and I’m tired of the obvious ad-populum fallacy implicit in the word “common.”
  • I am against Common Core because of its inevitable assumption of intellectual mediocrity that has already resulted in many of its proponents not understanding the basic Socratic logic I just used above. 
  •  I am against Common Core because I believe there are ideas that are tested by time, defended by reason, and validated by experience and many of these ideas, especially in our day and time are anything but “common.”
  • I believe in the laws of Nature and Nature’s God. I believe that we can know that rape is wrong, that the Holocaust was bad, and that hatred and racism are to be reviled. I believe that even though we cannot produce these truths in a test tube, we hold them to be self-evident laws that no human being can deny regardless of what is “common” to a culture or its king.
  • I am against Common Core because, as an educator, I recognize that when we exchange the truth for a lie that we build a house of cards that will fall to mankind’s inevitable temper tantrum of seeking control and power. History tells us time and time again that to deny what is right and true and embrace what is wrong and false is to fall prey to the rule of the gang or the tyranny of one. We need look no further than to the lessons of the despots mentioned above for such evidence.
  • I am against Common Core because I believe in liberty… Liberty: the antithesis of slavery… Slavery: the unavoidable consequence of lies -- Lies about who we are as people; lies about what is right and what is wrong; Lies about man and lies about God.
  •  Common Core is a mistake. It is not a fix for our educational system. It is an inaccurate sum if you will. We cannot correct this and “put the sum right” until we acknowledge what’s wrong and “work afresh” from the beginning. Doubling down and “simply going on” would be as foolish trying to force a 3 into the equation 2 + __= 4. Until we go back and “work it afresh” from the point of error we will not get the right answer but instead get what is a predictably “common” error to those who refuse to learn.
You can read the full transcript of his speech here.

The Corporate Owned Common Core

If anyone tells you that the Common Core is "state-led," or that teachers developed the Common Core Standards, they are misinformed.

AP Propaganda

From Deutsch29

Associated Press Propaganda: What the AP Survey Really Shows

August 18, 2013
On August 17, 2013, the Associated Press (AP) announced that a survey they conducted in June and July 2013 found that not only do parents really like standardized tests– they approve of the high-stakes usage of such tests and believe that the number of standardized tests administered is “about right”:
Often criticized as too prescriptive and all-consuming, standardized tests have support among parents, who view them as a useful way to measure both students’ and schools’ performances, according to an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll. Most parents also say their own children are given about the right number of standardized tests, according to the AP-NORC poll.
The release of this propaganda is certainly strategic timing given the recent New York debacle of Mayor Bloomberg’s aligning Common Core assessments to the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and flunking most New York schoolchildren by design.
It is also interesting to note that at the same time the AP was conducting its survey, the Texas legislature finally heeded to parent pressure to reduce the annual number of standardized tests in Texas high schools from 15 to 5.
Nevertheless, according to AP, parents are fine with both the frequency and usage of standardized tests.
The AP report is a carefully crafted lie designed to promote an educational system that is high-stakes, standardized-test dependent at the expense of authentic teaching and learning.
Let us first consider who is purchasing this AP survey: The Joyce Foundation. Here is how the AP report spins Joyce Foundation involvement in their “research”:
The survey was sponsored by the Joyce Foundation, which works to promote policies that improve the quality of teachers, including the development of new teacher evaluation systems, enhance early reading reforms and encourage innovation in public schools. [Emphasis added.]
The Joyce Foundation wants to judge teachers using standardized tests. On the tabulated survey results, the wording for Joyce Foundation “sponsorship” is more to the point:
Conducted and funded by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research With major funding from the Joyce Foundation [Emphasis added.]
President Obama belonged to the Joyce Foundation board of directors from 1994 to 2002. Obama made it a requirement that states seeking Race to the Top funding must agree to evaluate teachers using student standardized test scores.
So here we have a “study” that finds parents in favor of what Obama wants, a study that just happens to have “major funding” from a reform organization to which Obama has close ties.

