Why Do We Care Who Is On The Standards Re-Writing Committee?

Today I received an impassioned response regarding our last post about the make-up of the Standards Re-Write Committee. If you have not read the post, you can do so here. The woman who commented on the post was a friend of Mrs. Mautra Jones, an appointee to the Committee. Here is her comment:

In response to your article regarding "Oil and Water and Who is Mautra Jones?", you are correct in stating she is a gubernatorial appointee to the Oklahoma Merit Protection Commission, involved in Leadership Oklahoma, and was the Development Director for the Foundation for Oklahoma City Public Schools. I will be happy to complete her resume so you will have all the facts. Mautra was Vice President of Development for Prevent Blindness, member and past President of the Oklahoma County Bar Auxiliary, and is currently the Director of Development at White Fields Home for Boys. She is also a member of Alpha Kappa Alpha and active in her church. She has an extensive resume indeed that I doubt many of us could compare. But just because you know her resume doesn't mean you know her and obviously from the title of your article/blog, you don't. I do. I have had the privilege of working with her through White Fields and know her personally. I can fill in the lines between her resume to show her creativity, her dedication to her community and her desire and heart to serve. I can tell you she is her own person and is willing to stand up for what she believes is right and challenge the status quo. I can tell you she has a heart for the children she serves and commits wholeheartedly into any cause, board or organization she is willing and feels led to serve on. She is an articulate woman of high intelligence, deep faith, commitment and resolve. She doesn't join something just because she is asked but because she feels she can make an impact. She is nobody's "yes" girl. These things a resume can't tell you. If she were to answer the question "what is your proudest accomplishment", she would tell you her family. Her role as a wife and a mom is first and foremost to her. Therefore to minimize her position as a parent is highly unfair. For you to insinuate her appointment to this board was "the straw that broke the camel's back" and she is just an "echo-chamber nomination" based solely on her resume is unfair to her as well. I cannot speak for the other appointees but I can tell you, if I had children currently in school, with the problems facing our educational system today, I would want someone of Mautra Jones' caliber working for and with them. She may not have all the solutions to the problems we face, but she will work hard to help find and implement them. So "Who is Mautra Jones?" She's one incredible, talented, dedicated woman I am extremely proud to call my friend. You would be blessed to get to know her yourself before commenting and making insinuations about her character and motivations. Next time, please write about someone you do know.

I would most certainly would also rise up in defense of a friend I felt had been treated unfairly, so that is perfectly understandable. The part that does concern me is that she would feel we were attacking her friend personally - which we were not - because this indicates a lack of understanding in our function. Because I'm hoping this to be a 'teachable moment' of sorts, I wanted to make sure readers saw this comment and my response. Politics can stoop to the dirty business of deriding others to elevate your candidate or position. Watchdogging is NOT the same function, and while I get admittedly overzealous from time-to-time, it is out of a dedication to educating citizens to their duties and responsibilities in a Republic and the reality that government has overstepped its bounds in too many areas to count. It is my hope you will find my reply useful to a greater understanding of our purpose.

Thank you for your comment, Sady. It is certainly of interest to have you relate Mrs. Jones CV and certainly, she is a very accomplished woman.

Please note that I did not cast aspersions on Mrs. Jones character. In fact, I pointed out that I did not know anything about her other than what I could find on the internet.

Because Mrs. Jones is an appointee to a Committee that will have direct oversight over the re-writing of Oklahoma's educational standards - a statewide concern - it is completely fair, albeit necessary, to know who serves on the Committee, as they represent the public in this endeavor. I am very glad to hear your outstanding defense of Mrs. Jones, but I would also ask you to understand why we would investigate anyone on the committee and report anything we found.

