Orem Common Core Presentation by UACC

If you have not been able to attend one of the Common Core presentations put on by our group, we taped Saturday night’s presentation by Renee Braddy, Alisa Ellis, and Christel Swasey. It’s just under 1 hour in length and gives a fantastic overview of the true Common Core agenda. Watch full screen for HD resolution.

43 thoughts on “Orem Common Core Presentation by UACC”

  1. This was a very informative and sobering presentation. I’m truly impressed with the depth of knowledge which you all possess and your generosity in spreading the word. Excellent, excellent work, ladies!

  2. i can arrange something with my local tea parties if you are doing presentations.
    Would love to do it. Or even without the tea party, that might bring in many more Parents. which should be the target and get people to open their eyes.

    1. Don ~

      We’d be happy to do a presentation. I believe it best to open the audience to as many people as we can. Please send an email through the contact us and we can get a meeting set up. Thank you.

  3. He is quoted him out of context here, the substance of his message has been removed – so that this portrayal constitutes a lie, essentially. I want to understand, and when I am bold face lied too, I am going to look to another source. If you cannot win the argument telling the truth, does that not strip credibility from your organization and your argument on the whole?

  4. I am the mother of 5 that lives in Germany (moved from Utah…my home state for 33 years) that the presenter quotes at the end of the video. I am taking a stand against common core and trying to get the message out to more and more families. Thanks for sharing this video and I hope and pray together we can stop (and reverse!) this movement in education.

  5. My husband and I retired to Utah, the home of all our ancestors, in the past 10 years. Most of the 8 families have followed. In every case these young parents are appalled at the school organizations in the communities they live in. Bountiful, Eagle Mt, American Fork, Spanish Fork are examples. School districts of outrageous size, preventing any and all input to school boards and superintendents. Why has Utah allowed such dysfunctional organizations to continue? Utah, the model of organizations as set forth by the LDS church. Of course evil designs of powers have invaded this poisonous condition. Utah must clean up their public schools or lose all values that are believed and taught in our homes. Talk about love as necessary for these educational entities to contribute to the raising of our children. There is no love in an impersonal district, only desire for wealth and power. Wasn’t it about 30- 40 years ago when we voters were brain-washed into voting for large districts to save money? Take back control of your school districts Utah– and then teach the parents about true principles of education. Give the parents the responsibility for choices for their children–if you don’t, you will inherit the wind. Wake up, Utah!

  6. It would be helpful to have links to the videos shown here and the different quotes and letters. They are hard to hear on the video. Thank you for the video….it is very helpful!

  7. Oak,
    Thank you and all of those working to educate the public about this federal usurpation program and our complicit state leadership. I am signer #5448 on the petition. As I clicked on the ‘Submit’ button I realized that I had neglected to include a very important distinction in my comments. I should have, as we all should, noted that I am a registered and involved VOTER. You would think that would be obvious to the intended recipients . . . but then, they are politicians and that probablity may not occur to them. Just sayin. Is there any mechanism to ammend our comments? Also, is there any possbility to make the list searchable by town or create a new list of people willing to be contacted to work together locally?
    Again thank you, all of you, for your efforts !


    1. John, there isn’t a way to amend or let you search for locals, but I’m considering something on that which may help.

  8. A couple of weeks ago my wife went walking w/ a friend and the math teacher of one of our children, a my wife tried to explain the dangers of common core to her. Her explanation must have fallen on deaf ears, because at back to school night last night, this same teacher, that I had respected, distributed to all parents a leaflet put together by Utah State Board of Education, espousing how wonderful common core is and trying to debunk concerns. Horrifying, the twisting of words by telling a truth or partial truth and following it with an outlandish lie like, …federal funding and strings are not attached to common core. Please, for the love of all that is good, get Utah out of Common Core.

  9. This presentation is full of one contradiction after the other. From asking why our federal representatives weren’t part of the CC effort while the governor was (duh, that’s what makes it state-led) to calling it a national coercion forced upon us all (except for Texas and Virginia of course who “decided” not to adopt it because of cost) to implying that Bill Gates was somehow in it for the money (he has given away his fortune trying to improve education). Lets also notice that the puzzle pieces did everything except address the critical question of whether the standards will raise knowledge and skills in the 45 states that have adopted or not. Besides lamenting less literature — a legitimate concern — they kept avoiding this queation because the answer is clearly yes. The state of education in America is mediocre at best and failing in many places. States have in fact been lowering standards to make their students appear smarter than they are and this state-led initiative to raise standards is a strong step in the right direction. The Obama administration should have exercised constraint and not provided incentives for adoption and the conspiracy theories would have remained dormant.