Monday, August 19, 2013

August 22, 2013, Sioux Falls - What is Common Core

Life Lessons and the Common Core

            From StopCommonCoreNC

        Ashton Kutcher’s Life Lessons Contradict Common                Core  
       By  Nina Rizzo in Blog on August 18, 2013
Ashton Kutcher’s thank you speech at the Teen’s Choice Awards went viral.  Kutcher shared three life lessons for achieving success in today’s world.  The first lesson was about opportunity – “I believe that opportunity looks a lot like hard work.”  The second was about being sexy – “The sexiest thing in the entire world is being really smart and being thoughtful, and being generous.”  It’s Kutcher’s third life lesson that I want to delve deeper:  build your own life – “You are told the world is the way that it is and your life is to live inside the world…  But life can be broader than that.  Everything around us that we call life was made up by people that are no smarter than you. And you can build your own things.  You can build your own life that other people can live in.  So build a life. Don’t live one, build one. Find your opportunities, and always be sexy.”
How does this life lesson relate to Common Core?  The goal of Common Core is to narrowly train students to become mere functionaries educated solely to live their life inside the world someone else built.  Extinguished is the flame to find one’s own opportunities and build one’s own thing.  How ironic that Common Core was funded by Bill Gates, a college dropout, who seized the opportunity to think outside the box and build Microsoft.  Gates funded the creation of an educational model that stifles creativity and entrepreneurship. I suppose then our children are to live inside a world built by Bill Gates.

Continue reading here.

Saturday, August 17, 2013 | South Dakota Educators Prepare For New Standards

KELO reported this story on Friday, 8/16/13
Highlights from the story:
...The standards specify what students are expected to know at each grade level. Several states across the country have adopted the standards. The South Dakota Board of Education did so November 2010.
The state plans to assess students using the Common Core Standards this spring, but schools won't be held accountable for the assessments until tests taken during the 2014-15 school year.
More than 500 educators attended a training hosted by Northern State University in Aberdeen Friday. That’s one way they’re getting ready for the change.
...Sen. Chuck Welke (D-Warner) attended Friday’s session.
"Well, I think there will probably be some hiccups and challenges, but I think that schools have been working very hard to try and get ready so I'm confident they'll be ready," Sen. Chuck Welke of Warner said.
...Welke says he's hearing from some who oppose the Common Core State Standards but also supporters who say they've put in a lot of work preparing and don’t want to see the state change its mind.
I would like to offer this response to the "professional development" that we are always offering teachers from Dr. Sandra Stotsky.

Senator Welke, are you saying that those in the education world are supporting the Common Core only because of the work they have already put into academic experiment called Common Core? Amazing that the state and local school districts are so willing to play foot loose and fancy free with our tax money, like $8.4 million dollars for three years of teacher training.  Did you ask the people of South Dakota if they want to spend millions of dollars to experiment on our children? Where are the empirical testing results?  Where are the results of the pilot study? Where is the proof that these standards are academically an improvement? 

Dr. Joseph Rella,Superintendent of Comsewogue School District robo-call against Common Core

Wednesday, August 14, 2013

Common Core Information Meeting

What is Common Core?

Thursday, August 22, 2013
7:00-8:30 pm
Downtown Sioux Falls Library Meeting Room
200 N. Dakota Ave.
Sioux Falls, SD 

We urge your attendance at this important meeting.

  • Where did the Common Core Standards come from?
  • Will the Common Core Standards and the accompanying National Assessments make your child College and Career Ready?
  • Are the standards Internationally Benchmarked?
  • How will the Common Core Standards be taught?
  • What is the cost of implementing the Common Core Standards?
  • Do we still have local control of the education our children receive?

Contact: Mary Scheel-Buysse 605-610-6872
Hosted by South Dakotans Against Common Core

"The philosophy of the school room in one generation, will be the philosophy of government in the next" - Abraham Lincoln

Tuesday, August 13, 2013

Implementation of Common Core is a Recipe for Disaster

This is the article from the Sioux Falls Argus Leader, Sunday 8/11/13.
From AEI
Even if you believe that the Common Core standards are high-quality, internationally benchmarked and would provide a solid foundation for the American education system, you should be worried about how they are being implemented.

If the Common Core standards - which are meant to define what knowledge and skills should be acquired by students during their K-12 education - are not integrated into the American education system with care, any positive attributes that they may have will be washed out by incoherence, misalignment and evaporation of political support.