1. Common Core was adopted in a decidedly non-transparent way. In fact, Governor Henry ordered the State Board to adopt them and the legislature put them into effect via one paragraph in a 32 page bill. Where was parental involvement in such an important decision?
2. Gubernatorial appointees serve "at the pleasure of" the governor. I have been told by several gubernatorial appointees that if the governor wants something specific to happen, she expects her appointee to comply with her wishes. That is her prerogative - she is the governor - she was elected by the people and she made that appointment. Unfortunately, we don't see the Governor as an ally in this effort. Though she signed the bill repealing Common Core, she was the president of the National Governor's Association - one of the organizations responsible for bringing us the Common Core - at that time. In addition, her office lobbied her own legislature vigorously to keep the standards in place over the time the bill was moving through the legislative process - against the wishes of 'regular' tax-paying citizens of Oklahoma.
3. Tax-paying citizens of Oklahoma have been left out of the process of government through bureaucracy now for decades. Yes, we retain the power to vote, but the Committees, Commissions and oversight boards established by Governors all strike at the heart of 'representative government' via direct representation. These are not directly elected positions, but positions populated by those in power at the time, via people they know. This is understandable, frankly - no one wants to work with people they don't know because an appointment is a position that 'represents' the government (please note; represents the government, not the people directly). Yes, we can vote out a Governor if we do not like his/her appointments, however, there are so many appointees that many tend to stay on following elections, continuing the business of the previous administration, not the one currently in power. Hopefully, you can see how this thwarts the notion of government "by the people, for the people, of the people". We do, and consequently, we reserve the right to thoroughly vet ANY gubernatorial appointee, regardless of who or where. When I mention "echo-chamber appointments" this is the process to which I refer. Every day, tax-paying citizens who do not have the CV of your friend Mrs. Jones, are regularly ignored for government appointments, though they more thoroughly represent the pulse of the majority. If a person has not attended Leadership Oklahoma, or served in another gubernatorial position or sat on a non-profit board, they are routinely omitted from consideration for this kind of service. Catalogs of previous appointments do not indicate good citizenship or leadership - they simply indicate that the person has been involved in many of the same circles as the person in power for a given amount of time. To summarize; there are many, many good citizens/leaders moving through regular, 'ordinary' lives who are outstanding individuals, yet they are rarely, if ever sought out for this kind of service because they are not inside the sphere of influence of those in power.

I hope this post creates a greater level of understanding regarding this blog - and what we consider to be our job as citizen 'watchdogs' for education. Again, I thank you for your comment. We will look forward to working with Mrs. Jones as this process moves forward. We are certainly happy to speak with her at any time. Please remember, however, that we will continue to report only what we are able to find and on as much of this process as possible, so if you have information to share, you are certainly asked to do so to enlighten us and others.

To Fire or Not To Fire, That Is The Question...

Following the filing of the lawsuit against HB3399, a number of questions could be raised about the fact that four individuals responsible for overseeing public education in Oklahoma were plaintiffs; Leo Baxter, Amy Anne Ford, William F. Shdeed and Daniel Keating.

As I've reported numerous times, the law regarding Oklahoma school board appointees has changed. During the first year of Dr.Barresi's term, our school board was changed from a board appointed by the governor on a rolling six year term to members appointed by the current sitting governor to serve at her/his "pleasure" (Senate Bill 435, 2011).  It seems odd then, that four board members would choose to go against the will of the governor (certainly displeasing one would think) following her signing of the repeal of Common Core in Oklahoma and file a lawsuit that asked the court to throw out, not just the part regarding legislative oversight of the standards to which they objected, but the ENTIRE bill.  Would this not be grounds for their removal? Why has this topic not been broached?

The state Board of Education is comprised of seven members.  According to Open Records law in Oklahoma, members of a body such as the state School Board may not meet together as a majority of the board without posting the meeting and taking minutes.  It is unclear how the lawsuit may have been discussed among the Plaintiffs in the lawsuit, but if at any time these four board members 'met' on a conference call or physically together in order to discuss the suit, Open Records laws were broken.  If I'm asking this question - did they meet - does this not constitute a level of impropriety?  What about trust?  How do the people of Oklahoma trust this Board to do the state's business when it appears as though they could have broken laws which provide transparency to citizens?

After the Board meeting in June, behavioral impropriety should also be at issue in my mind.  The first hand reports I received of the unprofessional manner in which the school board members on the lawsuit behaved, creates further issues of trust in my mind.  I know we don't live in the 50's and we're not all wearing white gloves and hats to meetings anymore, but truly, a state School Board meeting should be held with an amount of decorum to allow the public trust.  The loud, dismissive manner with which some acted, does not make me feel good about holding them up as representatives for myself or Oklahoma.

