Representative Rob Bishop addressed the Utah Senate and took some questions. Go to the 11:50 mark on this video and Senator Margaret Dayton asks him about Common Core. Watch to the end as there is another question asked and Rep. Bishop gives a very clear answer about states being hooked by the feds on Common Core.
All posts by Oak Norton
Sandra Stotsky releases FREE ELA Standards
Dr. Sandra Stotsky, a long time critic of Common Core standards, has released an ELA framework for use in schools, districts, and states, for free. Dr. Stotsky is known for her participation in crafting the excellent 2001 ELA standards for Massachusetts and how those standards placed MA as one of the very best states in the country on standardized tests. I recommend you download a copy of these standards for safe keeping, and then let legislators know there is a free set of standards Utah could adopt that would make us the envy of the nation in a short time. Here’s a link, and the last paragraph from the document.
http://www.uaedreform.org/wp-content/uploads/2000/01/Stotsky-Optional_ELA_standards.pdf
The Bottom Line
The 2001 edition of the Massachusetts ELA standards were already among the best in the nation. The 2010 draft manages to further strengthen these standards without losing any of the essential content or clarity. These standards are a model of clear, rigorous K-12 ELA content and expectations.”
If Utah would just adopt this and then the math standards from MA or CA prior to Common Core, we would be set for the future.
Best Billboard and Comic
I saw this awesome billboard on the Truth in American Education site and someone sent me the very appropriate Frank and Ernest comic last week.
Maxine Waters Confirms National Database on All Citizens
Someone sent in this news report video and it’s confirmation of something we have repeated numerous times. Common Core requires states to set up a statewide longitudinal database to track children. Marc Tucker in the 90’s wrote Hillary Clinton desiring such a database to implement cradle-to-grave tracking of citizens for the purpose of central planning and school-to-work organizing. Now Rep. Maxine Waters confirms the presence of a massive database President Obama has put in place giving him information on every citizen in America. Listen to her alarming words.
Here’s the bulk of her quote:
“I think some people are missing something here. The president has put in place an organization that contains the kind of database that no one has seen before in life. That’s going to be very, very powerful.
That database will have information about everything on every individual in ways that its never been done before and whoever runs for president on the Democratic ticket have to deal with that, they’re going to have to go down with that database and the concerns of those people because they can’t get around it and he’s been very smart , I mean it’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.” -CA Rep. Maxine Waters on TVone.tv interview
Christopher Tienken on the School Reform Landscape
I got several emails about this excellent video yesterday. Christopher Tienken is a professor at Seton Hall University and was an early voice against Common Core. This short video he has made makes some excellent points, though I disagree with one of his points at the beginning that there isn’t a problem in education. We see very clearly that university schools of education are steeped in bad educational philosophies like constructivism, which is one of the more destructive methods of teaching when used to extremes as it is in our schools in Utah. Still, don’t let that stop you from enjoying this excellent video.
Common Core is Educational Fascism
What do you get when corporate interests combine with governmental force to take over education? Nationalized educational and economic fascism. Thankfully, more legislators are starting to wake up to the situation.
E-mails link Bush foundation, corporations and education officials
A nonprofit group released thousands of e-mails today and said they show how a foundation begun by Jeb Bush, the former Florida governor and national education reform leader, is working with public officials in states to write education laws that could benefit some of its corporate funders.
…
The e-mails were obtained by Cohen’s group through public record requests and are available here, complete with a search function. They reveal — conclusively, he said — that foundation staff members worked to promote the interests of some of their funders in Florida, New Mexico, Maine, Oklahoma, Rhode Island and Louisiana.
The Web site of the Foundation for Excellence in Education used to list some of their donors but no longer does and is not required to list all of its donors to the public under tax rules for 5013C organizations. However, it is known that the foundation has received support from for-profit companies K12 and Pearson and Amplify, as well as the nonprofit College Board.
