All posts by Oak Norton

Concerns

Government Invades HIPPA Records

Leave a comment

The New York State Police have violated HIPPA regulations by suspending the handgun permits of people in the state who have been prescribed anti-anxiety medication. Jim Tresmond, an attorney representing one of the victims states, “The HIPPA act is supposed to prevent this kind of thing from happening. It’s a gross invasion of our privacy rights.”

Common Core has paved the way for your child’s records to be stored in a database the government has access to. It’s called the State Longitudinal Database System and Utah is fully participating in it. The goal is a cradle-to-grave system that tracks every citizen in the country and directs them toward what central planners feels they are best suited for.

How long until the government planners just NEED our children’s information for our own benefit and start pulling files in violation of FERPA and HIPPA. Education departments are already leaking information to researchers, and with the behavioral testing and data mining set up under Common Core’s agenda, the stars are aligning to make our children wards of the state. If you missed this MSNBC reporter’s comments, she’s openly advocating for the community (government) to have a claim on children.

Answering Charges

Asking Questions in Meetings

4 Comments

If what happened to Christel Swasey and others in the Wasatch School District Meeting is any indication of state tactics to avoid answering your questions, you need to be prepared to take control back in a meeting. There are a few tactics that get used in meetings you need to be aware of.

  1. The presenter drones on and doesn’t leave time for questions.
  2. The presenter deflects your question and tries to act like nobody else is interested and they’ll address your question after the meeting.
  3. The presenter works to separate you from the group during the meeting so you or your position are isolated. There are cases elsewhere, where a person might be pulled out of the room for someone to answer your question.

This is called the Delphi Technique and if you read this excellent article you will be prepared to defend yourself against it.

http://www.vlrc.org/articles/110.html

In general:

  1. Keep a calm voice and never lose your cool.
  2. Bring the person you’ve asked the question to, back on subject to answer your question. Stay focused.
  3. Don’t let them deflect or delay. Just calmly reiterate that your question hasn’t been answered.
  4. If someone else is being deflected, support them by asking the question again.

Read this report by Christel Swasey’s experience in a Wasatch School District meeting presentation by State Office of Education official Judy Park.

http://whatiscommoncore.wordpress.com/2013/04/08/judy-park-introduces-common-core-sage-tests-to-wasatch-school-district/

Here are some questions which you can ask at meetings. Please post your questions below in the comments.

  • Where is some empirical evidence that Common Core tests are based upon legitimate educational standards?
  • Why hasn’t a cost study been done to determine the actual costs of implementing common core?
  • Where can I read our state’s cost analysis for implementing Common Core and its tests? What will it cost per pupil?
  • Since a main selling point of Common Core was that we would have portability of students, why did Utah decide to adopt the integrated upper math version with Vermont instead of discrete years of math like all the other states?
  • Did you know that Common Core delays full completion of algebra to 9th grade while our 2007 standards set it in 8th? This means most students in Utah will not be able to take an authentic calculus class in 12th grade. How can we get better standards back in Utah?
  • Since Common Core introduces behavioral testing and tracking of our children, how can we opt our children out of all testing and tracking? State law says I have a “fundamental liberty interest” in the education of my children and the state is only there to support me in my responsibility. If that is true, and state law says it is, I want to know the process.
  • What is the amendment process for Common Core standards if we find out they are not working for us?
  • Where can I see for myself the evidence that Common Core standards have been proven to be of superior quality and that they are internationally benchmarked?
  • Where can I see for myself evidence that Common Core’s transformations (deleting cursive, minimizing classic literature, moving away from traditional math, etc.) –will benefit our children?
  • What is the American process of representation of individuals in the Common Core education and assessments system?
  • Does it seem good that the meetings of the standards writers (the CCSSO/NGA) are all closed-door meetings?
  • I read that there is a 15% cap on a state adding to the Core; so what do we do if we need to add a whole lot more to actually prepare our children well?
  • Although I have been told that Common Core is state-led, I missed the invitation to discuss this before it was decided for me and my children; please explain the analysis and vetting process for the upcoming national science and social studies standards.
  • The Constitution assigns education to the states, not to the federal government. Also, the federal General Educational Provisons Act (GEPA) states: “No provision of any applicable program shall be construed to authorize any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, or over the selection of library resources, textbooks, or other printed or published instructional materials by any educational institution or school system…“ In light of this, please explain why our state has agreed to intense micromanagement by the federal government under Common Core testing.

