Thread: "Common Core" And The All-Too-Common Tendencies Of Heavy-Handed Government

"Common Core" And The All-Too-Common Tendencies Of Heavy-Handed Government

Austin Hill | May 05, 2013











Is President Obama taking-over our nation’s public schools? Is a United Nations agenda infiltrating America’s K-12 classrooms? No, not exactly. Not Yet. But the so-called “Common Core” public education agenda could be paving the way for some serious trouble.Here are a few basic assumptions that people are making about Common Core – along with the facts of the matter.


Assumption # 1 : “Common Core” is a set of educational curriculum requirements being imposed on the states by the Obama Administration. Technically speaking, this is false. “Common Core,” whose official name is the “Common Core State Standards Initiative,” is not, itself, about curriculum. It is a set of academic standards that students in the various grade levels are expected to achieve. It has not been created by the Obama Administration, but rather, it is actually an effort that first emerged at the state level, undertaken by state governors and state superintendents of education nationwide. The official sponsoring organizations of the initiative are the National Governor’s Association (“NGA”), and the Council of Chief State School Officers (“CCSO”).


Attempts to impose academic standards on public educators date back to the early 1980’s. In the 1990’s it became a state-driven matter, while The federal No Child Left Behind Act, signed in to law by President George W Bush in January of 2002, required the states to create their own academic standards, and then to achieve them, in order to receive federal education funds.


During the past decade, state Governors and state education Superintendents began to collaborate in an effort to bring uniformity to their respective states’ academic standards, and today, there are three primary organizations that advance the Common Core agenda. The NGA and the CCSO, as noted above, remain as the official sponsoring organizations of the initiative. Separately, a group called Common Core, Inc., a non-profit, 501 (c) 3 organization based in Washington, D.C., writes curriculum (not academic standards) that is intended to help educators comply with Common Core Standards.


Assumption #2: The Common Core State Standards Initiative receives bipartisan support around the country. This is true. Both right-leaning and left-leaning individuals and groups across the U.S. support the Common Core initiative. The left-leaning American Federation of Teachers and the Fordham Institute, both champion the Common Core effort, as does the Foundation for Excellence In Education, an organization headed-up by the Republican former Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush. Similarly, both Republican and Democrat Governors - including Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter (R-Idaho), Governor Jerry Brown (D-California), and Governor Duval Patrick (D-Massachusetts), all support the Common Core effort.


Yet just as Common Core receives bipartisan support, it is also subject to bipartisan opposition. The conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation, along with libertarian leaning groups like the Pioneer Institute of Boston, opposes the Common Core effort. Glenda Ritz, a Democrat who currently serves as Indiana’s State Superintendent of Education, also opposes the Common Core initiative.


Ritz’ election in the heavily Republican state of Indiana is often cited as evidence of Common Core’s unpopularity. In November of 2012, Ritz unseated Indiana’s incumbent Republican State Superintendent, Dr. Tony Bennett, in part by campaigning against the Common Core initiative and claiming that Indiana’s adoption of the Common Core standards would result in a loss of state sovereignty. Ritz ended up receiving more votes in that election than did the new (and popular) Governor of Indiana, Mike Pence.


Assumption #3: The Common Core Initiative allows the U.S. Federal Government to directly control educational content nationwide. This is false. However, a scenario like this could come about indirectly.


Federal law prohibits the federal government from dictating educational curriculum content to the nation’s public schools. In fact, according to independent legal research conducted by the Pioneer Institute, no less than three separate statutes prohibit this from happening.


Yet on President Barack Obama’s watch, there has been a concerted effort within his administration to control public education with the Common Core agenda. Back in 2009 and 2010 when the administration was distributing so-called “stimulus” funds, the U.S. Department of Education devised what was called the “Race To The Top” initiative. Public schools could apply for and receive the stimulus money, but they had to meet specific criteria.


One of the criteria was for schools to adopt teacher evaluation procedures (this was a good thing, despite the outrage to the idea from teachers’ unions). Another criteria was for school districts to adopt higher “college and career standards” for students. And it just so happened that, in order to qualify for the stimulus funds, many states chose at that time to adopt the “Common Core” academic standards as a means of qualifying for the funds.