    Obama’s call for universal pre-school was way off the mark and that’s why it has gone nowhere. And local control of education has been messed with since the mid 1960s when the first ESEA was passed and it took the biggest hit when Republican George W. Bush passed NCLB, with its high stakes assessments. but high stakes assessments aren’t inherently part of the common core. It’s like everything these ladies don’t like about our education system is being blamed on the common core. I respect their passion and their right to speak out. But my opinion is that this effort to jetison the common core is misguided and without substance.

    1. Joshua,

      1. Having a governors’ club copyright the common core hardly makes this a state-led movement. We don’t hire govenors to represent us on the national stage. State-led implies that citizens and leadership of states were invited to weigh in or, or lead, this charge. This is not what happened. It came in under the radar as a grant opportunity before the standards had even been fully created or vetted.

      2. It was coercive because the states needed that grant money. It was the money, not any analysis of the standards, that motivated states to adopt Common Core. There is no empirical evidence that these standards can do anything good, or that they won’t harm the students; it was never piloted before being thrust upon the states; it is an experiment on our kids.

      3. Of course Bill Gates is going to make money with Common Core. A few million to him is nothing– but he’s partnered with Pearson to create curriculum and software that far outweighs what he “philanthropically” gave.

      4. If Common Core was truly about raising standards, why didn’t we adopt legitimately high, time-tested standards such as Massachusetts’ standards? For some states the Common Core may be an improvement, but for many states, it’s dumbing the students down. Think about it. How can one standard ever meet everyone’s needs? Even Jason Zimba, a CC creator, admitted that these standards only prepare students for a nonselective community college. Even the College Board has admitted that aligning to Common Core meant they had to get rid of AP calculus tests. It’s hurting many academically. This is a case of (in the words of Professor Christopher Tienken of Seton Hall University) “dataless decision making” and “educational malpractice” because policies have been made based on faulty arguments and no empirical evidence.

      Thank you for commenting; please write again.


      1. Christel,
        It’s embarrassing that you imply that the CCSS is being implemented in a grand scheme to make Bill Gates more money – and it is just that kind of thinking that keeps this anti-CCSS group considered a “fringe” group. In just ONE of Bill Gates’ initiatives he has given 1.5 BILLION dollars in scholarships for minority students. He has dozens of initiatives. His foundation has an endowment of over 36 billion dollars and a minimum portion is granted each year- something like 5%, which means at least 1.8 billion donated each year. No matter how successful Pearson is at creating curriculum for CCSS, I don’t think we are even in the ballpark. So maybe not a great idea to include those types of irrational insinuations in this discussion.

        With regard to why Utah hasn’t adopted truly rigorous and effective standards – I’d point the finger right back at you. This is what is truly needed, and some of us have been trying to illuminate how low Utah’s standards are for many, many years and we have tried to get others excited enough to do something about it. But that discussion never got people animated enough to do anything meaningful or constructive in the past, and so Utah’s students have suffered and suffered the “soft bigotry of low expectations”. Now that SOMETHING is being done, albeit not something as awesome as it could be, but at least it is SOMETHING, you and others find the energy and passion to fight it, spending great amounts of time and energy fighting AGAINST something instead of creating something worthwhile. Wrecking is always easier than building, but it won’t accomplish anything and it won’t bless our kids’ lives. If you came to the table with a plan, proposal, or recommendation for what the standards should be, maybe you’d have a purpose in all this fighting. I am just tired of people fighting over standards that, while imperfect, are certainly no worse than what we had, are not evil or highly political (any more than the last ones were which no one wanted to talk about no matter how poorly they served our kids). It’s a shame that you can’t bring an alternative plan to the table. I have NO interest in going back to what we had. It was mediocre and ineffective. At least the CCSS gets people thinking and analyzing and focusing on what we are teaching kids.

        And schools are not required to teach “to” the standards. They can exceed them – which is what we do in our charter school and what most high performing schools do – so it isn’t really a threat to great education. It just may raise the bottom some – which would be good for kids.

        1. Carolyn,

          We’re fighting for something huge: liberty and local control of standards.