There are strong connections between FEE and the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), according to the nonprofit Center for Media and Democracy:
…
FEE and ALEC also have had some of the same “experts” as members or staff, part of the revolving door between right-wing groups. They have also collaborated on the annual ALEC education “report card” that grades states’ allegiance to their policy agenda higher than actual student performance. That distorted report card also rewards states that push ALEC’s beloved union-busting measures while giving low grades to states with students who actually perform best on standardized knowledge tests.
So a “non-profit” organization takes donations from companies that want to get in on the Common Core movement and then lobbies for changes to help those corporations get entrenched to make billions. It’s no wonder that ALEC has squashed their anti-Common Core model legislation twice after receiving a sizable donation from the Gates Foundation. You can get all the power and control you want for money and Gates has already spent well in excess of $100 million to promote Common Core and fulfill the contract he signed with UNESCO in 2004 to create a global education system.
Pressure Mounts in Some States Against Common Core
Support for the standards from the private sector and higher education is clear, said Michael Cohen, the president of Achieve, a Washington nonprofit group that helped develop the standards and now helps state governments and others prepare for the common core and its assessments.
“These standards reflect the knowledge and skills needed to go on for higher education and careers,” said Mr. Cohen, who was an assistant education secretary during the Clinton administration.
But the private sector’s involvement and support are seen very differently by opponents of the standards.
Through the common core, public schools will be used to foster “economic fascism” in education, charged former U.S. Rep. Bob Schaffer, a Republican from Colorado, who until the start of this year served as the chairman of the Colorado state school board before he left the board.
“This is a 100 percent government-regulated industry emerging before our eyes,” with potentially billions of dollars being sent in its direction, said Mr. Schaffer, who is the principal of Liberty Common High School, a charter school in Fort Collins, Colo.
Legislators previously desperate for federal cash attached to the standards, he said, are “just becoming alerted to what’s going on.”
Economic fascism is right. The corporate interests in America created Common Core. There was nothing “state led” about it. In Utah we have Prosperity 2020 which is working to influence education “success” according to how they want to define it. Isn’t it time parents and children define their own education success according to their own family standards? Prosperity 2020 wants more money for education to come from Utah taxpayers.
One of the comments at the end of the news article was from Ronald Mortensen where he said:
The business leaders behind Prosperity 2020 are always for more taxes as long as the incidence falls on individuals and not on them. Notice that there is no recommendation to increase the corporate tax rate, no proposal to eliminate sales tax exemptions for businesses and no call for the repeal of the business tax breaks that these business leaders have lobbied for and obtained during the past decade.
The Salt Lake Chamber is a leader in this effort and it is no coincidence that it has been designated by Americans for Tax Reform as an “Enemy of the Taxpayer.”
The Utah State Office of Education touts their involvement in the “state led” standards, yet they didn’t even know who was writing them. We’ve adopted math and English, and now the science and social studies standards are being written, and again, nobody knows who is writing the social studies draft standards.
Common Core Social Studies Standards? (I strongly suggest you read this article in its entirety)
In November 2012 the CCSSO released Vision for the College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Inquiry in Social Studies State Standards. They say they are developing a framework for states to use as a resource as they upgrade their social studies standards and that this will not be a set of standards for states to adopt. They also say this framework is “being developed through a state-led effort”. They contend this framework, like the common core state standards, “will be based on evidence and will aim at college and career readiness.” The CCSSO is not disclosing the names of people on the writing team and tightly controls information about how and what business is being conducted.
I was told by 2 state school board members a while back that we would never adopt common science and social studies standards, just the math and English, yet just a couple weeks ago, state school board member Dixie Allen wrote Christel Swasey and said this:
Christel,
As one of my constituents, I owe you a response to your question. My New Year’s resolution is to work to be sure that our Core Curriculum contains all the objectives necessary to be sure our students are Career and College Ready as they leave our system of education. That will require our readdressing our Social Studies and Science Curriculum and evaluate if there are any issues with our current Core Curriculum in Math and Language Arts that needs additions or tweaks. This is a constant job of the State Board and our specialists at USOE. However, it is a very worthwhile assignment that truly needs to happen on a continuous basis, as our students change and require different methods of instruction and sometimes different learning objectives to insure they are ready for the 21st Century of higher education and work and are capable of competing on the world’s stage.