Interestingly, when the state of Massachusetts first applied for the “Race to the Top” stimulus funds in the first round of funds disbursements, the state had not yet officially adopted the Common Core standards, and ended up ranking only 13th among the 17 states that qualified for the “extra” funds. Later, after Massachusetts officially adopted the Common Core academic standards, the state received a #1 ranking when it next applied for the funds.


The lesson from Massachusetts was pretty clear. Adopt Common Core standards, and you’ll get more money from Washington. The Obama Administration could technically and legally mandate educational content to the states, but it has successfully used a “third party entity,” of sorts – the Common Core initiative – to have its way with the states. Given this precedent, it’s not difficult to see how the feds could eventually begin requiring certain types of curriculum for kids nationwide.


Many of the nation’s Governors and state school Superintendents who support Common Core still like to remind their constituents that the initiative is a “state thing,” not a “federal thing” – and, therefore, it’s a good thing. For them, to reject the agenda is to ignore their brilliance.

But all Americans should heed the warning: when a majority of the states begin to all do the same thing in terms of public policy, we, the people, become an easier target for federal control.

http://townhall.com/columnists/austi...1587366/page/2

Backlash Against Common Core

by Phyllis Schlafly
May 15, 2013

The national news media haven’t discovered it, but the issue that is bringing out hundreds of citizens who never before attended political meetings is Common Core (CC). More precisely, it is the attempt of Barack Obama’s Department of Education to force all states and schools to adopt specified national education standards for each grade level that will dictate what all kids learn and don’t learn.
Common Core means federal control of school curriculum, i.e., control by Obama Administration leftwing bureaucrats. Federal control will replace all curriculum decisions by state and local school boards, state legislatures, parents, and even Congress because Obama bypassed Congress by using $4 billion of Stimulus money to promote Common Core.
It’s not only public schools that must obey the fed’s dictates. Common Core will control the curriculum of charter schools, private schools, religious schools, Catholic schools, and homeschooling.
The control mechanism is the tests. Kids must pass the tests in order to get a high school diploma, admittance to college, or a GED. If they haven’t studied a curriculum based on Common Core, they won’t score well on the tests.
Common Core cannot be described as voluntary. Since CC is so costly to the states (estimated at $15 billion for each state for retraining teachers and purchase of computers for all kids to take the tests), CC is foisted on the locals by a combination of bribes, federal handouts, and as the price for getting a waiver to exempt a state from other obnoxious mandates such as No Child Left Behind.
Don’t be under any illusion that Common Core will make kids smarter. The Common Core academic level is lower than what many states use now, and the math standards are so inferior that the only real mathematician on the validation committee refused to sign off on the math standards.
He said the CC standards are two years behind international expectations by the 8th grade, and fall further behind in grades 8 to 12. The CC math standards downgrade the years when algebra and geometry are to be taught.
Parents will have a hard time helping their children with their math homework. CC standards call for teaching kids to add columns of figures from left to right instead of right to left.
CC advocates claim that the new standards will make students college-ready. That promise is a play on words: students will be ready only to enter a two-year nonselective community college.
Common Core means government agencies will gather and store all sorts of private information on every schoolchild into a longitudinal database from birth through all levels of schooling, plus giving government the right to share and exchange this nosy information with other government and private agencies, thus negating the federal law that now prohibits that. This type of surveillance and control of individuals is the mark of a totalitarian government.
Common Core reminds us of how Communist China gathered nosy information on all its schoolchildren, stored it in manila folders called dangans, and then turned the file over to the kid’s employer when he left school.
The New York Times once published a picture of a giant Chinese warehouse containing hundreds of thousands of these folders. That was in the pre-internet era when information was stored on paper; now data collection and storage are efficiently managed on computers in a greater invasion of privacy.
Common Core is encrusted with lies. It is not, as advertised, “state” written; it is a national project created in secret without any input from teachers or state legislatures. It is not “internationally benchmarked”; that never happened.
The readings assigned in the CC English standards are 50 percent “informational” texts instead of great American and English literature and classics. The result is that CC standards are very political.
The suggested readings include a salestalk for government health care (such as ObamaCare) and global warming propaganda (including a push for Agenda 21). Some of the fiction suggested is worthless and even pornographic, presumably chosen to reflect contemporary life. Another suggested reading favorably describes Fidel Castro and his associates without any indication they are tyrants, Communists, and mass murderers.
We should take a bit of advice from our neighbor to the north. Canada has no national standards (all standards are adopted locally) and not even any national Department of Education.
CC advocates admit the standards cannot be changed or errors corrected because they are already printed and copyrighted. Bills to repeal CC have been filed in Oklahoma, Kansas, Michigan, Missouri, Alabama, South Dakota and Georgia, and Indiana Governor Mike Pence just signed a law to “pause” the CC implementation and hold public hearings.