          I wish you could see that. You said, “If you came to the table with a plan, proposal, or recommendation for what the standards should be,” as if I have no personal plan.

          I have one. I would not force it on you, though. Why would you force this one on me and my children?

          The point is that it ought to be LOCALITIES, not any top down know-it-all, (including me or you) who should determine what the plan, proposal and recommendation ought to be. One size never fits all!

          For example, in my private home school, I use Hillsdale College’s K-12 standards and curriculum with some personal customizations, for my fifth grader. I studied what various NON-common core aligned standards were out there, and I liked this one. They (and I) use classical, time tested Saxon math and Christian ABEKA grammar books and suggest a decent geography book and tons of great classic literature books. They suggest French fof 5th graders; I prefer Swedish. They left out music; I put it in. I had a science book that I was already using so I skipped theirs. My point is: it’s PERSONAL for my little school, as it should be.

          If I were a school district, these decisions would apply to hundreds of fifth graders for better or for worse. But if I were the national force of the (unelected) NGA/CCSSO/Arne Duncan/Gates machine, these decisions would affect millions –without their consent.

          Tests based on my own one-sized standards would be utterly unfair, considering the fact that most students have not, for example, reached 7th grade math by fifth grade as my standards outline, nor have most students been speaking Swedish for ten years, as my 5th grader has, and most fifth graders are way better spellers than my fifth grader happens to be. “Just raising the bottom some” DOES HARM THE TOP AND BOTTOM KIDS.

          My point is that THE STANDARDS ARE NOT THE POINT. Control of them is the point. I would never “bring my alternative plan” to OTHER PEOPLE’S TABLE. That is the height of arrogance.

          I am not even close to quitting spending the incredible amount of energy that many are spending, fighting the loss of these constitutionally guaranteed liberties.

          We only wish that you would join us in the fight.

          1. Christel,
            Please define “local”. You are making decisions for your own family’s education, that is clearly the most “local” you can get. It is easy at that level to see where the power is and should be (with the parents of their child). Where does your logic take you next? When people join together to have their children educated together, decisions must be made for the group of children. All the parents will not agree on all aspects of what should be taught, or how. So how should those decisions be made? What would you consider “local” at that level?

            Is your suggestion a new model of public education where parents of students in a classroom get together and choose curriculum and vote on which one they want, with majority rule? That may work, though it would be extremely difficult to manage. Who gets to “nominate” a curriculum or a method? Who gets a vote? (children with 2 parents get 2 votes? 1 vote?) What if the teacher doesn’t like that curriculum – do they get a vote? That be “local control” at it most basic level. Would you recommend that?

            Of course it would be very difficult and problematic to manage, so maybe it is school level? Maybe the Principal and teachers should get to decide on the curriculum and methods for the children, and present it to the parents for their ratifying vote? That would be awesome. But it isn’t likely that all the teachers and Principal will agree, so how would that be managed? Would the Principal get a larger voting block? Would a teacher with more experience get more voting power? Maybe depending upon years of teaching? Or maybe just one vote per teacher? Then parents would vote to ratify what was chosen, and if they failed to ratify, a new process could be put into place for a second go-round, with parents nominating their chosen curriculum and methods, lobbying other parents and teachers, etc.

            School-level decision making with parents involved would be awesome – much more “local” than the state setting standards, right?

            Sure would be hard to manage that process. Teachers, Principals and parents will not likely agree on many things, and the fighting and arguing will cost relationships between people who need to cooperate and trust each other (after all, they will be sending their kids to spend 7 hours a day with these folks – you need to be friends, right?). So maybe we move it to the District level where decisions can be made and teachers can say “sorry parents, I don’t like it either but the district has chosen this curriculum”. That would at least save the relationships, but is how it is done in most districts now, with less than stellar results.

            Because that wouldn’t really be “local” would it – especially since the District people are far removed from the parents, and the District people actually run the School Board instead of the other way around. So we lose the “local” battle. There really is no way to have “local control” unless you home school your children, which is what you are doing, so you are getting exactly what you want, but is it realistic on a large scale? I think not. Clearly.

            Those of us with a sincere interest in doing what is best for literally thousands of children in our state realize that your ideal of “local control” is an not only an impossibility but a great distraction, cloaked in political speech that appeals to many people but is without substance. We don’t believe homeschool is going to be the solution for a majority of our state’s kids so “local control” as you espouse it will not be the reality for the masses. Unless you can explain how you define local control, how you think it will work, and what we should be doing to achieve it, all that talk is just political rhetoric, and it is causing great divisions for no productive reason.