 

Concerns, News

The AIR Stinks of SAGE

29 Comments

Brian Halladay, Alpine School District Board Member, sent out this email today alerting residents to a meeting next week in the school district. This should be sent to every legislator in the state so they understand what happens when the USOE tells them they are exiting their relationship with SBAC, but then writes an RFP (Request for Proposal) in such a way as to guarantee that only an SBAC related vendor will be selected. At the time we published that tidbit, we were criticized by numerous people at the state office and school board. Then Utah selected AIR and our state superintendent called them the “only organization currently delivering statewide, online adaptive tests approved for ESEA accountability.” Really? There were 13 applicants, and one already being used successfully in Utah. Check out what’s coming down the pike from AIR.

Next Thursday, April 11th, you are invited to participate in the SAGE assessment System presentation at 4pm at the Alpine School District Office Building.

SAGE is the acronym for the common core testing system that will be collecting data from our children.

I think it’s important for all of us to know before the meeting what SAGE is and it’s implications for our children, our privacy, and our school district.

Student Assessment for Growth and Excellence (“SAGE”) is being developed for Utah by the American Institutes for Research (AIR).  SAGE is Utah’s comprehensive adaptive assessment system, or the testing mechanism that will replace the CRTs. It is designed to replace and expand UTIPS, and provides the test delivery and administration of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium.

So, who is AIR? AIR is not an academic assessment company – it is a behavioral research organization. AIR has been around for over 60 years. Their founder, John Flanagan, a psychologist, started AIR by developing the “critical incident technique” one of the most widely used behavioral methods that is even now used in assessment models today.

In 1960, AIR initiated “Project Talent,” a research project administered by John Flanagan and a group of other behavioral scientists involving 440,000 high school students, collecting information on “aptitudes, abilities, knowledge, interests, activities, and backgrounds” of each student. These questions included questions about “hobbies, organizational and club memberships, dating and work experiences. There were questions about students’ health and about their school and study habits. Students were asked about their fathers’ occupations, parents’ education, financial situations, etc.” One question asked was, “How many children do you expect to have after you marry?” and “How old were you when you first started dating?”

What is AIR doing today? AIR is currently working with multiple partners, including the Department of Education, United Nations, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Open Society Institute (George Soros), to “conduct and apply the best behavioral and social science research evaluation towards improving peoples’ lives, with a special emphasis on the disadvantaged.” AIR prides itself on its “long history of contributing to evidence-based social change.”

What does this mean for the Alpine School District, or even the State of Utah?  In 2012 USOE developed the USOE Technology Standards 2012. One of the standards is to have a network-enabled computing device capable of providing access to the school’s technology resources. A purpose of this is for the understanding “human, cultural, and societal issues related to technology and practice legal and ethical behavior.” I don’t think it’s a stretch to think that AIR will be heavily involved with this.

AIR will be developing these assessments, which will include behavioral questions. It’s what they do. One of their primary objectives is to use this data not only in collaboration with other states in relation to common core, but also in collaboration with the United Nations.

With the recent amendments to the FERPA laws, the question becomes what will we as parents do right now to protect the privacy of our children?

Come to the meeting next Thursday at 4pm at the Alpine School District Office Building and get informed!

Brian Halladay

Thank you Brian for shining the light on this insanity.

Here is the schedule for all school districts in Utah for their AIR meetings.

Concerns

More Teacher Comments on Common Core

6 Comments

More and more teachers are waking up to the problems of Common Core. There are any number of issues that are hot-buttons for different people. Some are upset about the constitutionality issues, assessments, curriculum (or lack thereof), low quality standards, privacy concerns, database tracking of students, or other reasons. This post is the 2nd set of comments from Utah teachers. Click here if you missed part 1 of teacher comments.