---

On May 11, 2013, the Governor signed the Indiana Common Core bill. This bill requires the State Board to take no further actions to implement any common core standards and calls for the state board, the legislative study committee, and the office of management and budget to conduct “comprehensive evaluations” of the common core standards. In addition, the state board of education is to hold at least three public meetings.

---

Further Reading: Common Core

















http://www.eagleforum.org/publicatio...mmon-core.html

Legislative Alerts and Updates • Current Legislation • Key Votes • Capitol Hill Basics

	Action Alert Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email More Sharing Services Urgent Action: Stop Common Core in Kansas NOW! May 20, 2013 Time is of the essence right now in Kansas. We have the opportunity to stop the implementation of the Common Core Standards (CCS), but we must act quickly! As a final matter of this legislative session, your State Senator and State Representative will be voting on the state appropriations bill that must be approved by both houses in order to stop Common Core. As you know, the Common Core State Standards Initiative is a big-government, top-down control of education that sacrifices individualism for the sake of the collective. Local school boards will have zero control of content, and costs are estimated to be $16 billion with 90% paid by these states who have no say in what is being taught! There is also a data-tracking requirement from K through Career that is an intrusive violation of the privacy rights of our children and their parents. Additionally, CCS is a deliberate dumbing-down of our children as shown by performance scores that have steadily deteriorated since the inception of the Department of Education. In fact, the standards are so low that two Ph.D.s serving on the CCS validation committee (Dr. Sandra Stotsky and Dr. James Milgram) refused to sign off on the standards. You can read more about this issue in this Phyllis Schlafly column. We can defeat Common Core in Kansas – but only with your help. Take Action! Please call your legislators and ask them to vote “no” on any budget that does not defund the Common Core. You can also click here to send an e-mail (talking points provided) to your representatives.

You have to go to the link below to sign the petition

http://www.capwiz.com/eagleforum/iss...ertid=62678611

Reversing Course on Common Core

Three years ago, states sprinted to adopt national curriculum standards – the Common Core – in hopes of getting a chunk of $4.35 billion in federal “stimulus.” Forty-five states ultimately adopted the program, but over the last few months a firestorm has spread as the standards have hit districts and previously unaware citizens have denounced a federal takeover of their schools. Common Core, which once seemed like a done deal, now seems like anything but.

• "Behind the Curtain: Assessing the Case for National Curriculum Standards," by Neal McCluskey
• "Common Core a Threat to the State, Districts, and Students," by Neal McCluskey
• "Only the Little People Oppose Common Core," by Neal McCluskey