That said, there is ample reason to believe that the standards are not being implemented with care.
Last week, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, a multi-state consortium working to develop standardized tests aligned to the Common Core, released the price tag for its new exams.

At $30 per student, it came in at almost three times what Georgia spends per year on tests, causing the Peach State to drop out of the consortium later that day citing testing costs. Though it is true that the price point is less than what half of the states in the consortium spend on assessments, that is little solace for state education leaders who will need to acquire new funding for tests at a time of constricted state budgets.

This portends problems. One of the purposes of the Common Core is to unify the set of expectations for students all across the country.

There is no reason, the argument goes, that a fourth-grader in Mississippi should learn something different from a fourth-grader in Vermont. If, however, cost or politics drives every state to develop its own test of the standards, there is little reason to believe that students will be held to the same expectations.

Such could also be said about the flood of new "Common Core aligned" resources, teachers and principals are sifting through to reorient classroom instruction to the Common Core.

One of the promises of the Common Core was that it would create a nationwide market for textbooks, supplemental resources and professional development tools.

A quick Amazon search finds over 30,000 such items, most of which are described as aligned to the standards. If states, districts, and schools do not find a meaningful, workable way to vet these materials, they risk teaching students content or skills not aligned to the standards. This could cause an inaccurate assessment of student, teacher and school performance on accountability exams.
Continue reading at AEI 

Common Core Dangers and Threats

Monday, August 12, 2013

Who Has Access to Your Child's Personally Identifiable Information?

When you receive your parent handbook for your child's school this year, please check out the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) in the very tiny print. As usual, the devil is in the details. We would like to highlight a few of those details here.

First the text of your privacy rights.  
The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) afford parents and students over 18 years of age (“eligible students”) certain rights with respect to the student’s education records.  These rights are:
 (1) The right to inspect and review the student’s education records within 45 days of the day the school receives a request for access.
Parents or eligible students should submit to the school principal a written request that identifies the record(s) they wish to inspect.  The arrangements for access and notification to the parent or eligible student of the time and place where the records may be inspected.
 (2) The right to request the amendment of the student’s education records that the parent or eligible student believes are inaccurate, misleading, or otherwise in violation of the student’s privacy rights under FERPA.  This does not include the right to request a change to any specific grade.
Parents or eligible students who wish to ask the school to amend a record should write the school principal, clearly identify the part of the record they want changed, and specify why it should be changed.  If the school decides not to amend the record as requested by the parent or eligible student, the school will notify the parent or eligible student of the decision and advise them of their right to a hearing regarding the request for amendment.  Additional information regarding the hearing procedures will be provided to the parent or eligible student when notified of the right to a hearing.
 (3) The right to privacy of personally identifiable information (PPI) in the student’s education records, except to the extent that FERPA authorizes disclosure without consent.
One exception, which permits disclosure without consent, is disclosure to school officials with legitimate educational interests.  A school official is a person employed by the school as an administrator, supervisor, instructor, or support staff member (including health or medical staff and law enforcement unit personnel); a person serving on the School Board; a person or company with whom the school has outsourced services or functions it would otherwise use its own employees to perform (such as an attorney, auditor, medical consultant, or therapist); a parent or student serving on an official committee, such as a disciplinary or grievance committee; or a parent, student, or other volunteer assisting another school official in performing his or her tasks.  A school official has a legitimate educational interest if the official needs to review an education record in order to fulfill his or her professional responsibility.   Upon request, the District discloses educational records without consent to officials of another school district in which a student seeks to enroll if the disclosure is for the purposes of the student’s enrollment or transfer.
 (4) The right to file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education concerning alleged failures by the School to comply with the requirements of FERPA.  The name and address of the Office that administers FERPA are:
Family Policy Compliance Office
U.S. Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue, SW
Washington, DC 20202
Did you catch that if you, the parent, want to see your child's record the school has 45 days to get that information to you?

Did you catch who can have personally identifiable information about your child without your permission?  ...administrator, supervisor, instructor, or support staff member (including health or medical staff and law enforcement unit personnel); a person serving on the School Board; a person or company with whom the school has outsourced services or functions it would otherwise use its own employees to perform (such as an attorney, auditor, medical consultant, or therapist); a parent or student serving on an official committee, such as a disciplinary or grievance committee; or a parent, student, or other volunteer assisting another school official in performing his or her tasks. 

