Thursday, May 31, 2012
Parents Need To Take A Greater Role in the Education of Your Children, But You Can't Because _______ (fill in the blank)
When I first set out to try and 'right' perceived wrongs perpetrated on decent taxpaying citizens and parents through the public school system, I thought I was going to make quick headway. I thought, if I talked long and hard enough (I guess), I could make people see how easily and simply all today's educational issues could be solved by moving education back to the local level. Who, after all, more than a parent would want to see their student thrive in their education?
I have been wrong about myriad things in my life, but about fewer things have I been more wrong.
I remember one of the first times I discussed a bill with a legislator and said something akin to, "Parents don't want that.", and I was told, "Parents don't know what they want."
I've also been told, "Too many parents out there today are doing a terrible job - someone has to take care of those kids." "We all talk about local control - but local school boards are doing a terrible job."
There was even a legislator this session who wanted to make ALL home schoolers provide their lesson plans and curricula to the state because she knew A family who was 'home schooling' their children because they couldn't manage to get the kids to school on time due to the fact that their crack habit created somewhat irregular hours.
There is an old Chinese proverb that says, "If you give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. If you TEACH a man to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime."
Sadly, we have no idea how in the world to decipher this proverb anymore because humans have finally come to the point in history where legislation is written at EVERY level about EVERYTHING to protect EVERYONE from THEMSELVES.
No, there are no responsible home schoolers out there home schooling because there is ONE that isn't. No, there are no school boards out there doing the right thing because there are a number that AREN'T.
We don't write legislation, regulations and mandates TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE doing the right thing in society anymore, we create laws to try and force those that aren't into doing so. This ideology exists in direct opposition to that of the Constitution and the Founders' vision of our Republic. According to the Founders, government wasn't instituted among men to protect men from THEMSELVES, but to protect THEM from the government (over-regulation).
Yes, I feel that MANY parents today (maybe even a majority) have abandoned their children on a number of levels (emotionally, physically, economically, behaviorally).
I know good Christian parents who just can't bear to be honest with their children and reproach them for bad behavior because "We must speak life" into our children and "shaming or confronting" them will only make them feel worse about themselves. They 'helicopter' around their children's activities and schools because they never want to be out of the picture, but their eyes remain blissfully closed to anything other than perfection.
I know parents who need to have a house in Oak Tree but can only afford it on two incomes so they drop their kids off at school in the morning, allow them to let themselves into the house after school and remain unsupervised until they come home from work, pick them up and then cart them to 20 or 30 after school activities because they feel guilty about not spending time with them.
I know parents who have been left by a spouse (or whose other half is serving overseas in the military) and are having to be two people all the time and are simply too worn out to do as much as they'd like and as much as their children need.
I know parents who simply don't care a whit about their kids excepting the gubbmt check they get to feed and clothe them.
But let's "what if" a minute....
What if there weren't gubbmt checks to provide a 'safety net' for those who simply don't know how to survive because they've been getting a gubbmt check all their lives?
What if, instead of in-house suspension, a parent had to come up to the school and babysit their own misbehaving child, or be forced to take them to work with them?
What if a child was humanely and calmly given a swat with a paddle on their back end when they created an issue in the classroom that prevented others from learning? (I had a NUMBER of those and I turned out okay with no lasting emotional or physical scars!)
What if churches actually taught Biblical parenting, accountability and responsibility from their pews instead of the "speaking life" to "prosperity" gospel?
What if principals backed up teachers and told parents they had better make their kid tow the line or they'd get tossed into the street?
.....What if the federal, state and local governments, schools and districts, weren't providing a MYRIAD of ways for parents to avoid having to take personal responsibility for their kids?
.....What if the federal and state government stayed out of the mechanics of education entirely and schools and districts simply gave parents no choice but to have the responsibility for their children they should have assumed once they gave birth to them?
Yes, unfortunately for all of society, Leave It To Beaver is basically only a television show providing a glimpse of what family used to be and may never be again here in America as American values and morals drift further and further outside the scope of those of the '50's.