            We need our schools to be as excellent as they can possibly be so that the great majority of kids can receive a quality education in the public system. This requires setting standards so schools can have the maximum autonomy – yes, meaningful local control – in choosing exactly what they will teach and how they will teach it, so they can meet the standards. This model is actually the only one that does include a realistic amount of local control IF schools are allowed to choose curriculum and methods to meet the standards that have been set.

            I am sorry you are so opposed to improved standards for Utah schools. I have been involved in education in Utah for 12 years now and I have never seen a plan from you or from your friends to improve Utah standards (although Oak did the most I have seen with his work with math a few years back and he is to be commended for his efforts).

            It would have been AWESOME if you had come up with a plan for better language arts standards back when you had a chance, but you didn’t seem to be freaking out about them a few years ago, and the old Utah standards really were sub-par and something worth fighting to improve. Some of us were grateful to see new, better standards put in place. But you and your friends were not working to create better standards back when it was relevant and needed, because this fight really isn’t about standards and even you admit it is about a political strawman called “local control”.

            It is about all of us being run over by the Obama administration. I don’t like it either – I didn’t vote for him and I don’t admire his positions on most everything. But he did a remarkable thing with the CCSS, a most brilliant political move that I am still stunned at. Yes, it is infuriating. But the standards are better than what we had previously in Utah, so we will take them because kids come first. If they prove to be so terrible and evil as this group is espousing, I hope you and your friends will work hard to improve them in the coming years.

  10. How can we get this presentation to be given NATIONALLY?
    . . ..or, at least, in Arne Duncan’s office ???

  11. Don’t let people like Carolyn discourage you. “There are none so blind as those who will not see.” You ladies are officially my new favorite patriots. To our dismay our catholic school diocese has adopted these standards. What do we pay tuition for? more of the same? Leaving us with a feeling of betrayal….and the complacency of the moms is unreal. These mothers will say “There is nothing we can do about it”….well ladies i plan to do everything within my power to protect the most innocent among us….It’s as if they don’t believe there is real evil. If these become embedded in our country…. life as we know it is over ….our children and the republic are at stake here.

    I pray every morning. Thank you god for another day in paradise, for another day to fight the fight, another day for the unworthy. God Bless

  12. I agree with Carolyn.

    If not Common Core, then what are we proposing exactly? NCLB? I thought the consensus was that NCLB was ALSO a bad law?

    This video states that if we say NO to Common Core, we will have to find underdog curriculum companies. Would that really be better? Would they be more expensive since they are not in high demand? And if we had different standards between classes, schools, and even districts, how would we effectively measure “success”? That implies that we may end up with one school whose children are proficient in Math through Algebra II, but another feels it “important” to only teach through basic Algebra; while the same school, even though “low” in Math skills might be highly proficient in say Classical Literature, or even music. It makes sense that if you want more “local control”, you ought to home school- where you can fully control what is taught to your own children. The farther “local” you get from your own home, the more you would have to adopt some sort of general standard….otherwise it just turns into chaos.

    To be fair, I am not fully done researching Common Core, but it sounds to me like this is starting to get away from the real initiative- what we are TEACHING our kids.

    As for the data collecting…doesn’t the government already gain access to our children’s personal information such as name, address, birth date, Social Security #, race, citizenship status, etc. through TAXES?? And what about the NSA, who can get just about anything they want from anyone, regardless? For that matter, the vast majority of the general population already disregards privacy by posting pictures, etc. of anyone and everyone they so choose on various social media sites, which those sites have then tried to control by privacy settings and such. So, if data collecting is REALLY the issue, then shouldn’t we ban all social media sites and even all personal photography? Let’s just all live in a bubble!