Thanks for asking!
Dixie
************
It’s only a matter of time before the noose tightens and states realize they’ve lost any hope of preserving local control of education for their citizens. Contact your legislators and ask them to get us out of Common Core. We can do better and preserve our freedom and sovereignty.
Common Core Flier
Tired of the propaganda influencing your neighbors? Help spread the truth about Common Core with this flier. It’s a half-page, two-sided flier with the contents below. Print out front and back copies, cut them in half, and distribute them in your neighborhoods and help wake people up to what the Common Core agenda is really about.
Open the Common Core Flier #1 by clicking here
By 2014 you may have
no say in your children’s education
What happens when a typical busy parent forces herself to research Common Core State Education Standards?
Read Alyson William’s excellent article here:
www.UtahnsAgainstCommonCore.com/Children-for-Sale
Here are some facts about Common Core:
- Common Core ignores your child’s uniqueness
- Common Core strips away local control of education, leaving you with no say in standards or curriculum
- Common Core puts your child in a national database for cradle to grave tracking
- Common Core will prepare your child for technical school, but not all colleges
- Common Core math standards are lower than our old standards
- Common Core English standards reduce great literature reading in high school English classes to less than 50% of reading, while over 50% is for “informational texts”
- Common Core was not “state led” or “internationally benchmarked”
- The players behind Common Core are large corporations aiming to massively grow profits by getting all students on the exact same new learning schedule. You could rename this Corporate Core.
If the patients in a hospital are being poisoned by the latest wonder drug, do you keep on using it because you bought a huge supply which would now be wasted?
******
What are Utah Teachers saying about Common Core?
https://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/?p=349
Jane Robbins (American Principles Institute) videos explaining Common Core (5 videos – 30 min. total)
https://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/?p=515
The death of math in Utah by Oak Norton
https://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/?p=381
The Common Core Implementation Timeline
https://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/?p=240
Mom and teacher Christel Swasey’s detailed article on the background and agenda of Common Core:
https://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/?p=560
Alisa Ellis’ video presentation (40 min.) tying Common Core to a global agenda:
https://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/?p=539
Renee Braddy reveals the real purpose behind Common Core in Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s own words:
https://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/?p=329
Think you’re safe because you home-school? Think again:
https://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com/?p=496
Tell Utah lawmakers you want out, and sign the Petition to Exit Common Core here:
Dual Enrolling Your Child
Dual Enrollment Guidelines – Opting Out of Math or Other Classes
This post is a duplicate of something I posted a few years ago when serious math issues were happening in Alpine School District (http://www.oaknorton.com/imathresults37.cfm). The purpose of dual enrolling is to allow your child to attend some classes at school, but homeschool or get tutoring for classes you are concerned about (like say Common Core math, or English). Some of the below information may be outdated so it would be helpful to check current laws.
The Home School Legal Defense Association says this about homeschooling in Utah:
Public School Access for Homeschoolers—A Legal Summary
UTAH
Home school students shall be eligible to participate in extracurricular activities at a public school consistent with eligibility standards. School districts may not impose additional requirements on home school students that are not imposed on fully enrolled public school students. Utah Code § 53A-11-102.6
Home school students who are dual enrolled are eligible to participate in any extracurricular or co-curricular activity in the public school available to students in their grade or age group, subject to compliance with the same rules and requirements that apply to a full-time student’s participation in the activity. State Board of Education Regulation R277-438-34. Utah Code § 53A-11-102.5.
Utah code section 53 A-11-102.5 on dual enrollment
Utah code section on extracurricular activities for homeschoolers
Some of the information below may be outdated since this is a copy/paste of a previous post. Please check with the code sections above and your local district administration for questions you have.
Page Contents
- What is dual enrollment?