Push Against Common Core Gains Momentum

As parents, citizens, and legislators learn more about Common Core, some are deciding it is not the best means of improving American education. Parents in many states are mounting grassroots campaigns against Common Core’s standardization of learning and federal testing of students. In April, the Republican National Committee issued a resolution rejecting Common Core, saying it is a “plan [that] creates and fits the country with a nationwide straitjacket on academic freedom and achievement.”
Critics of Common Core say it is an untried experiment that lacks legitimacy and empirical study and is now being foisted upon the entire U.S. school system. It has the potential to waste billions of dollars, multiple years of education efforts, and the learning potential of all schoolchildren.
Several state legislatures are considering withdrawing from Common Core (CC), delaying or not funding implementation, or withdrawing from national testing by government-funded consortia. Four states never adopted CC: Alaska, Nebraska, Texas, and Virginia. Minnesota accepted CC English standards, but rejected CC math. Private organizations developed CC; it was neither debated in public nor enacted by state legislators.
Certainly many Common Core promoters believe further centralization of education will improve educational outcomes, but power and cash may also be motivating some supporters. There is an immense amount of money flowing to public education because of Common Core implementation, and also to specific companies that are CC public-private partners that develop curriculum, create tests, and train educators to teach Common Core.
Federal Education Standards
On a national level, Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA) is asking the Senate Appropriations Committee to cut off funds that allow the Obama administration to cajole states into adopting Common Core standards and national standardized tests by tying some funding to CC adoption. Grassley challenges other legislators to co-sign his letter to the Appropriations Committee which documents that the Obama administration forced states to sign on to CC as a prerequisite to get Race to the Top money or to receive No Child Left Behind (NCLB) waivers. These waivers allow a state to continue receiving federal funding although NCLB requirements have not been met. Grassley’s letter also addresses concerns about federalizing education:
The decision about what students should be taught and when it should be taught has enormous consequences for our children. Therefore, parents ought to have a straight line of accountability to those who are making such decisions. State legislatures, which are directly accountable to the citizens of their states, are the appropriate place for those decisions to be made, free from any pressure from the U.S. Department of Education.
Opponents of Common Core state that nationalized education standards are unconstitutional, citing the 10th Amendment, which limits federal influence over states. The General Educational Provisions Act also prohibits federal overreach by prohibiting “any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States [from exercising] 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. . . .”
Federal Standardized Testing
Heavy reliance on standardized testing is another controversial aspect of Common Core. Critics suggest nationwide tests will neither improve education nor register whether education is improving. Some experts point to teachers “teaching to tests” and students who are anxious over standardized test results as root problems in American education.
The New York Daily News reports that students from 33 New York City schools boycotted state exams that tested students according to Common Core standards that New York will not even begin teaching until September. Parents said their students would boycott tests because they oppose Common Core and the overuse of standardized testing. When 3rd- through 8th-graders took the tests in mid-April, one-third of students at the Earth School in Manhattan opted-out. The New York Times reports that among students who did take the tests, “many did not finish, and some students said classmates were crying at the end.” (04-19-13)
A further complication in the rush to adopt Common Core is that competition to federal tests from private companies has arisen. The U.S. Department of Education gave $360 million from the federal economic-stimulus act of 2009 to two consortia, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) to develop national standardized tests. Some observers say competition could be the beginning of the end for PARCC and SBAC, as states like Alabama opt to use tests being prepared by non-federal competitors, like ACT/Pearson. Alabama chose ACT because it has background, infrastructure, and many years of successfully testing students (Fordham Institute, 04-16-13).
Invasion of Students’ Privacy