  13. Melissa, thanks for posting. It reminded me I meant to respond to Carolyn’s email.

    To Melissa, no we are not advocating NCLB. It’s a bad law as well and needs repealed. Utahns fought that law when it came out but stunningly have embraced CCSS which is NCLB on steroids.
    If we say no to CCSS, we do not have to find underdog curriculum companies. There have been hundreds of curriculum companies out there, but just a handful of major publishers like Pearson, etc… One of the major concerns of CC is that these companies who were involved in the creation of CC in the beginning, got an unfair market advantage over their competitors. As CCSS is adopted nationwide, the big companies have the early release advantage and they’ve put significant numbers of competitors out of business, or bought them out. I can’t remember how many Pearson has bought but I saw a list a short while ago that was quite lengthy.
    I’ll deal with math standards below, but as for data collecting, no government has the right to intimately know the details of our or our children’s lives. Obama’s goal is a planned economy with planned training for children. As you read the articles we’ve posted on the site, you’ll see in their own words their desire to aid corporate America by putting children in tracks at early ages where they can identify what they think is best for them and then move them forward toward that job. An education is about character development and learning a broad range of knowledge so that you can do anything you want in life. If someone has a desire to pursue a certain course, then great! Pursue it! But we don’t need the federal government tracking our children’s blood type, religious affiliation, and dental records, along with 500 other data points, to store in a massive database. When governments practice religious tracking it doesn’t always end well. It’s kind of spooky that Bill and Melinda Gates fund Common Core and a database to track students (In-Bloom) and they funded a eugenics conference in London last summer.

    To Carolyn, you say the standards are better than what Utah had previously. For math, I completely disagree. Even Dr. David Wright at BYU who tends to think the CCSS are OK, is extremely frustrated because of the way the USOE implemented the standards and how it’s bringing back constructivism in Utah which we worked very hard to squelch in 2007 with Utah’s new math standards. The 2007 Utah standards rated an A- from Fordham, just like Common Core did after Gates paid them a ton of money to review the standards. The USOE seems very bent on implementing constructivism statewide. In their teacher trainings they’ve been telling teachers they no longer need to teach the times tables and long division, just like the fight we had with Alpine school district several years ago. Nobody learns from history.
    Our 2007 standards were superior to CCSS math standards. Dr. Wright has pointed out that now under CCSS with the integrated method the USOE has adopted, we’ve pushed algebra 1 completion from 8th to 9th grade for most students. Don’t tell me what you’re doing at your school, I’m just talking about statewide. Because the math is integrated, students don’t have the ability to double up on math by taking geometry with algebra in order to advance faster. So in order to get to an authentic calculus course by 12th grade, you almost have to be in honors math by 7th grade. Otherwise the best you could hope for is pre-calculus by 12th grade.
    Do you remember back in 2007 how the USOE fought tooth and nail to raise our then D-rated math standards? They hated me and Senator Stephenson for pushing them to the point where they had to raise the standards. We brought in Dr. Jim Milgram who showed how pathetic the standards were. The USOE complained about the cost of switching the standards and the enormous effort we would have to go through to do it. Dr. Wright was one of 3 mathematicians on that drafting committee and they were good standards. The USOE had Dr. Wu at Berkeley review the standards and THEN INTENTIONALLY DIDN’T IMPLEMENT ANY OF HIS CHANGES. The USOE had the chance to get us to A rated standards and they didn’t want it!!!
    Along comes Common Core with the *chance* to perhaps get some federal Race to the Top money and the USOE jumps all over it. These people are so addicted to money they sold us out. They wouldn’t get us better standards in the past, and in 2007 when we suggested just adopting CA’s math standards because they were some of the best in the nation and would have curriculum specifically written for them, THEY REJECTED THAT IDEA BECAUSE, “Well we don’t share the same standards as people in California so we don’t want to adopt their standards.” It was one of the dumbest arguments I’d ever heard. As if we were going to adopt their lax morality standards in the state by adopting their math standards. Pure stupidity. The USOE has never been interested in the best standards. They are interested in money. Adopting CCSS the way we did is total proof of that. If we really wanted the very best standards, we would have used California or Massachusetts’ math and ELA standards as they are rated among the best in the country. Dr. Sandra Stotsky who authored MA’s #1 standards offered to come to Utah for FREE and work with teachers here to develop our own standards that would be the best in the nation. We could have done the same for math. Instead, we adopt what everyone else is doing in a one-size-fits-all mentality that promotes constructivism all across the nation. True, the CC standards were better than quite a few states, but not all. We’ve actually settled for mediocrity across the nation. Not only that, we’ve abandoned local control which is far more important than having consistent standards across the nation. If we can’t control the nationwide assessments because they are tied to CC standards, we will never control the standards because no state is going to want to show lower test scores by breaking away from teaching exactly what is on the standards.
    Local control is the level at which parents can have influence. Under Common Core, parents now have zero influence over modifying the standards or assessments. In Utah, it took us 8 months to get the state board to add teaching cursive writing to the standards since we do have leeway to add up to 15% to the copyrighted standards. Ultimate control is the family level, but at a local school, the parents should be able to choose the curriculum they want their children to go through, free of regulations and someone in Washington D.C. telling them what they are required to teach. Every step control is removed from the top down approach is a positive one. State standards are better than federal. District standards are better than state. School standards are better than district, and homeschooling standards are the ultimate local control. We used to not have state standards and amazingly, America put men on the moon and were the technological leader of the world. Look at the tests children used to take a hundred years ago and our high school graduates would be hard pressed to pass the middle school tests.
    “For the children”? Really? The loss of local control over what our children are taught and how they are tested is acceptable because you feel these standards are better? That’s a very shortsighted position to take.
    You state you’ve never seen a plan from us. You haven’t read the site I guess because from the beginning we’ve talk about exactly what we’d like to see. Saying we should have spoken up when we had a chance is a very ignorant statement to make. Before the public knew what CC was, the draft was released on June 2nd and the state board adopted it on June 4th, just 2 days later. They had to adopt it then in order to apply for more money or sign onto some other contract with the feds. Then they re-ratified that vote in their August meeting. There was no time for everyone to find out what CC was. It wasn’t publicized and there weren’t public meetings. Here’s the post that specifically outlines our replacement plan:
    You end by stating you hope we’ll work to improve CCSS in the years to come. Good luck with that. The only changes that will come will happen at the national level where the NGA and CCSSO, two private NGO’s, hold the copyright on the standards, and essentially the control over the assessments. Nobody is going to be able to improve the standards unless we break away from the national CC agenda.
    I cannot believe you advocate so strongly for CCSS when just a few years ago you were sharing information with me about how parents and teachers could convert their local public school to a charter so they would have great autonomy over what was being taught. You’ve certainly had a change of view.