- State laws concerning dual enrollment
- What is needed to dual enroll
- Parent experiences with dual enrollment
- Where can I see and purchase home school materials
Dual enrollment is where you as a parent decide you want to teach your child some subjects at home and have your child enrolled in public school for other classes. For example, you want to teach math at home but allow your child to continue with other subjects and activities at school.
The school system should mind this as they get full credit (ie. money) for your child being taught in their school but don’t even have to teach your child full time.
State laws and other resources concerning dual enrollment
http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r277/r277-438.htm
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~code/TITLE53A/htm/53A0C004.htm
http://www.uhea.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=35&Itemid=52
(look on the left menu bar under Legal Issues for a couple other useful
links)
Parent Comment: With the new homeschooling laws that took affect last year, I don’t see that a form is required anymore for Dual enrollment. You have to submit a “statement” of your plan to the school/district. There were some modifications up for discussion in this year’s legislative session. I couldn’t see if the amended changes were actually passed, but here’s the link.
http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2006/bills/sbillamd/sb0072.htm
State Employee Comment:
Dual enrollment does not require you to tell the school district anything about your plans. All that is needed to obtain the Homeschool exemption is an affidavit (a notarized letter; we’re working on changing the requirement for notarization) saying that the parents will provide instruction for the number of hours required by state law (900 hours/year). The School district is expressly forbidden from reviewing or approving your curriculum choices, and they are required to approve all requests for exemption. http://www.le.state.ut.us/~code/TITLE53A/htm/53A0C003.htm is the actual language of the law as it currently stands. From subsection 2(d): A local school board may not:
(i) require a parent of a minor who attends a home school to maintain records of instruction or attendance;
(ii) require credentials for individuals providing home school instruction;
(iii) inspect home school facilities; or
(iv) require standardized or other testing of home school students.
The proposed changes to the home school statutes died in the House Rules committee last year and were not passed by the legislature. SB72 (the bill you link to) was actually substituted twice before it passed the Senate and moved to the House. This link: http://www.le.state.ut.us/~2006/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0072S02.htm goes to the second substitue’s “cover page” which has links to the bill text, committee and floor vote histories, and amendments. The 2nd substitute bill made some additional changes to the dual enrollment statutes as well. The requirement for notarization is a quirk of Utah law. In federal law, an affidavit only requires a signature, but Utah law requires affidavits to be “sworn,” which requires a notary or a court clerk. Sen. Mark Madsen was unfamiliar with the Utah practice and drafted the original bill based on the federal practice; we had a very strong bipartisan support for the bill in ’05 and didn’t want to open any debate by making changes to the bill that created the affidavit requirement.
If a student is fully home schooled, the school loses the state funding for the student. They get the funding back if you enroll the student for a single class or any part of the school day, so they should be eager to allow the dual enrollment status. See section 53A-11-102.5 Utah Code: http://www.le.state.ut.us/~code/TITLE53A/htm/53A0C004.htm. This section of code details all of the requirements for dual enrollment, and might be helpful for anyone wishing to convince the school or district that there really is a dual enrollment provision in the law.
It appears that all you need to dual enroll is to submit a plan to the school such as the following:
Intent to Dual Enroll
I plan to teach <MyStudentName> <Subject> at home on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday’s from 8-9am and will no longer need to do the work from <SchoolName> in this subject. I do not want my student to be penalized, graded, nor required to do homework in this subject from the school. End of year SAT/Iowa testing can be accomodated in this subject.
<MyStudentName> will be in class at <SchoolName> during the balance of the school day, 9am – 2:30 pm on Monday, Wednesday, and Fridays and from 8am to 2:30 pm on Tuesday and Thursdays.
Thank you.
Parent experiences with dual enrollment
Oak,
I have had my children for the last 5 years on this dual enrollment. I started with them in 5th grade teaching math at home. They have not had to attend class during for the math instruction nor do they get a grade (which is meaningless) for math. I have taught them up through algebra and then in 9th grade have them start with geometry in Jr. high, so they can get the credit for graduation.