According to HB3399, the entire education standards re-write is overseen by a Steering Committee which consists of at least two board members:

• The Chancellor of Higher Education, or a Designee: 
• The State Superintendent of Public Instruction, or a Designee:
• Secretary/Executive Director of the Department of Commerce, or a Designee:
• Two State Board of Education Members

There are only two Board members who did not sign on to the lawsuit - Cathryn Franks and Bill Price.  Mrs. Franks is new and none of us have had the chance to make her acquaintance, but Bill Price is well known within the Republican Party as a sincere supporter of Common Core.

How can we have any confidence that those of us that spoke out against the Common Core will be considered for Committee membership?  How can we believe any of the four Board Members listed as Plaintiffs on the lawsuit will be fair in overseeing the standards re-write process? 

I think these concerns are valid and should be addressed by our Governor at her earliest convenience.  If indeed, as the law says, these individuals serve at her pleasure, why are they still serving?  I must say, if these Board members served at my pleasure, they would be serving no more.

Arne Duncan Reveals His True Colors

This blog was published in American thinker under this URL:  http://americanthinker.com/2014/06/arne_duncan_vs_oklahoma_comments.html

Response To Brickman (Fordham) and Hudeyki's Six Reasons for Gov. Fallin NOT To Sign HB3399

Monday I was ecstatic to find that, while I was leaving for Ohio to participate in an anti-Common Core rally, Michael Brickman from Fordham Foundation (located in Ohio) was coming to Oklahoma to give Governor Fallin 6 reasons why she should not sign HB3399 - the repeal and replacement of the Common Core State Standards in Oklahoma.

I feel it important to address each one of their points:

1.    The Fiscal and Educational Costs of Repeal

This is particularly vexing.  When was there EVER any notion of cost mentioned with the establishment of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in any state?  In fact, that’s been one of opponents largest concerns – how much will this cost.  The National Conference of State Legislators doesn’t know.  Governing magazine doesn’t know.  In fact, even Oklahoma’s own legislators couldn’t have known what it would cost to implement the CCSS because they were passed into state law before they were even fully written and prepared for public view. You can’t estimate cots of an initiative for which you’re not fully familiar, but now we’re going to cry foul on costs?

Oh yes, there were a number of organizations which provided some reasonable estimates early on in the process – one even locally adapted – but these got very little discussion – as though it seemed easier to just ignore the thought and see if it would go away.  Representative Gus Blackwell attempted to bring a Task Force to bear for study of the costs of Common Core in Oklahoma during the 2013 legislative session, but that bill was blocked from a hearing on the floor after passing the rules committee resoundingly.

2.    Avoid A Shortsighted Political Takeover

Truly, this is rich.  The Common Core were installed in Oklahoma by Governor Brad Henry (D) in order to get State Fiscal Stabilization Funds and a Race to the Top Grant from the Obama Administration.  Republicans were willing participants in this initiative, Senator Clark Jolley and former Speaker of the House, now Secretary of State Chris Benge chief among them.  What in the world could be more shortsighted than a Republican legislative majority allowing the takeover of Oklahoma education via a set of education ‘reforms’ being offered by the Obama administration as carrots for federal education control – especially when they hadn’t been studied or reviewed.  Yes, the Jeb Bush-backed Foundation for Excellence in Education provided talking points for many ‘reform’ ideas, and maybe that was just enough to pacify Republican legislators into following their lead, but there is no doubt nary a single legislator did, or could have, known exactly what was in the standards when they were placed CCSS into Oklahoma state law.

3. Ready to Compete Through Higher Standards

I will concede this if anyone will please, please find me where any specific study (not paid for by Bill Gates) has shown these to be higher standards than Oklahoma’s.  In addition, please find me specific studies that point to even the notion that the use of Common Core standards are going to be the deciding factor in how well Oklahoma students compete in the global economy.