In one absolutely stunning development, it’s being reported:

New York’s largest teachers’ union is asking parents to join teachers in opposing the state’s use of what the teachers’ union calls “hastily implemented standardized tests for high-stakes decisions affecting students and teachers.”

For months, a statement from New York State United Teachers says, it has been pressing the state Education Department to acknowledge teachers’ growing concerns with the state’s implementation of new Common Core learning standards and new standardized tests that students must take in April.

“While NYSUT supports the ‘potential’ of the new Common Core learning standards and fully embraces the principle of accountability for students and educators, two-thirds of teachers said in a poll that their students lacked textbooks and materials aligned with the state’s new standards,” the union statement contends. “Even worse, many teachers say students will be tested next month on material that has not yet been taught, with the state still distributing materials and guidance to teachers as late as last month.”

One comment posted to Facebook by an ASD bus driver who gave permission for his comment to be shared with his name:

I am a 67 yr old school bus driver for Alpine School District. I have been driving for 4 years. I spent my career in middle management in private companies. I have been teaching the students who ride my bus about the Constitution, what made America different; the many forms of tyranny; socialism, communism, progressivism, fascism, and about common core. My middle school and high school students knew nothing about these subjects. I get about 5 minutes each bus ride to educate. I question and ask them to do their own research. I bracket everything in freedom and responsibly. Once you nudge their interest, they come up with very thoughtful responses and can see the daily loss of more and more individual freedoms being traded for dependency on government. I teach that slavery comes in many forms and that every decision we make has consequences.

My BS degree was in sociology, my wife’s was in child development and family relations. My graduate work was in large system management. (control and brainwashing)

I have been studying common core and by the 6th grade we will have a bunch of secularist robots. The teaching objectives are insidious and downright anti freedom in every way.

Utah and the rest of the nation will be lost if we do not get rid of common core. One administrator I know is just as concerned as I am after he took my advice and studied the objectives.

-Randall Jones

More comments from Utah teachers:

CommentGrade TaughtIf AdministratorCountyName
We should never have a “one system fits all” education program, and especially not one from the federal government! I have both a special needs child, and a gifted child. In our family then, we would not have freedom of choice to learn and grow according to our own individual needs and desires. This is WRONG!Retired 1st grade, and collegeUtah
Common Core is a way to push communism and indoctrination in the public school system. The amount and type of data that is being collected and monitored is scary.K-5th
The standards are controlled by the Federal Gov and that violates the constitution which leaves decisions regarding education to the states.11,9,7,4Davis
Children are each unique and require unique solutions to learning. CC is a one size fits all curriculum aimed at going at the pace of the lowest common denominator.4thUtah
Restricts students to a “Common” curriculum. Hard working and passionate students are held back while teachers must focus on slower students to help them understand or master. Needs and abilities are not held in “common.”11th – 12thN/AWeber
I’m an art teacher, common core is like giving a kid a set of oils and saying OK, now go problem solve, go create a masterwork….Ya good luck with that! what happened to..lets first build a foundation, teach them basic skills, hold their hand for while and then when they understand their tools and have a few skills, then..and only then do problems get solved and masterworks created.10-12utahJerime
Common Core Standards are a bad idea because it gives the government too much control over what students are taught and how they should learn. Common Core seems like a dumbed-down standard that our States will be forced to implement in order to obtain much needed government educational money. In addition to the great expense of the Common Core program, power will be taken from the teachers to prevent them from creating teaching plans based on the needs of their students. This also removes the opportunity for the teacher to share their enthusiasm and love of learning with their students by dictating what and how they should teach. Teachers become robots rather than those who can use their talents to inspire. Also, if the Common Core Standards are implemented, parents will have a more difficult time helping their children with homework because the methods being taught are very different than how they were taught. This could be most confusing, especially in math.3-6Salt LakeTiffany Barlow
The mathematics in the text books no longer have a good flow from principle to principle. It is confusing and the text books do not provide enough information for kids to review when at home. Also some of the questions are more social engineering than math.6Utah
I’m against the federal government being in control of our education. Common cord goes a lot deeper that just curriculum but a complete take over of our children and their future and the future of the family unit.High SchoolUtah CountyCheryl Lindsey
I oppose it because nationalized education would take control and freedoms away from the parent. Individual children have individual needs that must be assessed one-on-one in many cases. I’d the curriculum is made to be the same for all nationally, many children will be left behind. Local education gives freedom to parents and teachers to better assess the needs of each child.TESOL certified substitute
We do not need robots, we do need each child to grow to be productive individuals in their own prospective. The government DOES NOT KNOW WHAT IS BEST FOR MY CHILD, thank you!!! I am not for Global Control???4th gradeUtah
We had a great math program going based on what was best for our school. Common Core has made our jobs much more difficult. We have lost the ability to do what we know to be best for our students. The sequencing of the common core as it has been imposed on us is poor. The state can’t even generate an End of Level test but somehow the teachers are supposed to re-invent the wheel and a whole new curriculum? It is a tragic joke that isn’t funny.9th grade and AP Calculus.Washington CountyMalin
It takes the local control away from teachers and parents. It promotes conformity and places every student being taught by the CC in one mold. It dumbs things down to an unbelievable level. My teachers wrote their own tests why can’t I? If an engineer can go to school for four years and then put a stamp on a set of plans an says build it, and we do and we trust it. Why can’t I as a licensed professional educator put my stamp of approval on an education plan that has been decided upon by me and the parents not the state or a national common core. I also have children in school. My 4th grader is frustrated with his CC math the teacher is frustrated and after talking to most of the other parents – there is nothing but frustration where the old reliable way of teaching was not frustrating. My daughter is in the 9th grade and the math is being taught differently now. There will no longer be a geometry class it will be blended into a math class. I want my kids to have geometry.7-12CTE Intro Team LeaderBeaverAndy Swapp
The federal government should have no control over what or how we teach our children in Utah. I teach at a charter school, and we are constantly evaluating what does and doesn’t work and changing our methods and curriculum as needed. We use Saxon Math and group according to need and ability so that we have some 8th graders doing calculus while other 8th graders are doing 6th grade math. We allow students to move up as their understanding increases or down if they are struggling. Parents are a part of all of these decisions. Local control, school choice, and freedom to explore options and try new methods are crucial in meeting the needs of the individual child. Common Core would take all of this away from Utah schools.4th and 5thUtah
CCSS abolishes state sovereignty in the role of education, controls what is being taught even if contrary to community values, irrelevant testing that disrupts the learning/teaching process, lacks evidence-based research to demonstrate superiority to what is already in place or enhances current curriculum, lack of educational and state input. The list is endless.K-12Speech/Language PathologistSalt Lake CountyNoel Lee
Education needs to be locally controlled. The local teachers need more freedom to address the needs of their classes. Also, it artificially sets the standards too low and doesn’t allow for the needs of gifted kids. It will also infringe on the rights of homeschoolers.Pre K-8Principal and TeacherUtah (originally)
I am opposed to Common Core because we lose local control. It becomes much too cumbersome to make needed changes on a local level when the educational system is centralized. We need more local control, not less.3Utah

 

Concerns

Education Department Database Leaks

Leave a comment

Joy Pullman of the Heartland Institute wrote an op-ed published in the Washington Examiner showing how education departments are now leaking confidential student information.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/education-dept.-helps-leak-students-personal-data/article/2525112

Nine states have sent dossiers on students —including names, Social Security numbers, hobbies, addresses, test scores, attendance, career goals, and attitudes about school —to a public-private database, according to Reuters. Standardized tests are beginning to incorporate psychological and behavioral assessment. Every state is also building databases to collect and share such information among agencies and companies, and the U.S. Department of Education has recently reinterpreted federal privacy laws so that schools and governments don’t have to tell parents their kids’ information has been shared.

…

Because the U.S. Department of Education has unilaterally knocked down federal privacy protections, lawmakers need to rebuild that wall. Alabama, Georgia, Oklahoma, New York and Oregon are a few states considering such legislation. They should act swiftly, and so should others.