The district has a form that I fill out each year that releases them from the Math instruction.
(Oak note: a district form is not required)
*****
Teacher Comment: I had a student whose parents wanted her doing Saxon math. I was NOT doing Investigations. I had my own textbook that I think is super. The mother gave her Saxon assignments to do while we were doing math, and she did her own thing, usually finishing somewhat sooner than we did.
The mother reported how her assignments were done and gave me scores on her tests. I entered those scores, which I had to calculate to fit percentage-wise with my tests. She got a grade. The mom was OK with that. It worked. It was a small bother. Some teachers wouldn’t do that, but it was OK with me.
*****
I had this situation last year. Math was taught in the middle of the day, so I just sent my son’s math “homework” with him to do during math time. He participated with the class when he was finished with the work I gave him (I didn’t mind investigations as a supplement). I used Saxon and sent the worksheets with him.
Regarding the paperwork for dual enrollment, I spoke first with the principal, then with the teacher to inform them that I would be teaching my son math at home and would be doing “homework” during math time. While they both were quick to assure me that they supplement Investigations, neither one offered resistance to my plan and I didn’t end up having to fill out any paperwork.
I just wanted to stress that my approach was that of a parent informing the school personnel what I had decided. I didn’t justify, argue or persuade. I had made a decision regarding my son’s education and told the school about it and offered to fill out any paperwork necessary. Had my plan required extra work on the part of the teacher, I would have taken a different approach.
*****
Oak, I had a neighbor who did this for math only (Saxon at home). She arranged with the teacher to have him just sit at his desk during that time and work individually on his Saxon workbook. This teacher was very cooperative, and the child understood that he needed to work independently during that time. The neighbor needed to make sure her son knew what pages he needed to work on during that time each day. It worked out great for them.
I contacted you last Spring about this. When I mentioned to my daughter’s teacher that I was considering “opting out” of math (5th grade), she was very cooperative when it came to math. She understood that I wanted my daughter to be given full credit if she got the answer correct using “traditional” strategies. She understood that I completely disagreed witht he “fluff” of Investigations, and if my daughter didn’t write complete paragraphs describing how she got an answer and then “how she felt about it” that she was still to get full credit. Occasionally I would have to write a note on her homework saying that she had completed the assignment and to call me if she had any questions. I had to occasionally remind the teacher what our “agreement” was, but each time we spoke about it I mentioned that I would be happy to go through the official approval (I didn’t know then that it is called “dual enrollment”) to have her excused from math. She didn’t want me to do that probably because she knew it would be a little more coordination for her (she would have to have math at the exact same time every day, or she would have to let my daughter work on her workbook while the other kids did math) and because I think she understood that my daughter was getting double the math instruction so she would be one of the many kids who would keep the district math test scores high because she was being “tutored” at home. Anyway, my advice to parents wanting to do this is to be firm and to persist until you get the arrangement you want.
My other daughter (10th grade at LPHS) was enrolled in pre-calc honors. There were no pre-calc honors teachers who taught traditional. So, after a couple days in that class (my daughter really wanted to stay on the honors track) we changed to a “traditional” teacher. The honors class went from a full class to being cancelled because when she left there were only 8 kids left in the class because they had all transferred out because they wanted traditional. I spoke with her counselor about it and he acknowledged that there were no traditional honors teachers, but he didn’t have any solution. I also mentioned that LPHS AP Calculus test pass rate had slipped significantly the year before (spring 2005) and asked him if they were going to add more traditional instruction to help the kids do better on national standardized tests and he had no response. That is my biggest gripe with this math–if you only have kids in elementary level, then you can’t see down the road to what happens when they have to take ACT, etc. and compete with kids all over the nation on timed tests that rely heavily on basic facts. My two oldest kids (Freshman at BYU) weren’t hurt that much by it, but my two youngest daughters, especially the sophomore, are the ones who will suffer when it comes to speed and accuracy on these tests.