Though certain you will, you will also find studies that have concluded that the factor making the largest difference in a child’s education is his/her TEACHER.  The Fordham Foundation graded every set of educational standards in the country and compared them to the CCSS (thanks to a fat check from Bill Gates) – including Oklahoma’s.  It speaks directly to the political football the CCSS have become that the Fordham Foundation – after grading Oklahoma’s previous educational standards (PASS) to be on par with CCSS – is now printing a retraction and providing various reasons and excuses as to why they now wish to change their mind and throw Oklahoma standards under the bus.  Well, of course they want to make that analysis go away.  Anti-Common Core forces have used that analysis to show how silly it is to say that PASS aren’t appropriate for College and Career readiness and won’t prepare students to compete in a global economy – as if that’s all important in the education of a child anyway.

4.    An Opportunity to Demonstrate Political Courage

Yes, it is VERY courageous to do exactly what nearly every state in the country did all at the same time for the same initiatives to get a shot at the same money.  How many times did your mother tell you, “If Johnny jumped off a bridge, would you do it too?”  This is yet another argument that drives right at the heart of the Anti-CC argument.  It actually takes political courage NOT to do the same thing the majority of the country is doing.  It actually takes political courage to say, “Whoops, sorry, we didn’t research this initiative very well and now we realize we’ve made a mistake.  Please forgive us and let’s try to work together to go in a different direction.”

Who says this kind of stuff other than an entity bought and paid for by the Bill Gates Foundation?

5. A Political Advantage with Most Voters

           

Interesting.  The candidates for 2014 office in Oklahoma to whom I have spoken and who have commissioned a poll on Common Core have reported results showing public support for CCSS is nearly nil.  Oh yes, there is supposedly a new poll that says four star Republican voters are for CCSS, therefore any political candidate opposing CCSS could be summarily tossed, but the questions doesn’t ask, “How do you feel about the Common Core State Standards?”, it says, “How do you feel about higher standards?”   Only the truly delusional candidate and/or most out of touch policy wonk could spin that to mean Common Core.  Good grief, even despite the fact our Secretary of Education is out explaining to the public that us white moms are mad because we’ve found our kids aren’t as brilliant as we think they are, most parents WANT higher standards for their children. 

Tony Bennett was the first CCSS casualty.  He was beaten by Glenda Ritz, an unknown Democrat candidate, losing his bid to be re-elected as Indiana’s State superintendent in 2012.  Republican governor/possible presidential candidate Bobby Jindal has changed his tune on CC because his state GOP has made it an issue (just like Oklahoma and other states) – same thing with South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley.  A recent race in Ohio saw a long-time establishment Republican lose his seat over CCSS and Common Core supporter Governor Nathan Deal is behind his Democrat challenger in Georgia’s gubernatorial race.

           

Establishment Republicans can sit in their Ivory Towers and pray to the Gods of the polls to save their elections should they continue to beat their chest about Common Core, but that is exactly what they have been doing and why the ‘brand’ has become tarnished enough to prevent Mitt Romney from becoming POTUS in 2012.  There are moms all over Oklahoma – and the nation – who, after seeing their kid in tears at their kitchen table are prepared to vote like they may never have voted before.  These votes are wildcards that can’t be determined by voter roles and the establishment candidates know this – at this point it’s safe to say Common Core supporters are simply blustering for effect.

6.    Opponents Will Not Be Satisfied

Here is another fascinating view from the edge.  Is there a way to even rationalize this ‘reason’?  We crazy ‘opponents’ won’t be happy with anything.  Never mind that we have said we want standards – high standards – it doesn’t matter because we want them to be created inside the state where we live by actual state citizens.  Apparently Oklahomans are too moronic to create something College and Career ready for our own kids.  That job is reserved for national non-profit organizations not populated by educators or parents!  Never mind we local plain Jane parents have a vested interest in creating the highest standards in the nation in order for our kids to be the best they can be – we’re just ignoring laundry and cleaning and husbands to wage a political fight – to cry about having higher standards because our kids weren’t as smart as we thought they were after all.

ROPE Response to Gov. Fallin's Executive Order on the Common Core

ROPE Response to Governor Fallin’s Executive Order 2013-40 on the Common Core State Standards

Having just finished reading Executive Order 2013-40[i] ROPE can say the following:

1.       The Governor uses the opening paragraph to re-state her commitment to use public education funds to ‘educate’ students into jobs instead of supporting America’s free enterprise system.  By promoting the idea that public education (tax payers) should train children for jobs instead of businesses providing their own on the job training at their own expense, she is replicating Bill Clinton’s failed School to Work[ii] initiative – but then, that is basically her NGA agenda[iii].