It has been shown that Bill Gates has spend $100 million in setting up a national database to track students. This excellent article at World Net Daily does a great job exposing Gates as someone who publicly talks about privacy rights but then his own product says it can’t guarantee the safety of the data within the system.

http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/bill-gates-100-million-database-to-track-students/

Please contact your Utah lawmakers and ask them to protect our students from these violations of privacy. Confidential, personally identifiable information, must be kept secure at the school level and never passed up to a database. It should be a felony for local school officials to send personally identifiable information outside the school, up to the state or any other entity, without the express written permission of parents.

Concerns, Reference

Why Constructivism and Direct Instruction will Damage Your Child’s Brain – Part 3

7 Comments

Read Part 1 of this 3 part article | Read Part 2

A Couple Loose Analogies

Picture totalitarianism on one end of a scale and anarchy on the other. Both have issues but for different reasons. Totalitarianism is like Capital “D.I.” Direct Instruction where they attempt Prussian style education of forcing knowledge into heads. Here’s your task, repeat it. Constructivism is akin to anarchy. Anarchy always always leads to a Democracy (moral relativism as the group makes decisions) and always ends with an oligarchy of power at the top (ie. totalitarianism) where a few excel and the rest are drones. If these are the extremes, then what’s in the middle? Traditional education. I guess you could say it’s like a republic between these two extremes.

Lets try another. How should we answer a child if they asked, “how can I know God is really there?” Under a Capital DI (Direct Instruction) model we might see people saying “memorize this prayer and say it 10 times and know that God is there because it’s so.” Under constructivism you might have a teacher say, “Well why don’t you get together with a few friends and come up with a strategy to pray?” Under traditional education we might say, “prayer is communication with God. He wants to communicate with you. Let me teach you about prayer and then you try it out. I would like to show you what others have experienced with prayer in the scriptures so you have some concrete examples. Look at their experiences. You can experience this too if you learn the principles of prayer.”

Wrapping the End to the Beginning

Remember in part 1 of this article where I talked about Daniel Pink’s work on motivation? Motivation is driven by 3 things: autonomy, mastery, and purpose.

Under capital D.I., you do move toward mastery, but even though you have individualistic learning, your autonomy is hampered by the rigid straight jacket of the curriculum. There is no exploring outside the path set for you. You are told what to do, and you do it, and you’re tested on it, and you stick to the programmed schedule. The education system hinders true education. John Taylor Gatto said schools are good at schooling but not very good at educating and extreme D.I. fits that like a glove. Schooling is all about obedience, while educating is about learning. You can have purpose as you realize you are learning math with a future goal in mind, but it’s not the kind of purpose born of deep intrinsic desires when you have autonomy to pursue your dreams and educational desires.

Under constructivism, you don’t have mastery because it’s so dumbed down you can’t even build a foundation. You don’t even have as much autonomy as D.I. because now you have an emphasis on work that is socially oriented, or assignments so far below your capabilities that you become bored out of your mind. You may have some purpose if you have a goal, but without mastery your purpose will fade and the light of your dreams will go out (as has happened for tens of thousands of graduates just in Alpine School District who graduated with A’s and didn’t know their times tables or long division). These poor students went to college with shattered dreams only taking them to remedial math.

Under traditional direct instruction education, also known as classical education, you should have all 3 elements with intrinsic motivation and rewards and not extrinsic ones that can sap your motivation by making you do it for the reward. It’s not animal conditioning, and it’s not socialistic learning. What does this look like? Homeschooling can do this. Many classrooms in schools with good teachers who are well educated in their subject matter might also qualify. There are tons of good teachers, but they are shackled by red tape nonsense and dumbed down by professional development that indoctrinates them in constructivism instead of content knowledge they can impart to students. Schools of education are by far, doing the most damage in this area telling students that “all the studies show this is the best way to teach math” and pushing constructivism on those students. The truth is there are no studies that support constructivism. Unfortunately the structure of schools interrupting learning every 50 minutes or so to send students on to the next subject is also a barrier to learning, but great for schooling them in obedience and being on the clock.