Thanks for letting me vent–I think we’re getting ready to approach my daughter’s 6th grade teacher and give her the same “option”, which is Investigations “my way” or opting out. Keep up the good work!
*****
We dual enrolled our children for math last year. We lived so close to the school that they came home during math, but we were told by the principal that they couldn’t be unsupervised at school (like in the library) and that they couldn’t just stay in class and read a book or do their “home” math assignments because it would be distracting to the teacher and the rest of the class. So our choices were to either send them home or keep them at school and they would have to participate in investigations math but wouldn’t be responsible for homework and wouldn’t receive a grade.
*****
Oak,
My wife and I dual enrolled my 15 year old for the last three years. All that is required is filing a homeschool exemption affidavit (which the district cannot deny) and then enrolling the student in whatever classes you wish them to take. [Name] took three years of orchestra and a year of art.
A side note: The state and the school districts have prepared forms for the affidavit, but these forms ask for more information than the law requires. We just send in a notarized letter stating that we’re home schooling. The UHEA form is the best one to use, but the districts may be a bit balky about it.
(Oak note: notarization should not be required by anyone)
*****
I really really like the idea of dual-enrollment for math. As I’ve considered it, I’ve asked my 5th grader when they do math. “Whenever”. So, I’d bet she could do her other class homework during math, or go to the library and work on whatever (my math homework?)… If your child is not disruptive, why would the school care if they were there? If she gets her other class homework done during that time it opens up time at home for math.
(Oak note: I really like this idea–opt your child out and let him/her use it as a study hall to get other homework done so you can do math at home and not other homework)
*****
Our experience with dual enrollment has only been with the junior high school. The “rules” are that the child cannot remain on the school grounds during the class that they’re not taking. I asked if our child at the time could attend the library during that hour and the answer was “no.” So, if this child is in elementary school, it’ll depend on the principal. Another alternative is to come to the school during that class period and take the child to the learning resource center (library) and work on math at the school. I’m sure the school will work with the parent if the parent presents a couple of alternatives.
*****
I have heard of a parent attending school during math time and taking their child to the library to teach them math.
*****
We pulled our #2 son (during 6th grade) out in the beginning of the day (math time) and took him to a local Jr. High for Pre-Algebra. When he got back to the elementary he helpd out with the others in math. Incidently, we pulled him out during the Christmas Break, brought him up to speed in 2 weeks and then he pulled straight A’s for the rest of the year.
*****
Where can I see and purchase home school materials
There’s a lot of places that sell really good home school materials if you want to teach your child at home. For math, I love Life of Fred (our children have used this and it’s solid math set to a story of real world examples where the math is needed to solve a problem), Singapore Primary Math, or Saxon math materials (best pre-Common Core).
Michelle Malkin Weighs in on Common Core
Michelle Malkin wrote a great piece in National Review today. Here’s a link and the beginning of the article.
America’s downfall doesn’t begin with the “low-information voter.” It starts with the no-knowledge student.
For decades, collectivist agitators in our schools have chipped away at academic excellence in the name of fairness, diversity, and social justice. “Progressive” reformers denounced Western-civilization requirements, the Founding Fathers, and the Great Books as racist. They attacked traditional grammar classes as irrelevant in modern life. They deemed grouping students by ability to be bad for self-esteem. They replaced time-tested rote techniques and standard algorithms with fuzzy math, inventive spelling, and multicultural claptrap.
Under President Obama, these top-down mal-formers — empowered by Washington education bureaucrats and backed by misguided liberal philanthropists led by billionaire Bill Gates — are now presiding over a radical makeover of your children’s school curriculum. It’s being done in the name of federal “Common Core” standards that do anything but set the achievement bar high.
Common Core was enabled by Obama’s federal stimulus law and his Department of Education’s “Race to the Top” gimmickry. The administration bribed cash-starved states into adopting unseen instructional standards as a condition of winning billions of dollars in grants. Even states that lost their bids for Race to the Top money were required to commit to a dumbed-down and amorphous curricular “alignment.”