2.       Paragraph two reiterates the position of the Oklahoma Constitution[iv] on public education.

3.       The third paragraph amounts to cherry-picked phrases from Title 70[v] (Oklahoma school law) containing the buzzwords/phrases our Governor and other school ‘reform’ leaders enjoy messaging[vi], such as ‘critical thinking’, ‘literacy’ and ‘core curriculum’.  She also claims here that Oklahomans had a say in the development of the Standards.  Two members of the CCSS Committee, Dr. Sandra Stotsky[vii] and Dr. James Milgram[viii] have both testified that the standards Committee was nothing but a rubber stamp for Student Achievement Partners[ix] (the private organization with whom NGA contracted to create the standards, written by David Coleman, Susan Pimentel and Jason Zimba – all of whom but Zimba are non-educators).  If national educational experts had no input, how did Oklahomans?

4.       The Governor uses paragraph four to acknowledge that the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are listed by name in Title 70 – in other words, it is LAW that Oklahoma students be educated with Common Core State Standards.  She also states the standards were developed through the National Governor’s Association[x] (NGA - for which she is currently Chair) and the Council of Chief State School Officers[xi] (CCSSO).  She does not mention these organizations are PRIVATE, DUES-PAID organizations in no way responsible to individual citizens – in essence, she admits the standards were created outside the bounds of representative government.  She also does not acknowledge our legislature passed Common Core into law (SB2033[xii]) before the Standards were available to read.

5.       In paragraph 5, Governor Fallin first says Oklahoma has not received FEDERAL funding to adopt CCSS.  True.  Oklahoma, via Brad Henry, adopted ALL CCSS[xiii] in order to be more competitive on its Race to the Top Grant, yet didn’t get a grant.  Incidentally, the RTTT grant specified the use of what ROPE calls the Four Pillars of Americas Education Takeover[xiv] (referred to in Oklahoma’s federal NCLB waiver as, Principle 1-4);

a.       College and Career Ready Standards (aka Common Core, since only those were available at the time of application)

b.      State Longitudinal Database System

c.       Teacher and School Accountability Measures (A-F/TLE)

d.      Turning Around Low Performing Schools

This is the point at which ROPE finds major cause for concern.  Janet Barresi (State Superintendent) and Mary Fallin applied for a No Child Left Behind Waiver[xv].  Inside that waiver, the federal government specifies that NCLB recipients must use all four of the Pillars (Principles) just described.  Consequently, when the Governor says, “Additionally, Oklahoma has not received any federal directive regarding implementation of curricular standards, core curriculum, or Common Core State Standards”, she is apparently insincere, or ignorant, of what constitutes a federal directive.  Yet, she goes on to use the federal government as the specter for directing Bob Sommers (until very recently an Ohio resident), Secretary of Education and The Workforce (a position that serves ‘at will’ of the Governor, not the people) to protect Oklahomans from federal intrusion into public education by

1.       Making sure the public is fooled into thinking Oklahoma has its own standards[xvi] and NOT the Common Core by giving the CCSS the title of Oklahoma Academic Standards.

2.       Making sure every aspect of CCSS is followed by every school for every student in Oklahoma in order for them to become better workers for the companies Oklahoma woos to the state.

She then makes two fairly illogical statements:

1.       Oklahomans (including BUSINESES) will have input into the Common Core ‘assessments’.

2.       That the development of Oklahoma Academic Standards will CONTINUE to be done in a transparent manner.

a.       This statement makes Governor Fallin appear to be ignorant of the ‘assessment’ process in Oklahoma.  Our Department of Education has a signed contract with Measured Progress to provide Oklahoma’s Common Core testing.

In addition to its partnerships with states, the company has worked with the Race to the Top consortia on initiatives ranging from item development to systems architecture. Measured Progress is applying its test development experience to provide a secure item bank for Oklahoma…[xvii]

MP is an out of state contractor.  Even their website announcement indicates nothing about involving Oklahomans in the process.  