Common Core gives unprecedented access to students’ personal information to schools and third parties and thus may invade student and family privacy. Privacy laws have previously prohibited such data from being available, but those laws have been changed and reinterpreted to allow such information as name, address, social security number, attendance, test scores, learning disabilities, and family information to be recorded and shared. The Obama administration made changes to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), broadening the collection of students’ information and sharing it with other agencies. This information will not only be available to schools, but also to researchers and private companies. The Gates Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation, and Rupert Murdoch of News Corp. have funded and developed this database system and recently turned it over to a nonprofit corporation called inBloom, established for the purpose of controlling the information. There are security risks involved in the collection and storage of students’ data.
The New York Daily News reports that parents were neither informed nor did they give permission for New York to allow private data about their children to be collected and shared. The report continues:
If this information leaks out or is improperly used, it could stigmatize a child and damage his or her prospects for life. The state and the city are setting themselves up for multimillion-dollar class-action suits if and when these data breaches occur. The data [which] inBloom receives from the education department will be placed in a vulnerable data cloud. Many technology professionals do not trust clouds for their more sensitive data (03-14-13).
Opponents of the data collection and storage, which is already in full swing in nine states and scheduled for use in all Common Core states, include the New York Civil Liberties Union and ParentalRights.org.
The “sphere of privacy within the family” is effectively being broken down and destroyed by those who want to track children. This is in alignment with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child which “has repeatedly browbeat nations to create a national database just like this that will allow the government to track children, purportedly to make sure their human rights are being protected — different declared purpose, same kind of system, same invasion of privacy for government purposes,” states ParentalRights.org President Michael P. Farris (WorldNetDaily.com, 04-25-13).
“Turning massive amounts of personal data about public school students [over] to a private corporation without any public input is profoundly disturbing and irresponsible,” the executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union told the Daily News. The Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington is suing the U.S. Education Department in an effort to stop the illegal collection, storage, and sharing of student data (03-13-13).
Follow the Money
Those who oppose Common Core are fighting an uphill battle against the money and political forces that created, fund, and promote Common Core. Why has Bill Gates spent millions of dollars to develop, support, and fund the establishment of Common Core standards and testing in U.S. public schools? Why did Exxon Mobil Corporation blitz television coverage of the Masters golf tournament with ads promoting Common Core? These questions are not easily answered.
Along with the federal government, private philanthropies and private companies have dumped money into Common Core in a manner unprecedented in American education. Arne Duncan’s appointment as President Obama’s Secretary of Education marked a new era of opportunity for private influence on public education, and under his watch public-private partnerships have flourished. There are also swinging personnel doors between the Gates Foundation and the Department of Education, although that would be illegal if they were professional rather than amateur lobbyists.
The Common Core revolt is definitely grassroots whereas Common Core has big money behind it. Bill Gates gave the National PTA $1 million and funds think tanks that favor Common Core. And the Gates Foundation money isn’t slowing down. It is currently soliciting proposals from teachers:
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is accepting proposals from organizations, primarily those that consider themselves to be networks of teachers, to support implementation of Common Core State Standards in literacy and mathematics. Through its “Shifting into High Gear: Accelerating the Common Core Through Teacher Networks” initiative, the foundation will award grants ranging from $100,000 to $250,000 to organizations working to accelerate implementation of the Common Core across a robust teacher network. Priority will be given to innovative approaches, which create scalable solutions that travel across networks quickly and broadly (FoundationCenter.org, 03-13-13).
The Gates Foundation now wields tremendous influence in American education. Michael B. Petrilli, executive vice president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute that has received millions in Gates Foundation grant money, told the Puget Sound Business Journal in 2009, “It is not unfair to say that the Gates Foundation’s agenda has become the country’s agenda in education.” Mr. Petrilli wrote at the Fordham website in April 2013, criticizing the Republican National Committee statement against Common Core, “Republicans used to stand for standards. We’re confident that once GOP governors and legislators have a chance to give this language a look, they will again.” Mr. Petrilli seems to suggest that those who oppose Common Core are opposed to standards. But for many of Common Core’s opponents, the opposite is true. The more they learn about the standards and the way they are being implemented, the less they find to like.