That doesn't negate the fact that, today, the education establishment, and government at all levels, take power away from parents on a long term and DAILY basis, only to then attack them for not doing 'enough'.
Guess what? Prophesies are often self-fulfilling and your straw man is on fire.
Thursday, May 24, 2012
A number of recent Oklahoman editorials have disparaged those NOT backing ACE tests and the A-F grading system. Apparently, those of us begging to differ with these complicated, federally-derived, accountability systems want dumbed-down standards that will graduate scores of unemployable public school students all across Oklahoma.
Not to dodge credit, but that trend likely began in 1965 when the first 31 page, 605 section Elementary and Secondary Education Act (now No Child Left Behind – NCLB) unleashed a tidal wave of federal regulations upon local schools and established the ‘pay for play’ scheme that keeps states towing the line (according to the feds, "Here schools, do what we tell you to do, and if you do, we'll give you back some of the money we steal from your state's taxpayers to make you do what we want you to do.")
Today’s NCLB is 9,601 sections and an untold number of actual printed pages.
This in stark contrast to the philosophy of America’s Founders who believed that free public grammar school should be supplied by every township containing 50 families or more to teach the fundamentals of reading, writing, ciphering, history, geography and Bible study, with control and oversight directed by local school boards – a system which by 1776 had produced a higher literacy rate than we have today.
Could unchecked growth of federal control over public education be why NAEP reading scores for 17-year-olds have increased only one point since 1971 and NAEP math scores for 17-year-olds have increased only two points – over 41 years? Why have SAT scores in the verbal category dropped 25 points since 1972 and math scores increased by only one?
According to the American Enterprise Institute, who released a paper entitled, Federal Compliance Works Against Education Policy Goals, “…fiscal and administrative requirements often lead to expensive and time-consuming compliance processes that are not related to improving student achievement or school success.” Lindsay Burke, writing for the Heritage Foundation in The Dead Hand of Education Reform also reports that, “…while the feds provided just 7% of education funding, they accounted for 41% of the paperwork burden imposed on the states…”
Santa Fe South High School in Oklahoma City personified this thesis recently when they submitted their NCLB waiver (A-F) paperwork to the SDE only to find out that, while their test scores were fine, they were placed on the failing school list because their paperwork wasn’t filled out properly.
The same day the disapproval of the A-F rules passed the Administrative Rules and Government Oversight Committee, Governor Fallin issued a press release indicating her support of the rules and the SDE issued a press release touting their receipt of nearly 7 million dollars in School Improvement Grants to be used for “turning around” schools determined to be ‘failing’ under the NCLB-prescribed A-F grading system.
My son, in first grade at our local public elementary, doesn’t know his basic math facts or parts of speech, but has had week long units on Global Warming and Rainforest Ecology between his 2 days a week of Art (his is an Arts Integration school). Recently, his teacher told me she just “doesn’t have time to teach [math facts] to mastery” because she has to teach to the test – the results of which will soon determine whether she keeps her job.
Not only are regulations and/or mandates confusing and generally counterproductive, they are expensive. In a paper just released by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, the authors show how regulations drive up costs and reduce competition. In public education, the case can be made that mandates and regulations force money to be spent OUTSIDE the classroom on administrative and compliance processes that do not affect student learning, making it impossible for actual school choice to occur by reducing competition. Why take your child to another public school when that school will be subjected to all the same federal mandates and regulations as all other public schools? The authors also discuss the adverse incentives rife at the federal level to continue this trend ad infinitum.
In the Competitive Enterprise Institute's yearly publication, "Ten Thousand Commandments 2012", the authors put an actual number to the cost of overall federal regulation. They report, "Regulatory compliance costs dwarf corporate income taxes of $198 billion, and exceed individual income taxes and even pre-tax corporate profits." We should absolutely take umbrage with this notion - especially when it applies to those institutions supposedly teaching our children the basic skills needed to succeed in life.