  14. Oak,

    I am reading through the information on http://www.utahpublicschools.org today, where most of what was presented in this video is DISPROVED. I am speaking of the presentation only since it is (so far) the only research I have done on this site. That website states that while funding may have been a factor in other states, it was NOT in Utah (because we were rejected), as well as addressing almost every other point in this presentation. I would copy and paste all the relevant points, but it would be far too lengthy. From what I can tell, the information on the above site is from 2012. Which leads me to ask….who is right? It’s clear someone is misinterpreting information. Is it the state of Utah or the private associations who are so strongly against Common Core?

    1. Melissa, I have to chuckle at your response. Of course everything a government agency posts online is accurate and we should trust that information. Just ask President “you can keep your own plan” Obama.
      Yes, there are private associations who are against Common Core. Just as there are private associations who CREATED AND FUNDED COMMON CORE. Geez. How much of this website have you read? How many hours of audio from state meetings have you listened to? If you’re going to come into this with blinders on, you might as well quit reading this site and just tell people we’re wearing tin foil hats. Ignorance is bliss. You’re choosing to believe things from the state office and saying the state has debunked us. What documents did they point you to? Over and over and over again on this site you’ll find us referencing source documents. They don’t. Read the source documents and then ask the questions. They are great at assuring people they know what’s right, but when you look at the documents and listen to the audio, you have to wonder if they are so caught up in the charade they’ve created that they can’t bring themselves to admit they made very serious mistakes. You want to know about Utah’s grab for money? It’s all there. Watch this little video that Alpine School District Board Member Wendy Hart made that features the actual audio from USOE officers.
      You know, I once had an ASD board member email me saying, “Oak, if you ever get open minded,” you should look at this study that proves Investigations math is great stuff. I always try to be open minded. I didn’t battle fuzzy math at first because all the “experts” told me the studies said it was the best way to teach math. I went and did my own homework and the “experts” could no longer answer my questions. I looked at that study the school board member suggested and it turned out that the study was funded by the publisher of Investigations math.
      I try really hard to do my homework before making statements and I know dozens of other people who have spent hundreds and perhaps thousands of hours the last couple years digging through federal and state documents for the truth. So when you come to this site, if you want to toss out accusations, please be prepared with specific points that go to source documents. Please don’t reply until you’ve watched Wendy’s video. Then you can read a rebuttal to the USOE fact vs. myth flier here:
      I truly hope you will look seriously at this issue. I’m confident once you do, you’ll find the truth.