http://www.eagleforum.org/publicatio...-momentum.html

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Indoctrination Revealed in Utah School Curriculum


Youtube



Published on May 11, 2013
http://www.utahnsagainstcommoncore.com - Have you heard the notion that Common Core standards don't indoctrinate? Well they don't. It's the curriculum that is susceptible of indoctrinating. Here's an example of social justice activism for 1st graders.

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/05/...ah-school.html


Now remember this is starting in the first grade!!!

Saturday, May 25, 2013

Teacher Resigns Over Curriculum Mandates and Disrespect

Youtube


Published on May 21, 2013
A veteran teacher shares her story of...

5/26/13: The outpouring of love and support is overwhelming. I originally intended for this video to be watched by my administrators and my community; I had no idea it would reach so many. The thousands of stories already shared with me from around the globe that mirror my own are both critical and heartbreaking. I cannot change the system from within, so I leave to allow myself to continue teaching in my way, on my terms. I never planned on giving up, and I never will. If you are interested in learning more about me and my future educational endeavors, feel free to visit http://tunes2teach.com. I have the deepest respect and gratitude for those whose voices join with mine, and for those who are still fighting to find their own.


A veteran teacher explains why the "No Child Left Behind" mandates are killing creative learning in schools and how teachers have been diminished. This is formidable resignation letter and a damning example of what schools are being forced to become.

http://www.activistpost.com/2013/05/...urriculum.html

“Common Core”: The ObamaCare of Education

Posted on May 29, 2013 by Common Constitutionalist




It sends shivers down the spines of freedom loving individuals. It is the Obamacare of education with its national standards and testing and its one-size-fits-all government model.
While the implementation of the Common Core curriculum is new, the passion for and the idea of national education has been burning in the hearts of progressives for more than a century.
Many people blame George W. Bush for Common Core. After all Common Core is just the natural extension of Bush’s “No Child Left Behind,” resulting in the progression to Obama’s “Race to the Top.”
“Race to the Top” was simply a bribe offered to cash poor states during the recession to entice them to accept the Common Core curriculum. Just imagine the federal government saying to the states: “You may have this pile of money to help your state through these tough times.” “Great,” reply the states. “What do we have to do?” “Oh, not much,” say the feds. “Just accept these national education standards and teach exactly what we dictate with no possibility of change or adjustment to the curriculum. That’s all.”
“Oh, is that all? We’ll take the cash and worry about the ramifications later,” say the states.
As I stated, Common Core is just the natural progression of an ever-intrusive federal government that has been advancing the idea of a national school system devoid of local control.
Each progressive administration, dating as far back as reconstruction, has moved the ball forward. Whether a little or a lot, the ball moved forward.
Before Bush’s “No Child Left Behind,” there was Bill Clinton, who in 1994 secured passage of the “Improving American Schools Act” and the “Goals 2000 Educate America Act.” Notice all the lovely flowery names for these laws? They picked these names so that no politician can vote against them. It’s quite dishonest.
Prior to Clinton there was kinder, gentler George H.W. Bush and his Charlottesville Education Summit in 1989. What came out of the summit were eight, typically liberal, pie-in-the-sky, feel-good, unachievable talking points dressed up as goals. Among these were gems such as “All children will start school ready to learn.” “Every adult American will be literate.” “The high school graduation rate will be at least 90%”. (Atlanta Public Schools had just over 51 percent of students graduate. The high school graduation rate in some Georgia school districts is under 50 percent: Randolph County (49.3 percent); Talbot County (45.5 percent); and Twiggs County (45.3 percent).) I won’t even waste my time commenting for I’m sure you’ve drawn the same conclusion. Absurd!
As one would expect of Ronald Reagan, although he supported education, he felt it better left to the states. But even in the Reagan Administration the “Improving America’s Schools Act” was passed in 1983.
Jimmy Carter, being the leftist he was and still is, did not feel the same about local control. We all know to thank Yimmy^[1] for his signature on October 17, 1979 — the creation of the national Department of Education. Ugh!
Before Carter there was Nixon. His 1970 “Special Message to Congress on Education Reform” simply threw money at the supposed problem. He did, however, discover a new human right. It was the Right to Read. The constitutional framers must’ve forgotten that amendment when crafting the Bill of Rights.
Then there was Lyndon Johnson — modern-day father of the ruination of the United States. Johnson’s “Great Society” debacle was an umbrella vision. Under it were handouts for job training programs, housing programs, healthcare, poverty programs and of course education. Everything the federal government shouldn’t be involved in.
He chose to sell his idea of “Education Reform” as part of his “War on Poverty” because “poor kids can learn too.” This cause gave rise to ESEA, Johnson’s “Elementary and Secondary Education Act.” He claimed it was to break the “cycle of poverty” and as is always the case, throwing money at the education problem via a government “investment” will solve things.
In a conversation with VP Hubert Humphrey, Johnson told Humphrey: “Don’t ever argue with me. I’ll go a hundred million or 1 billion on health or education. I don’t argue about that anymore than I argue about [First Lady] Lady Bird buying flour. I’ll spend the god damned money. I may cut back on some tanks.”
I originally intended to take this all the way back to Woodrow Wilson, but frankly it’s depressing to think what has happened just since the 1960s. I think you get the point. Common Core is not the beginning but it may be the end of proper education in this country if it is not stopped.