Vilifying those of us who believe education is a local issue best dealt with by parents, district school boards and education officials rather than nameless faceless bureaucrats at the federal – or even state level – will not change the fact that a layered, top-down bureaucracy will never solve governance problems like a locality. Government closest to the people (parents) is always best because it is nearest the needs of the people being served (students/parents) and paying for the services (parents/taxpayers).
Monday, May 21, 2012
I had been planning to write another personal post, and here it is. I have noted that people simply LOVE to hear personal stories and as a person who loves to share to the point of oversharing, I will provide!
Originally, my post was going to detail only my latest in yet another public school run-in, followed by a blog post on what I believe is wrong in public schools today. I have decided to merge these two activities here for the most part, however (although I will include a later post on what is wrong with public schools to include some diagrams upon which I have been working).
Let me begin with the personal story...As many of you know, I have had a crazy time of first grade with my son Samuel. Last week, Sam brought home paper after paper on the rainforest. I didn't pay much attention to any of them frankly. To me, a child in first grade who can't do his addition or subtraction math facts to mastery but is studying the rainforest seemed too stupid a situation to even confront. Then, it started happening...."Mom, did you know the rainforests are being destroyed all over the world?" "Mom, did you know there won't be any sloths by the time I grow up?" Hmmmmm....
Teachers who attempt to teach biology (especially Rainforest Ecology) to the child of a woman with a Master's degree in Biology who actually went all the way to Costa Rica for a Rainforest Ecology class and who saw rainforest first hand (and there is a whole lot of it in Costa Rica), should probably walk softly. But oh no...
Of course I had to put Sam in the White Family Re-Education camp for that week and answer the constant questions arising from his overwrought, environmentalist, indoctrination with comments such as,
"Yes, Sam, some rainforests are being cut down and the land used so people don't have to live in poverty. We don't believe God gave the world rainforests to simply sit and look at. If people have no other jobs, but have land, they should use it wisely and make a living for themselves and their families rather than rely on the government or churches to support them."
"Yes Sam, sloths die and they do reproduce slowly, but there is LOTS of rainforest out there in the great big world God gave us (all around the equator) and many countries manage sections of their rainforests to preserve it for future generations. Sloths will be around for you to see, it is fairly certain."
I even helped him study words like "Kapok Tree", "toucan", "protect" and "habitat" for his spelling test, though he can't spell "huge" or "very" - words I would think should pull a bit more weight in the English language.
Thursday Sam brought home a math paper that had him adding 2, 3-digit numbers in column form. Hmmmm...
I decided I'd had enough. On this homework paper, I placed a lined sticky note with the following comments,
Dear Mrs. Smith, Sam will not be doing this homework as he's spent most of the week learning how to spell Kapok Tree and still is unable to recount most of his basic math facts. I don't feel he needs to be further confused. Here are four pages of basic math facts that I had him pull out of some math practice books I keep at home. You may count them for homework, or give Sam a zero - whatever you think is best. Thank you, Jenni White."
Now, Mrs. Smith has been absent for the past several days, so I have no idea if she will count them or not, but between 2 days a week of art classes, computer class, and classroom days spent on activities such as field day and the Jog-a-Thon (- to raise money for the computer lab. Once, as a member of PTA last year, I suggested we didn't need a computer lab in elementary school. This was not at all a popular thought. Suffice it to say, I am no longer a PTA member.), when exactly is Sam supposed to master ANYTHING that matters?
Which brings me to the second portion of my post. Today, I read an article called, "Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste". It was written by a man who extolled his time in public education after World War II and what an excellent education it was. He then went on to make comments on public education today - insisting that the thorough failure we are seeing is a result of lack of investment and inattention to the detail of those poverty-stricken students who just can not get on track.
After my experiences in public education, I felt absolutely OBLIGED to respond to this sad, utterly misinformed, geriatric individual with the following post;
This is where I get sad and cry for the Greatest Generation. Eli, why in the WORLD, after admitting that you graduated with an excellent education following WWII, do you believe that our education system is suffering due to a LACK of anything other than, well, EDUCATION? You of ALL people should realize the great inroads in all industry after WWII which were made on the backs of those who earned an excellent BASIC education in sometimes one room school houses - without computers and online training and special accommodations.