In addition, the NCLB waiver the governor signed specifies PARCC tests - the consortium of PARCC having been funded in large part by the federal government (Please note, C3 is the first attempt at the State Department of Education changing the names of the standards in hope of confusing the public): 

How will Oklahoma assess the Oklahoma C3 Standards?
Oklahoma will assess the Oklahoma C3 Standards through state assessments aligned to the standards and through a partnership with other states that have adopted the Common Core State Standards. This partnership, known as PARCC, will develop tests in English Language Arts and Mathematics. The PARCC tests will be administered for the first time during the 2014-2015 school year. Other content areas will continue to be assessed through state assessments. (Page 3, point B-3)

b.      Next is the notion that implementation of Common Core was EVER a transparent process.  Common Core was adopted before those voting on it could read the Standards themselves[xviii].  How is that transparent?  ROPE and others have been shut out of public comment[xix] at the state school board meetings and, as the largest grassroots-based education watchdog with the most formal research on the topic in the state of Oklahoma (an organization comprised of active Republican women), we have never been granted a meeting with our governor even after 3 formal written requests.  In addition, we have been summarily dismissed by our State Superintendent during one face-to-face meeting and then again publicly.  For years, many legislators knew nothing about the Common Core at all.  Today, there are even teachers that know very little about the Common Core and have gotten very little, if any, training in the Standards themselves.  Consequently, this statement can be considered little more than messaging.

The last portion of the EO is the most contradictory and frustrating. 

1.       Statements 1 and 2 are essentially a re-statement of fact.

2.       In statement 3, Governor Fallin says schools can adopt additional assessments.  Why would they do this?  The state-mandated tests eat up so much classroom time per year no teacher/principal/district would have either the money or time to devote to such an effort.

3.       Statement 4 indicates the Governor’s lack of understanding about Common Core specifically, or teaching in general.  There is no way possible for anyone anywhere to be able to oversee all the curricula available in the public marketplace with a Common Core stamp on the front.  Already, ROPE has documented many, many instances of curricula violating parents’ values and sensibilities[xx].  How in the world is this going to happen?  We’re not told.  Is she going to appoint a new Curriculum Sherriff who will go out and check each and every lesson before it’s implemented in the classroom? 

4.       Number 5 is another major concern.  The Governor states, “The Oklahoma Academic Standards will not jeopardize the privacy of any Oklahoma student or citizen.”  How can that be when Governor Fallin signed Janet Barresi’s application for a $5 MILLION dollar State Longitudinal Database[xxi] grant from the US Department of Education?  Does the Governor honestly have no idea how disengenuos it sounds when she decrys federal involvement in education while applying for and taking federal education assistance?  There is so much data collection via the Federal Government[xxii] for ESEA Titles 1-9, SLDS, the NCLB waiver, Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities programs and others, there is no possible way our governor could make any such promise, period.

5.       Another wrong-headed claim brings the whole EO home.  Homeschools ARE affected by the Common Core.  One has only to visit Mardel, where many homeschool families purchase curriculum, and see the many books with “Common Core Aligned” stamps on them to understand the scope of this statement.  Not only that, but the SAT and ACT are being aligned with the Common Core as we speak (David Coleman moved from Student Achievement Partners to the College Board in order to do just that[xxiii]).  Many homeschooled students take these tests prior to graduation from their program of study.  If that doesn’t drive the point home enough, please read Andrew Pudwa’s statement[xxiv] from the final Common Core Interim Study for the House Administrative Rules Committee under Representative Gus Blackwell.  In part, he says;

In fact, CCSSI is a huge windfall for education publishers, since most districts in most states are being forced to replace their existing texts with CCSSI conforming texts, and any differentiations by state standards have been superseded by the Common Core standards. This, of course, makes it even harder for small publishers such as myself to keep a toehold in the public education market. Again, centralization and standardization eclipses initiative and creativity; we are not only up against the marketing and PR juggernaut of the big players, we now have to jump through ridiculous hoops to show that what we do—and have always done—not only builds basic writing skills better than most anything out there, but somehow “meets or exceeds” the Common Core standards.