  15. Interesting spelling on the state of Kentucky quote slide about the “state-lead” initiative. Spelling correction; shouldn’t it have been “state-LED”? Do they mean the mineral LEAD (short E), or do they mean the present tense verb LEAD (long E) as in, “Let’s LEAD America in trying to ‘dumb down’ our children so they won’t have the opportunity to be able to recognize a synonym from a homonym or antonym?” Kind of like the person who spell-checked the statement? Sorry; Common Core brings out the aggravated former language arts teacher in me. All sarcasm aside, kudos on what Utah is doing to defend the rights of parents and their children against “ObamaCore”. Oops, sorry. The sarcasm reared its head again! Keep up the good fight, Utah!

    1. You may be a small group but you’ve put together a good presentation. Thanks for your tenacity in promoting awareness about the dark side of common core. We’ll done!

  16. We would love to have an informational meeting like this in Logandale, Nevada. Would you be willing to come and speak to us? We are a small community outside Las Vegas. Erika

  17. I wish someone would do a presentation in carbon county so I wouldn’t be the only one at the elementary school educating the parents. I am home schooling my kids here in the next few weeks and all the parents want me to explain what the common core is. Very few have heard about it but agree with me after I tell them how bad it is.

    1. Get more parents to watch videos like this one. Get informed enough to do a presentation. We didn’t start off knowing everything we know. We really need hundreds more who are educated on this stuff well enough to present it.

    2. Jayme, I recently purchased a new video presentation that you should look into. Its title is “Common Core: Stifling the American Dream. It’s put out by the Utah Eagle Forum (UtahEagleForum.org), and you can purchase this video by calling 801-756-8077.

  18. Video: Stop the Common Core by YouTuber NoToCommonCore LINK> http://youtu.be/coRNJluF2O4

    Website: Truth in American Education
    Article Titled: Is The U.S. Dept. of Education Violating Federal Law by Directing Standards, Tests & Curricula?
    Article Link: http://truthinamericaneducation.com/common-core-state-standards/is-the-u-s-dept-of-education-violating-federal-law-by-directing-standards-tests-curricula/

    Referring to the Website: Truth in American Education
    Article Quote, “The Road to a National Curriculum: The Legal Aspects of the Common Core Standards, Race to the Top, and Conditional Waivers is ___sponsored by___ Pioneer Institute, the Federalist Society, the ___American Principles Project___, and the Pacific Research Institute of California.”

    Why is Jane Robbins with the American Principles Project in a 1 of 5 Videos Series Called, “Stop the National COMMON CORE POWER GRAB: Reclaim Local Control of Education”? ____When According to the quoted article and link attached to article The American Principles Project Sponsors “The Road to a National Curriculum: The Legal Aspects of the Common Core Standards, Race to the Top, and Conditional Waivers?”

    Jane Robbins works for and making a video presentation for the same company sponsoring “The Road to a National Curriculum: The Legal Aspects of the Common Core Standards, Race to the Top, and Conditional Waivers?”

    Can Someone Please Help Me Understand This? THANK YOU From My Heart to Yours. Joanna MaGrath

    1. I think it’s semantics. The “road to a national curriculum” IS Common Core. Jane opposes it and is anti-CC. APP isn’t sponsoring “the road to a national curriculum”, they are exposing it.

  19. Thank you for sharing your valuable insight into common core. After doing only a small amount of research myself into this matter, I am extremely disturbed by what is happening….Please continue to inform the public, and let the people know how we can make positive changes, and put the power back where it belongs.

  20. I attended one of these presentations in Park City with a friend who was dealing with the Middle School and HS that was constantly invading privacy with Tests & Surveys of their personal family’s thoughts & beliefs on religious & political affiliations, as well as a GENETIC TEST that children nor parents were given adequate information or time to Opt-Out! That last part I thought couldn’t be true! Yet it is. I was amazed this information is virtually unknown by ANY teacher I have approached & asked directly about it, as well as Parents! How did something this big get by 90% of adults involved?! Are we sleeping or what? Oh, that’s right, it’s Political Cash in our Public Official’s coffers. Vote them Out! I guess this was the “Hope and Change” they wanted to force on our children without Parental Consent! Opt-Out. -c

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.