I regret to admit that I believe it is your generation, Eli, who have let my children down by pandering to an outmoded, selfish belief that your children MUST possess more than did you yourself. Frankly, what our children - and our bloated, over-priced, over-spending school systems - need is the swift kick in the pants of NOT needing - of simplicity and thrift - all those things provided your generation from which my (and my children's) generation have been robbed by the very souls that benefited most from those practices.
The propensity to look toward other countries as a way to educate Americans is not only spurious - as our system was NEVER meant to educate Communists or Socialists - but also disingenuous as well when you state that our educational system is inadequate to educate children of poverty. Poverty is defined in a completely different way today than it was in your day. People with cell phones and big screen TV's are considered destitute enough to qualify for enough free federal government programs to grant them access to better resources than even those NOT on public assistance!
Not only that, but your comparisons to education in other countries doesn't include that America's poverty rate (the number of children actually unable to eat with both parents working) is a bare fraction of theirs. And you also do not mention that other countries do not provide PUBLIC education in the same manner as the US.
I take umbrage to the incongruent parallels you, and others who insist that America's PUBLIC education system only needs MORE - more money, more computers, more STUFF.
My first grader can not add 7+7, but by God he knows that rainforests are being destroyed before his eyes. My 4th grader can not write a coherent, perfectly spelled paragraph, but she understands that American Indians were murdered by non-natives and that Global Warming is a fact.
Return schools to the oneness of parental control, schools boards and districts, teach the basics as you were taught, and not all the other GARBAGE and I would absolute bet GOOD money we'd see the results you had as a lad.
Less is more Eli. Face it and a hearty dose of REALITY as well.
More on the absolute cognitive dissonance that is what we call today, "Educational Choice", later.
Saturday, May 19, 2012
Fair enough. Anyone who can afford to spend money on advertising should CERTAINLY be allowed to do so. The thing I'm most concerned about here is the word "Conservative". To be fair, Senator Jolley's ad was not the actual impetus for my reverie - no, that came in the 2010 election cycle when Governor Fallin and a host of other Republicans with accessible voting records, applied the term to themselves ad nauseum. (This recent assessment of what Oklahoma Republicans say and what they actually do, might help you understand my confusion.)
So, what exactly does the term "Conservative" mean? Let's do a little etymological study here. According to Merriam-Webster's online dictionary for children, the primary definition appears to be, "believing in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society". In the adult section, we see that the word originated somewhere in the 14th century and is today given the definition, "of or relating to a philosophy of conservatism". So what is "Conservatism"? Webster says,
Alright. Agreeing to apply Merriam-Webster's definition from the standpoint that America has been using a Webster's dictionary since 1806, we can then make assessment of Senator Jolley's claims of "conservative".a : disposition in politics to preserve what is established b : a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change; specifically : such a philosophy calling for lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility for personal needs (as retirement income or health-care coverage). [emphasis mine]
I am going to use the mailer that was sent out to district 41 on behalf of Clark Jolley by the State Chamber of Oklahoma ("not authorized or approved by any candidate", but a contribution to the campaign by the Chamber as an 'in kind' donation, so it is definitely 'fair game' for use as a measure of his campaign). Also, it is important to note that according to our State Chamber, "Strong public schools provide quality educations for our children, as well as prepare a qualified workforce for our city’s future." Not only that, but the Chamber appears to haven't met an education reform they DON'T like! Good grief, they want the state involved in EVERY aspect of education. Color me stupid here, but I could have thought that it was the Communists that used their education system to educate 'workers'. I thought we had public education in America to, as our Founders stated, teach American children the joys of our Republic and to learn our Constitution and impart it to the next generations.
This mailer, "Senator Clark Jolley - Champion for Education", "Promoting Common-Sense, Conservative Reforms", lists five bills referred to as conservative reforms for which Senator Clark Jolley has pushed.