Is it OK with you that these people have personally identifiable information about your child released to them without your permission? 

Does it take them 45 days to get your child's information to any of those listed?

Making Common Core Common Knowledge

Common Core Conference in Rapid City, SD August 24, 2013. You can get the registration form here.
Jane Robbins, J.D. - Jane Robbins is a native of Pendleton, South Carolina, and is a graduate of Harvard Law School and Clemson University. Ms. Robbins is a Senior Fellow at the American Principles Project which was founded to reinvigorate and restore those principles that made our country great.. On behalf of APP, Jane Robbins work includes education policy, student privacy and parental rights issues. Ms. Robbins has drafted state legislation on educational transparency and sovereignty that has led to a parallel resolution by the South Carolina Southern Baptist Convention, model ALEC legislation, and emulated legislation in several states. Her writings have appeared in, among other places, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, The New York Post, and Public Discourse.
Chuck Laudner is a graduate of Upper Iowa University with a degree in public administration and a minor in history. 
Kitty Werthmann was born in 1926 and grew up in Austria under Hitler’s regime. She immigrated to the United States in 1950 and has been a U.S. citizen since 1962. Kitty currently resides in Pierre, SD. She is president of the South Dakota Eagle Forum and she lobbies the state Legislature, primarily on family issues. Kitty travels throughout the country speaking about her experience of living under Hitler’s socialist regime and warning Americans of the dangers of Socialism.
Florence Thompson  - Florence is a School Psychologist with over 40 years of experience in her field. 
Rep. Elizabeth May - May studied Lakota Culture, History and Language at Oglala Lakota College on the Pine Ridge Reservation. Rep.  May and her husband Avery ranch near Kyle SD and also own and operate a grocery store in Kyle.
Rep. Jim Bolin is a three term legislator from Canton, representing the furthest southeastern portion of the state. Rep. Bolin is a graduate of both Seattle Pacific University (B. A. in History ) and from the University of South Dakota ( M.A. in History). During his 32 year teaching career , Rep. Bolin has taught in both public and private high schools.

Wednesday, August 7, 2013

Tracking Our Children?

August 7, 2013
So, the data mining on our children, has begun and it has gone retroactive. At the Tea Area School District school enrollment fair, this form was presented to parents. I don't have the form for the upper grades, but was told by a parent that while enrolling her Junior in High School, she was also asked about his preschool enrollment. What does preschool enrollment have to do with how a junior in high school is going to perform?  

If this is truly about studying their early childhood programs, why all the questions about what type of preschool? Could it be because of the data points the federal government is requiring the state to collect on children? 

Is this a part of Arne Duncan's vision for tracking students from preschool to career?

We have shared about data collection and the issues it presents before. One of the most egregious is how the United States Department of Education has changed the Family Education Rights Privacy Act of 1974 and has required states to change their education privacy laws to be able to share personally identifiable information with the federal government and other "stakeholders," whoever they are. You can read more about these problems at the following links. 

Tuesday, August 6, 2013

Where's the Proof?

The Common Core Standards are not internationally benchmarked and do not make children college and career ready.  If they had proof that they were internationally benchmarked and prepared students for college and career, they would be shouting it from the roof tops. The teaching methods used with the Common Core have never been tried and proven. If they had proof that the teaching methods were tried and proven, they would be shouting it from the roof tops. They have no proof that the formative Common Core Assessments, with the psychometric testing, which will follow your children for the rest of their lives, will make children college and career ready. If they had proof, that the formative Common Core Assessments, with the psychometric testing, that will follow your children for the rest of their lives, will make children college and career ready, they would be shouting it from the roof tops. The student and teacher accountability data tracking/data mining systems have nothing to do with creating higher test scores or college and career ready students. If they had proof that tracking/data mining your children's personal information created higher test scores, and prepared them for college and career, they would be shouting it from the roof tops. 

The Common Core is a Hypothesis

Friday, August 2, 2013

Problems with Common Core

Common Core in 5 minutes. Dr. Duke Pesta describes what's wrong with the federalized, one-size-fits-all Common Core standards for American education. Dr. Pesta is academic director of FreedomProject Education and a contributor to The New American.