Read more: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/05/...#ixzz2Us86NyQe

CAP Likes Common Core

Spencer Irvine, June 21, 2013



Share/Save

There is an interesting split on the Left over the Obama Administration’s Common Core education reforms. Many on the educational Left dislike it, including the Modern Language Association (MLA) and the editors of Rethinking Schools. Conversely, the president’s favorite think tank—the Center for American Progress (CAP)—is enthusiastic about it.
The “Common Core” being developed by the U. S. Department of Education, is a program of benchmarks and standards for math, science and language that states must adopt if they wish to continue receiving federal funds.
A recent event sponsored by the Center for American Progress featured several Core supporters, including: Leo Casey, Executive Director of the Albert Shanker Institute, Elizabeth Evans, founding CEO of VIVA Teachers, Kaitlin Pennington, CAP’s Education Policy Analyst, Teach Plus Memphis Executive Director Lisa Watts and teacher and union leader William Wong, who spoke on the future of teacher involvement in education policy.
Pennington claimed that before Common Core, teachers used to “feel like victims in the process instead of advocates” regarding curriculum and experienced relative isolation in policy input. Now, Common Core teaches “how to make teaching more dynamic” and makes room for teachers in the policy-making community.
Furthering the progressivism of Common Core, Pennington praised the program for its ability to “welcome a diversity of thought among its members”. Admitting that teachers’ organizations and teachers’ unions overlap, she could only say that both are aware of the overlap and deal with it in a professional manner.
Pennington showed a video testimonial about Common Core and the growing influence of teacher’s voice organizations in the education policy sector. Most of the teachers interviewed talked about how they could share a “boots on the ground perspective” with policymakers and how their “united front” counters the “policies [that] are inflicted upon us rather than be developed collaboratively with us.” Some added how both “teacher’s voice organizations and teachers’ union members could work together” to “instantly multiply and amplify your voice” in policy-making.
Lisa Watts, of the teacher’s voice organization Teach Plus Memphis, said that too many “teachers leave by year 3, before they hit their stride” in their development as a teacher. She explained that they are too discouraged when entering the teaching profession, with long hours and an imminent need to become organized.
William Wong, a teachers’ union president and leader of a teacher’s voice organization, said that both are working together to improve education and include teachers in policy-making.
Elizabeth Evans spoke of the disconnect between teachers in the view of society and teachers as individuals. She said that “teaching has a revered and valued role in society…We need to close the gap in perception between individuals and the collective,” in order to improve teaching over time.
Leo Casey highlighted the issues of teachers, noted how “teaching has mostly been a female occupation” and how they“have struggled from the beginning” to combat issues like lack of respect and other perceptions that male-dominated professions like law or medicine never dealt with.
Watts noted how, in the video presentation, “we heard a monolithic voice” and illustrated the “disconnect between what they [policymakers] hear” and what actually happens on the ground. Even though teachers are passionate about their profession, “for some reason, it hasn’t been heard”.
Evans declared that since “public officials…have been failing us” for years, policymakers and teachers should now “change the way that we work together.” Casey added that there’s “no doubt that teachers feel overwhelmed with the testing and tsunami around them” that further overburdens teachers.
Wong tried to correct perceptions of teachers’ unions and how they engage with teachers, stating that “there’s a lot of misconceptions of what these groups do”. Wong went on to say that “there’s not this magical box of status quo that we’re trying to protect” as unions, adding that they are trying to make better policy decisions. Casey supported his argument, saying that “teachers’ unions are democratic.” To address concerns about union ads and political leanings, Casey could only acknowledge that these concerns exist but did not give a cohesive argument as to why unions lean one way or the other.
Evans said that it is known that “there are imperfections in” working with unions, that “there are limited resources to go around” and there is a need to make one’s voice “outsized” to garner attention about your issues and concerns.
Casey suggested adding mandatory 1.5 hour collaboration and planning time every day, as the New American Academy in New York does on a daily basis. Watts ended the discussion by reiterating the importance of teacher’s voice organizations and how “there’s a hunger on all sides for the work that we are doing.”
Spencer Irvine is a staff writer at Accuracy in Academia.
If you would like to comment on this article, e-mail mal.kline@academia.