1. HB1456 "increase(d) accountability to parents". This bill was signed into law by the governor last year and contains no less than TWENTY-FOUR (24) requirements (mandates) for the State Department of Education (SDE) and local schools and districts. The majority of the requirements satisfied the requirements of the federal government in order for Superintendent Barresi and Governor Fallin to apply for a No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Waiver. HB1456 provides the BACKBONE of the NCLB Waiver with its prescription for a report card - to be issued by the SDE - for each individual school in the state using the familiar A-F nomenclature. May 2, 2012, a Motion of Disapproval was submitted to the Rules Committee in the House for the A-F grading rules, which allowed for an inordinate amount of failing schools which would then be taken over by the SDE and out of the hands of local education officials as per the Waiver's specifications. The fruits of the A-F grading also allowed Superintendent Barresi and Governor Fallin to collect nearly 7 million dollars in federal grants to "turnaround" D and F schools.
[FAIL: increases size of government, prevents local control, creates abrupt change]
2. HB1380 "save(d) money for the classroom". This bill was signed into law by the governor also last year. Senator Jolley is not an author of record for the bill so I do not know why this was included. 1380 was a bill to remove Trial DeNovo for teachers, ostensibly saving money by prohibiting fired teachers wanting recourse from the courts to drag out a determination. Yes, I'm sure this will save money for the state for those teachers who wanted to take their dismissal through higher levels of adjudication, but it also allows districts to more easily fire teachers who might want to add Intelligent Design to discussions of Evolution, or those who did not want to teach sex/health classes, for example.
[DRAW; considering a case could be made for usurpation of local control]
3. HB2115 "strengthen(s) local control". This bill was also signed into law last year. Again, this is not an example of Senator Jolley's legislative hand, as he is not an author on the bill. This bill allows the SDE to financially assist school districts who voluntarily consolidate. Yes, this does provide incentive, if you will, for schools to consolidate, but the SDE still is able to consolidate schools by their own authority involuntarily, so how this amounts to strengthening "local control", I see not.
[DRAW; considering ANY further laws added rather than repealed creates more government]
4. HB346 "ensure(s) quality education". Another 2011 bill now law. Senator Jolley is the lead author. This is the much-lauded bill to prevent social promotion and requires children to be reading by 3rd grade. Yes, ALL of us want Oklahoma children to be functionally literate and beyond, but it is ultimately the parent who must take responsibility for their children's education - not the school system. Additionally, simply retaining non-readers by 3rd grade does not "ensure" a quality education. What it DOES do is put more strain on teachers and schools who must constantly train to learn new teaching methods forced on them by continued mandates like the Common Core State Standards. This phenomenon causes children to be taught to state tests, the results of which can help determine if the teacher is fired or not (SB2033). It also opens the door to reasons for federal grant application such as the Race To The Top Early Learning Challenge under the argument that children need to be exposed to reading methods before public education starts at 8 (according to the Oklahoma Constitution). My own daughter came home from public school last year in April crying because her teacher told her if she didn't pass her state tests this year, she would be left in third grade. Yup, that worked out as planned! Thanks Senator Jolley for creating at least one scared teacher and one equally scared child!
[FAIL; increases size of government, takes oneness off parent, opens the door to bigger government, creates abrupt (and painful) change]
5. SB969 "enhance(d) school choice". This is, again, not a Jolley bill, it was a bill by Dan Newberry in the Senate and Lee Denney of the house. This provides a tax credit for individuals and/or businesses who donate money to "an eligible scholarship granting institution" for the purposes of providing an alternative education to disadvantaged (poor) and disabled students in failing school districts. Yes, this does allow choice for a number of 'classes' of students, but not for ALL students. No matter your opinion of the bill, it did force LOCAL school districts to yet again come under a mandate from the state and created a gargantuan controversy simply because of that fact.
[FAIL; increases size of government, usurps local control - actual choice can only be allowed when ALL mandates are removed from ALL public schools and they are allowed to operate as they should, through the jurisdiction of their boards]
I am adding SB2033 from 2010 and SB222 from 2009.