For years I’ve advocated against Investigations math (constructivist type program) and in favor of Singapore math and Saxon math. Singapore math (only the Primary Math series from www.singaporemath.com) is in my opinion, perhaps the very best program available. It lays a great foundation for children in elementary levels and there is solid material in the upper grades once you’re done with Primary Math. Singapore is direct instruction (lower case “d.i.”, ie. traditional math) where children truly think through things and arrive at answers. Saxon math is heavily scripted. It definitely falls toward the capital D.I. side from where Singapore is, though it has “softened” a bit over the years. I’ve had children in all 3 of these programs. Investigations is a nightmare for everyone involved. Saxon and Singapore are great programs and I’ve seen some impressive assignments in Saxon math that made me really glad my children were in it instead of other alternatives (though I would still prefer Singapore Primary Math).

Both DI and constructivism have some techniques which can help some students, but when we just stick to the extremes (like Investigations math), we are going to dumb down our children and actually reduce their drive to excel. We’re reprogramming children from being intrinsically motivated to extrinsically which leads to a loss of “flow” or “focused motivation” by taking away autonomy, mastery, and purpose. Charlotte Iserbyt criticizes computer software education programs for this very reason that the reward mechanism in the program meant to give a student a success cue, actually damages the intrinsic motivation as well. Digital learning is excellent in some areas, but can be harmful when it steps into rewards because then children come to expect rewards. Video games are designed to be addictive because they introduce rewards to players in such a way that they want to continue for the next reward. Bill Gates has declared that he wants learning to be game-based because winning can be a motivator. This is exactly what Daniel Pink said will turn into a demotivator. What happens when those children graduate and find life isn’t a game and the best things in life come from intrinsic motivations?

Unfortunately in Utah, our state office of education is pushing the failed constructivist approach to education. Schools of education like the McKay School of Education at BYU push this nonsense. The Math Education Department at BYU proved constructivism is an utter failure when they took honors freshmen calculus students and in the name of giving them a “deeper understanding of math,” had them score at the bottom of all 17 regular calculus sections that semester. Why does this persist? John Goodlad’s philosophies are set in the hearts and minds of educators and change is hard.

Is this tied to Common Core? Absolutely! The Utah State Office of Education (USOE) had the opportunity to implement Common Core in different ways. They chose to have Utah implement it in the “integrated” fashion for upper math along with Vermont, instead of discrete years of math like every other state. Dr. David Wright at BYU’s Math Department warned them this was a bad idea because there were no textbooks available written with this integration, but they told him they had it under control. They hired 5 constructivist educators from around Utah and wrote their own horrible curriculum for districts to use with Common Core. They are constructivist dreams. No content, just problem sets. They can’t even be called textbooks. They told us we needed Common Core so that we would have portability of students across state lines, when in reality, we have no ties to other states schedules of learning in upper grades because of this integrated approach. The USOE has also chosen to push the constructivist method in their professional development to districts. Utah could have so much better, but for our state office of education.

Where should we go from here? Full local control of education. Close the USOE, decentralize education, and let parents in the local schools determine their own high standards and what goals they want for their children. I believe the philosophy should be an Agency-Based Education which maximizes freedom to learn, is individualized (and if done right, intrinsic) for each student, and puts parents back in the driver’s seat. Parents who are responsible for their children’s education instead of relying on the state to set what their children need to know, will pay closer attention to detail and figure out what really works and what doesn’t. We don’t need state educrats determining the best philosophy for hundreds of thousands of unique children and pushing it down on them without parental input and guidance. Especially when those philosophies are proven to demotivate and damage our children’s brains.

Additional Resources:

The Leipzig Connection (On Amazon – excellent book on the history of education)

Charlotte Iserbyt’s Deliberate Dumbing Down of America (free online book – get the PDF now)

Tracy Hayes, an education researcher in Massachusetts wrote a helpful article further explaining the difference between Direct Instruction and traditional education.