In practice, Common Core’s dubious “college-ready” and “career-ready” standards undermine local control of education, usurp state autonomy over curricular materials, and foist untested, mediocre, and incoherent pedagogical theories on America’s schoolchildren.
Over the next several weeks and months, I’ll use this column space to expose who’s behind this disastrous scheme in D.C. backrooms. I’ll tell you who’s fighting it in grassroots tea-party and parental revolts across the country from Massachusetts to Indiana, Texas, Georgia, and Utah. And most important, I’ll explain how this unprecedented federal meddling is corrupting our children’s classrooms and textbooks.
Read the rest here: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/338428/common-core-corrupts-michelle-malkin
Children for Sale
Children for Sale
By Alyson Williams
No more decisions behind closed doors! Let’s get everyone talking about Common Core.
In the spring of 2011 I received a receipt for the sale of my children. It came in the form of a flyer that simply notified me that my state and thereby my children’s school would comply with the Common Core. No other details of the transaction were included. The transaction was complete, and I had no say. In fact, it was the very first time I’d heard about it.
I know what you’re thinking. That’s outrageous! Common Core has nothing to do with selling things, especially not children!
Okay, so the idea that the State School Board and Governor who’d made this decision could be described as “selling” my children is hyperbole. It is an exaggeration intended to convey an emotion regarding who, in this land of the free, has ultimate authority over decisions that directly affect my children’s intellectual development, privacy, and future opportunities. It is not even an accurate representation of my initial reaction to the flyer. I say it to make a point that I didn’t realize until much, much later… this isn’t just an issue of education, but of money and control. Please allow me to explain.
That first day my husband picked up the flyer and asked me, “What is Common Core?” To be honest, I had no idea. We looked it up online. We read that they were standards for each grade that would be consistent across a number of states. They were described as higher standards, internationally benchmarked, state-led, and inclusive of parent and teacher in-put. It didn’t sound like a bad thing, but why hadn’t we ever heard about it before? Again, did I miss the parent in-put meeting or questionnaire… the vote in our legislature? Who from my state had helped to write the standards? In consideration of the decades of disagreement on education trends that I’ve observed regarding education, how in the world did that many states settle all their differences enough to agree on the same standards? It must have taken years, right? How could I have missed it?
At first it was really difficult to get answers to all my questions. I started by asking the people who were in charge of implementing the standards at the school district office, and later talked with my representative on the local school board. I made phone calls and I went to public meetings. We talked a lot about the standards themselves. No one seemed to know the answers to, or wanted to talk about my questions about how the decision was made, the cost, or how it influenced my ability as a parent to advocate for my children regarding curriculum. I even had the chance to ask the Governor himself at a couple of local political meetings. I was always given a similar response. It usually went something like this:
Question: “How much will this cost?”
Answer: “These are really good standards.”
Question: “I read that the Algebra that was offered in 8th grade, will now not be offered until 9th grade. How is this a higher standard?”
Answer: “These are better standards. They go deeper into concepts.”
Question: “Was there a public meeting that I missed?”
Answer: “You should really read the standards. This is a good thing.”
Question: “Isn’t it against the Constitution and the law of the land to have a national curriculum under the control of the federal government?’
Answer: “Don’t you want your kids to have the best curriculum?”
It got to the point where I felt like I was talking to Jedi masters who, instead of actually answering my questions, would wave their hand in my face and say, “You will like these standards.”
I stopped asking. I started reading.
I read the standards. I read about who wrote the standards. I read about the timeline of how we adopted the standards (before the standards were written.) I read my state’s Race to the Top grant application, in which we said we were going to adopt the standards. I read the rejection of that grant application and why we wouldn’t be given additional funding to pay for this commitment. I read how standardized national test scores are measured and how states are ranked. I read news articles, blogs, technical documents, legislation, speeches given by the US Education Secretary and other principle players, and even a few international resolutions regarding education.
I learned a lot.
I learned that most other parents didn’t know what the Common Core was either.