SB2033 was written by Coffee, Jolley, Ford, Rice and Leftwich of the Senate. This bill was created as a vehicle by which to apply for federal Race To The Top funds. The bill is 34 pages and codified into law the Teacher Leader Effectiveness Evaluation System (as mentioned in #4), the Race To The Top Commission, The Common Core State Standards Initiative, and failing school intervention program - three of the four aspects of the Obama Administration's Race To The Top grant paid for with ARRA funds.
[HUGE FAIL; massively increases size (and cost - taxes) of government, usurps local control, opens doors for more federal control and federal money through at least 13 different grant application possibilities]
Clark Jolley was the principle author on SB222. This bill was 26 pages long. It covered the fourth aspect of the RTT grant necessity - development of the P20 Council (and P20 Council REVOLVING FUND) to run the longitudinal database that collects educational 'data' from students Pre-K through 20 years of age. The P20 database has resulted in egregious violations of student privacy and is becoming vilified in a number of states as parents catch on. SB222 also created the Educational Quality and Accountability Board (and REVOLVING FUND), Quality Assessment and Accountability Task Force and many other provisions. I won't go into all of these since I have provided a copy of the bill for all to read, but I will say that the Educational Quality and Accountability Board never met. This created another gargantuan controversy because of the fact that state public school tests were never actually "properly assessed and calibrated according to law", making it legally impossible for the SDE to force ACE regulations.
[MASSIVE FAIL; enormous increase in size of government to the point that it effects privacy of students and families, usurps local control, opens doors for more federal control and more federal money through SLDS grant programs]
Now, since I have covered specific bills, I am going to take a minute to impart a personal story.
During 2011, there was a bill of Senator Jolley's (SB264) with which we had issue. It was advertised as a deregulation bill for schools, but there were an additional number of components - including a reference to the SLDS we didn't like - and we didn't want it passed. Unfortunately, we found it late in its legislative cycle - after it was going back to the House a second time. Three of us (Lynn Habluetzel, Danna Foreman and I - you can read about our board here if you don't know who we are), were walking the halls talking to Representatives, sharing our concerns about the bill, when Clark Jolley strides by us at a ferocious clip, points a finger at us and says, "I want to see you in my office" and marches off. We felt as though we were to follow, so we shrugged our shoulders at one another not knowing what was going on, and followed dutifully.
Senator Jolley strode into his office directly behind his desk, told us to sit down, sat down himself and immediately launched into a very thorough berating, replete with pointed finger. Now, mind you, Danna Foreman is actually a constituent of the Senator and NONE of us on the ROPE board are paid in any way - we are all mothers and housewives (Danna and Lynn also run their own businesses) who take it upon ourselves to study the legislative process and become involved. This fact, however, did not stop Senator Jolley from taking the time to tell us exactly how the cow ate the cabbage.
We were NOT to go around behind his back, he explained vociferously. If we had a problem with one of HIS bills, we needed to come to him first and not let him hear about it from someone else. He wanted to make sure HIS bills get passed and he would work with us but he was not going to have us going around him taking matters into our own hands.
I have NEVER been such a combination of flabbergasted, annoyed and angry all at the same time. I thought Senators were supposed to be public SERVANTS. At one point I finally decided I'd had enough and told him that we weren't paid lobbyists and didn't know the system inside and out - heck one of us was even a constituent - we were simply doing what we felt was right. It didn't require a lecture.
I have never forgotten that incident - and neither have Danna or Lynn.
None of us can understand why a man who can berate three housewives over an education bill really needs to continue as a Senator as this behavior simply doesn't seem consistent with that of a 'servant'. In fact, it makes me wonder if that's how he gets so many of his bills passed. Well, who wants to stand up to a bully?
In closing, while I feel certain that many people will see this as a HIT piece (which it is not, as every assertion in this blog can be corroborated or is backed up by a direct citation) it might help to hear Senator Jolley talk about the legislative process in his own words as recorded during a visit to the High Noon Club last year during a celebration of Milton Friedman's birthday.
I can believe that Senator Jolley (and the Chamber of Commerce) believes that he is conservative. We don't, and we hope we have made a direct enough case for you to agree.