Closing thoughts;

1.        2014 is an election year and elected officials tend to desire re-election.  There is also a long-standing habit of artificiality that accompanies this activity (a chicken in every pot?).

2.       Common Core has been an issue in many elections across the country – including Indiana, where State School Superintendent and Jeb Bush Chief for Change, Tony Bennett was ousted by a candidate against Common Core.

3.       An Executive Order preventing federal intrusion into an initiative we have been told repeatedly isn’t federal in nature in the first place to seemingly pacify the public, fits the model of tone deaf government officials attempting to quash public dissent in order to continue bad public policy that serves their needs and not that of the public at large.

4.       Mary Fallin is Chairman of the NGA.  How can this not influence her stance on Common Core?

5.       Mary Fallin is a Republican, yet she has turned her back on the Republican National Committee and the Oklahoma Republican Platform in her dogged persistence of the Common Core.

6.       Oklahomans should continue in their dogged persistence to stop Common Core in Oklahoma, making it clear that a candidate FOR Common Core, simply can’t win.

FOOTNOTES

---

[i] Governor Mary Fallin, Executive Order, 2013-40; https://www.sos.ok.gov/documents/executive/917.pdf

[ii] School to Work; http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/1997/apr97/psrapr97.html

[iii] America Works; http://nga.org/cms/sites/ci/home/1314/index.html

[iv] Oklahoma State Constitution; http://oklegal.onenet.net/okcon/

[v] Title 70 School law; http://www.ok.gov/sde/education-law-book

[vi] Common Core Stepford Wives; http://restoreoklahomapubliceducation.blogspot.com/2012/05/common-core-stepford-wives.html

[vii] Common Core’s Invalid Validation Committee; http://educationresourcesconsortium.com/2013/10/15/dr-sandra-stotsky-common-cores-invalid-validation-committee/

[viii] Professor James Milgram rejects the adoption of Common Core standards…  http://mathexperts-qa.blogspot.com/2011/04/prof-r-james-milgram-rejects-adoption.html

[ix] Student Achievement Partners; http://achievethecore.org/about-us

[x] National Governor’s Association; http://www.nga.org/cms/home.html

[xi] Council of Chief State School Officers; http://www.ccsso.org/

[xii] SB2033; http://www.scribd.com/doc/93232739/Sb2033-Engrossed-Version-of-School-Reform-Bill

[xiii] Race to the Top Addendum; http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/phase2-applications/amendments/oklahoma.pdf

[xiv] Race to the Top Fund; http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html

[xv] Oklahoma’s Approved NCLB Waiver; http://ok.gov/sde/sites/ok.gov.sde/files/ESEA-FAQ.pdf

[xvi] Does the State Department of Education Think Oklahomans are Stupid? http://restoreoklahomapubliceducation.blogspot.com/2013/07/does-state-department-of-education.html

[xvii] Measured Progress; http://www.measuredprogress.org/ok-sde-chooses-measured-progress

[xviii] Achieve, history; http://achieve.org/history-achieve

[xix] Oklahoma State Department of Education Prevents Comment; http://restoreoklahomapubliceducation.blogspot.com/2013/06/oklahoma-state-department-of-education.html

[xx] Testimonies of parents and teachers for Oklahoma Common Core Interim Study 11/5/2013; http://www.scribd.com/collections/4384797/Testimonies-From-Parents-Teachers-Oklahoma-Common-Core-Interim-Study-11-5-2013

[xxi] Oklahoma’s State Longitudinal Database Grant; http://ok.gov/sde/state-longitudinal-data-system-grant

[xxii] YouTube video of Student Privacy Testimony – Common Core Interim Study Fall, 2013; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwM7VNLkynI&feature=share&list=UUffrnW6WlGtduw0C7NXNWKg&index=11

[xxiii] College Board to Make Changes To SAT; http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/college-board-to-make-changes-to-sat/2013/02/26/fb332bc4-8063-11e2-b99e-6baf4ebe42df_story.html

[xxiv] Statement of Andrew Pudwa for Common Core Interim Study; http://www.scribd.com/doc/181696903/Written-Testimony-of-Andrew-Pudewa-to-Common-Core-Interim-OK

Edit in the first paragraph 12/7/13
Added section on PARCC 12/10/13