I learned that the standards were state accepted, but definitely not “state led.”
I learned that the international benchmark claim is a pretty shaky one and doesn’t mean they are better than or even equal to international standards that are considered high.
I learned that there was NO public input before the standards were adopted. State-level decision makers had very little time themselves and had to agree to them in principle as the actual standards were not yet complete.
I learned that the only content experts on the panel to review the standards had refused to sign off on them, and why they thought the standards were flawed.
I learned that much of the specific standards are not supported by research but are considered experimental.
I learned that in addition to national standards we agreed to new national tests that are funded and controlled by the federal government.
I learned that in my state, a portion of teacher pay is dependent on student test performance.
I learned that not only test scores, but additional personal information about my children and our family would be tracked in a state-wide data collection project for the express purpose of making decisions about their educational path and “aligning” them with the workforce.
I learned that there are fields for tracking home-schooled children in this database too.
I learned that the first step toward getting pre-school age children into this data project is currently underway with new legislation that would start a new state preschool program.
I learned that this data project was federally funded with a stipulation that it be compatible with other state’s data projects. Wouldn’t this feature create a de facto national database of children?
I learned that my parental rights to deny the collection of this data or restrict who has access to it have been changed at the federal level through executive regulation, not the legislative process.
I learned that these rights as protected under state law are currently under review and could also be changed.
I learned that the financing, writing, evaluation, and promotion of the standards had all been done by non-governmental special interest groups with a common agenda.
I learned that their agenda was in direct conflict with what I consider to be the best interests of my children, my family, and even my country.
Yes, I had concerns about the standards themselves, but suddenly that issue seemed small in comparison to the legal, financial, constitutional and representative issues hiding behind the standards and any good intentions to improve the educational experience of my children.
If it was really about the best standards, why did we adopt them before they were even written?
If they are so wonderful that all, or even a majority of parents would jump for joy to have them implemented, why wasn’t there any forum for parental input?
What about the part where I said I felt my children had been sold? I learned that the U.S. market for education is one of the most lucrative – bigger than energy or technology by one account – especially in light of these new national standards that not only create economy of scale for education vendors, but require schools to purchase all new materials, tests and related technology. Almost everything the schools had was suddenly outdated.
When I discovered that the vendors with the biggest market share and in the position to profit the most from this new regulation had actually helped write or finance the standards, the mama bear inside me ROARED!
Could it be that the new standards had more to do with profit than what was best for students? Good thing for their shareholders they were able to avoid a messy process involving parents or their legislative representatives.
As I kept note of the vast sums of money exchanging hands in connection with these standards with none of it going to address the critical needs of my local school – I felt cheated.
When I was told that the end would justify the means, that it was for the common good of our children and our society, and to sit back and trust that they had my children’s best interests at heart – they lost my trust.
As I listened to the Governor and education policy makers on a state and national level speak about my children and their education in terms of tracking, alignment, workforce, and human capital – I was offended.
When I was told that this is a done deal, and there was nothing as a parent or citizen that I could do about it – I was motivated.
Finally, I learned one more very important thing. I am not the only one who feels this way. Across the nation parents grandparents and other concerned citizens are educating themselves, sharing what they have learned and coming together. The problem is, it is not happening fast enough. Digging through all the evidence, as I have done, takes a lot of time – far more time than the most people are able to spend. In order to help, I summarized what I thought was some of the most important information into a flowchart so that others could see at a glance what I was talking about.
I am not asking you to take my word for it. I want people to check the references and question the sources. I am not asking for a vote or for money. I don’t expect everyone to agree with me. I do believe with all my heart that a decision that affects the children of almost every state in the country should not be made without a much broader discussion, validated research, and much greater input from parents and citizens than it was originally afforded.
If you agree I encourage you to share this information. Post it, pin it, email it, tweet it.
No more decisions behind closed doors! Let’s get everyone talking about Common Core.
(Click to enlarge)
Thanks to Alyson Williams for permission to publish her story.
This was first posted at Common Core: Education Without Representation.