Paul Blair is ROPE's choice for Senate. We hope he'll be yours as well.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
I think just about everyone in the state of Oklahoma remembers the Health Care Exchange debacle. Governor Fallin wanted to take 45 million dollars so Oklahoma could set up health care exchanges even prior to the determination by the Supreme Court as to whether Obamacare was even Constitutional.
Apparently, our governor is at it again.
May 2, 2012, the Administrative Rules and Government Oversight Committee met and disapproved the A-F grading system rules created by the Oklahoma State Department of Education. [For those uninitiated, there was a bill (HB1456) passed by the legislature last year (authored by Representative Lee Denney) which created the A-F nomenclature for Oklahoma schools - not the grading system itself - the formula upon which the grading was to rest, was left up to the SDE to determine.]
I am creating another more in-depth blog about the process, so I won't go into detail here. I simply want to point out a couple of things:
- The A-F grading system is the backbone of the NCLB waiver. Those schools considered failing, according to the grading system, will be taken over by the SDE and subjected to something called the Turnaround model (even more information here).
- To implement the Turnaround model, the SDE applies for something called School Improvement Grants (SIG).
All of these things are written about extensively in the waiver. They are ALL processes created by the FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. This program - A-F school grading - is a method by which local control of schools is usurped using money - from a federal government trillions of dollars in debt.
May 2, three things happened:
- The State Department of Education posted a press release saying that it was receiving nearly 6 MILLION dollars in SIG grants.
- Mary Fallin issued a press release reaffirming her support of the A-F system.
- The A-F grading system was disapproved by the Administrative Rules and Government Oversight Committee.
Here's our take on that situation:
The A-F system is now FINALLY under scrutiny by the legislators who passed the bill last year under the pretense that this would be a way for parents to finally understand how well their school was working for them. I can't imagine they had any idea at the time that this would be used as part of the NCLB waiver and all the punitive rules for 'failing' schools that came along with them. Now, if, using the A-F formula, a school is found to be a D or F school, the SDE can come in and take over a school - including 20% of its Title 1 Funding to implement the Turnaround model. Gone is local control - the state assumes control - using federal money and a federally prescribed program which hasn't even worked in Arne Duncan's OWN Chicago school district, let alone others!
The Governor and Dr. Barresi realize that if the A-F grading system goes down - the WAIVER GOES DOWN - and WITH IT the newly minted 6 million dollars in SIG grants.
So, once again we have to ask ourselves...education 'reform' is it about the kids, the parents, the schools - or is it really, only about money?
I read an article today that made me comment. I mean, I read stuff all the time about education 'reform' that makes me WANT to comment, but I persuade myself to avoid the futility - who cares about the comments section, really...anyone? If it's not snarky?
Today, I saw a number of articles in the Education GadFly (which shows up in my inbox, since I have an email subscription) that caught my eye. It was called, "Early reports from the heartland show support for the Common Core". Now, believe it or not, ROPE members do attempt to read articles in support of the Core, in case there's some solid evidence out there chronicling their worth, but also to see what new yarns are being spun about these fabulous standards so we can go about systematically debunking them.
These were the first two paragraphs of the article:
When I read reports like that of my colleague Kathleen Porter-Magee’s “Is there anything ‘common’ left in Common Core” I’m reminded why I like spending time with real educators and teachers in Ohio. Kathleen’s post provides a brutally concise and accurate summary of the political fights now swirling around the Common Core academic standards. She offers a glimpse into what rabid critics on both the far Right and Left are saying about the effort. The various ravings are epitomized by Susan Ohanian (whoever that is) claim that “the reality is that if people who care about public education don't find a way to fight [the Common Core standards], public schools are dead—and so is democracy.”)
But, in the heartland the conversations are very different and far more practical. Out here the issues aren’t political. Rather the talk focuses on how can educators most effectively implement the Common Core standards to improve instruction for students.
My family lives in Ohio. I live in Oklahoma. Though I (and my kids) love Ohio, Ohio is NOT the heartland, nor will it EVER be the heartland - maybe especially because it's IN THE EASTERN PART OF THE COUNTRY - but also not from the perspective of a born and bred Okie. I could go into a veritable essay on why Ohio isn't the "heartland", but I would digress, so let us push forward.