http://www.academia.org/cap-likes-co...410e-224224701

Common Core: Homeschoolers Face New Questions on College Admissions

Posted on June 25, 2013


Liberals are hard at work to get in the minds of conservative children.
Check it out:
New information on Common Core “alignment” by the ACT, SAT, and even GED exams raises questions about the impact Common Core will have on private and homeschooled students and their ability to “opt out” of the federally incentivized standards if they want to apply for college.
David Coleman, new head of the College Board—which administers the SAT—said in an interview with Education Week that one of his top priorities is to align the SAT with the new standards. “The Common Core provides substantial opportunity to make the SAT even more reflective of what higher education wants.”
Valerie Strauss at The Washington Post reported in February that the College Board sent an e-mail to all members of the College Board stating, in part:
In the months ahead, the College Board will begin an effort in collaboration with its membership to redesign the SAT® so that it better meets the needs of students, schools, and colleges at all levels.… In its current form, the SAT is aligned to the Common Core as well as or better than any assessment that has been developed for college admission and placement, and serves as a valuable tool for educators and policymakers.
Continue Reading on blog.heritage.org ...


Common Core: Homeschoolers Face New Questions on College Admissions


Brittany Corona

June 23, 2013 at 3:46 pm





New information on Common Core “alignment” by the ACT, SAT, and even GED exams raises questions about the impact Common Core will have on private and homeschooled students and their ability to “opt out” of the federally incentivized standards if they want to apply for college.
David Coleman, new head of the College Board—which administers the SAT—said in an interview with Education Week that one of his top priorities is to align the SAT with the new standards. “The Common Core provides substantial opportunity to make the SAT even more reflective of what higher education wants.”
Valerie Strauss at The Washington Post reported in February that the College Board sent an e-mail to all members of the College Board stating, in part:

In the months ahead, the College Board will begin an effort in collaboration with its membership to redesign the SAT® so that it better meets the needs of students, schools, and colleges at all levels.… In its current form, the SAT is aligned to the Common Core as well as or better than any assessment that has been developed for college admission and placement, and serves as a valuable tool for educators and policymakers.

In 2010, the ACT also released “The Alignment of Common Core and ACT’s College and Career Readiness System,” which offers assurance that the “ACT pledges to work with other stakeholders to develop strategies and solutions that maximize the coverage of the Common Core State Standards to meet the needs of states, districts, schools, and students.”
Even in states that do not sign on to Common Core, schools could find themselves having to align content with Common Core material in order to ensure student success on the SAT or ACT—something that could affect private schools.
Moreover, recent alignment of the GED assessment, sometimes used by homeschoolers to demonstrate content mastery, could pull homeschoolers into the Common Core web. The GED just made a major shift from its 2002 Series GED test to its 2014 GED test. Its justification: “The shift to the Common Core standards is happening nationwide at the current time.”
Proponents of the standards have tried to argue that Common Core is optional for states. But alignment of tests like the SAT, ACT, and GED poses new questions about the extent to which states, private schools, and homeschooled students will be compelled to accept national standards and tests.
Thankfully, tests like the SAT and ACT can be changed or replaced, even though they have begun a transition to Common Core. If a significant number of states pull out of Common Core, these exams can be modified, or there could be an opening in the market for other college entrance exams to take root.

Read more: http://conservativebyte.com/2013/06/...#ixzz2XGQe4tS7