Here are the first two paragraphs of what 'is working' according to author Terry Ryan.
- Educators see the “big picture,” the “global” problems that the Common Core aims to address, i.e. U.S. students’ lackluster performance among their international competitors and the large number of high-school graduates who are not prepared for college or a career.
- A common language around the Common Core is being widely used. To a person, the educators spoke of ‘rigor and relevance,” “formative assessments,” “short cycle assessments,” “formative instructional practices,” “professional learning communities,” “curriculum-based assessments,” “curriculum alignment,” “curriculum maps,” “project-based learning,” “portfolio-based assessments,” “higher level thinking,” “performance-based testing” and “critical thinking skills.”
Isn't this crazy, but I'm out on the first one!? As one of those "conspiracy-fixated groups and individuals in our society" I take exception to the fact that US education needs to be solving GLOBAL problems and comparing Singapore students to American students. Then there's the fact that we in no way believe the sole task of our public schools is preparing kids for college! Kids should be given a well rounded education and allowed to determine what they will do and where they will go after school - absent of pressure to attend an over-rated, expensive, indoctrination facility full of highly touted, tenured teachers with bloated salaries, giving out degrees like "Women's Studies" that can't possibly allow a young person to get a job outside that of 'barista'.
The second bullet point is what gave me the fit that caused me to write the following comment to the article:
The second bullet point is what gave me the fit that caused me to write the following comment to the article:
Hmmmm....as one of the apparent evil naysayers that are attempting to upend Kathleen Porter-Magee’s 'precious' Common Core State Standards (I think there was a 'precious' in the Hobbitt, wasn't there?) by addressing specific concerns regarding the Federal intervention in education and the lack of local control that comes with it (for example; if my child is not responding to the English standards being used - if she's not responding to more 'technical' texts and would like more 'pleasure' reading, what do I do? Call Ghostbusters?), I would just like to maybe make a point by using...the Stepford Wives - since I'm on movie analogies here anyway.Now that I've re-read it, I think I would add one more thing. We are NOT a Communist country. We don't train workers - we train children (up in the way they should go and not depart from it). A one size fits all set of standards is meant for children to be trained up in the way of the worker - for a job. We don't believe that stuff here in America, where everyone has a chance - so long as they take it - and everyone succeeds or fails on their own merit. Heaven help us that so many today either don't know this to be true according to American history, or simply choose to forget it because it's easier to have the government raise your children for you.
Yes, I said the Stepford Wives. Does no one remember the very interesting near end of the movie when Joanna stabs her friend Bobbie because she thinks she's become one of 'them' and Bobbie doesn't bleed or scream but merely starts calmly saying, "But Joanna, I want to be your friend, I want to be your friend" over and over?
I do, and I guess it's not terribly hard for me to see Bobbie calmly (albeit robotically) saying the words and phrases, "‘rigor and relevance,” “formative assessments,” “short cycle assessments,” “formative instructional practices,” “professional learning communities,” “curriculum-based assessments,” “curriculum alignment,” “curriculum maps,” “project-based learning,” “portfolio-based assessments,” “higher level thinking,” “performance-based testing” and “critical thinking skills.”, over and over and over again. (By the way, most ALL of this Core-Speak, has to do with Constructivism - the theory prescribed by John Dewey - the Father of Progressive Education - the stuff that hasn't worked since it was put into widespread use in the 1960's - which is another reason we disagree!)
I know as a parent and education watchdog, I've heard ALL these words - in various iterations - and each and every time I hear them, I hear Bobbie saying them, over and over and over, like a broken record.
I guess this simpleton, backward Bible belt midwesterner from the ACTUAL heartland, would rather remain just that, than a soulless robot repeating nonsense from a program I was given by someone else in order to get money to Guinea Pig yet another untested, unproven, education 'reform' program on the backs of the KIDS which is really all this is about anyway - isn't it?