Part 2: Senator Jake Merrick's Loss Engineered At The Hands of Oklahoma's School Choice (Voucher) Cabal Who Helped Spend $344,471.40 To Elect His Opponent

Screenshot taken from a Common Sense Conservatives, LLC dark money ad.

While every political campaign has numerous points for failure from fundraising to voter contact, a post mortem of Jake Merrick's re-election campaign shows that a combination of dark money and redistricting probably did more than anything to sink the re-election campaign of a fine man and public servant.

Oklahoma Republican Legislators Enacted President Obama's Education Agenda During 2010 Creating Many Of The Problems We're Seeing In Public Education TODAY

As a pre-Halloween trick, this article was released in the Tulsa World - Teacher shortage milestone: New record set for nonaccredited teachers given emergency certification in Oklahoma.

Common Core Conservative Re-Tread? Smart Oklahomans Won't Buy It!

WOW! Welcome to the New Year in Oklahoma, where we find the liberal Oklahoma news media ringing in their year with a tired and somewhat expected re-tread of 'Common Core as pillar of Conservative doctrine' by reproducing a blog from a former Mitt Romney spokesman, "Common Core popular in many quarters" by the Daily Oklahoman!

Goodness! Does this article coincide with the Governor Fallin-appointed Steering Committee's commencement into the re-write of Oklahoma's educational standards, ostensibly away from Common Core? Well, interestingly, yes, yes it does. Has the calendar changed over to a new year, signifying that Oklahomans will now forget the happenings of last year - including the REPEAL of Common Core - as easily as they have forgotten the color socks they wore last Tuesday?

Sadly, I imagine this thought to be the reason the Common Core indoctrination/re-education machine has begun to spin again. 

Here, former "conservative" presidential candidate Mitt Romney's former spokesman, Shawn McCoy, articulates a theme only summarized by the statement, "Conservative friends, if  “fellow Conservatives" like Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney and John Kasich LOVE Common Core, then YOU should too!" 

Yes, McCoy isn't shy in his assertions; he comes right out and says he knows for a fact Common Core is loved by all "Conservatives" because it has NOT been an election issue. McCoy tells us, "…election results nationwide have proven Common Core's popularity". To back this theory up, we’re told that 'fellow' "Conservative", John Kasich, supports Common Core and he won his state's gubernatorial election by a landslide. He "even received 26 percent of the black vote". WHAT?

This statement makes my eyeballs bleed. At what point do you consider an essentially unchallenged election as a scored point for Common Core? Please note the very first line in this article from Human Events,

Ohio Gov. John Kasich trounced a disastrous Democrat for his November re-election win, but in 23 of 88 counties Kasich received fewer votes than he got in 2010.

Later in the article, we’re given even more information about this less-than-stellar win for Governor Kasich

An Oct. 1 Quinnipiac University poll found 25 percent of likely Democratic voters planned to pick Kasich over FitzGerald. Election results suggest Kasich won tens of thousands of Democrats who would have supported a credible Democrat challenger. Every down-ticket Democrat running for a statewide executive office received more votes than FitzGerald in almost every county.

So, honestly, the Democratic challenger was SO bad that “Fox News exit polling indicated 26 percent of self-identified liberals and 25 percent of Democrats voted for Kasich” and we’re to believe that Kasich won reelection not only because Common Core didn’t matter, but because it’s popular with “Conservatives”, leading to the unspoken thesis that all “Conservatives” support Common Core?

Man, I haven’t had a ton of logic in my studies, but I can assure you THIS notion amounts to a zero sum logic game.

While there’s no great exit polling on this race like Kasich’s, it might be instructive to look at “Conservative” Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin’s reelection bid.

In 2010, Mary Fallin ran for Governor against Democrat Jari Askins. Fallin received 625,506 votes (60.45%) against Askins - a strong Democratic candidate who left the post of Lt. Governor for her gubernatorial run.

In 2014, Fallin received 460,298 votes (55.8%) against an outgoing state Representative, Joe Dorman (338,239/41%), whose campaign began after a late announcement.

During her first term, Governor Fallin served as the Chairman for the National Governor’s Association – one of the progenitors of the Common Core – and made all of President Obama’s NCLB education ‘reforms’ the center of her education ‘reform’ initiatives. Why, would Governor Fallin lose 26% of the vote for her second term, if Common Core didn’t matter and conservatives supported this and other education ‘reform’ efforts?

Then there’s the case of former Oklahoma State Superintendent Janet Barresi, a Jeb Bush Foundation for Excellence in Education, Chief For Change, who supported all Governor Fallin’s initiatives. She lost her bid for reelection in the primary election where she came in third out of three, below a candidate that didn’t even mount a campaign.

I ascribe most of McCoy’s faulty logic to the idea that Romney, Kasich, Jeb Bush and Fallin are conservative. In fact, back in 2013, as former “Conservative” Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee came out in the Common Core camp, I wrote a blog about conservativism and what it means to be a conservative (I refer to the unrepresentative label as “Conservative”, I refer to the actual philosophy in lower case without quotes). I went on to contend that because Common Core is antithetical to the definition of Conservativism, there is no way conservatives can support Common Core.  

I know as long as Common Core lives ANYWHERE in the nation and as long as voters are not well enough educated on the principle of conservatism to understand they’re being played, this argument will arise again and again. We simply must educate others about what it means to be conservative if we’re to prevent Oklahoma from producing a Common Core re-tread that real conservatives don’t want and the state doesn’t need.

Congratulations Joy Hofmeister...?

Tomorrow, January 12, 2015, Oklahoma's new State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Joy Hofmeister will be sworn in for duty. I'm not sure whether to Congratulate Joy or the state of Oklahoma first.

I may choose for Oklahoma to receive heartier congratulations actually, as Mrs. Hofmeister will have a doozy of a time cleaning up the OSDE after the door slams behind the last superintendent, making entrance to the job of State Super, decidedly un-super for at least the near future. In fact, Mrs. Hofmeister may need

before

yet either way, there is no denying that tomorrow can't help but bring a new day for public education in Oklahoma.

Though I could probably write a more significant statement about our outgoing state superintendent, I'll not. Instead, I'll make note of a few significant lessons learned under the tenure of Dr. Barresi because to forget history is to doom it to repetition:

• public school reform should NOT come from ex-presidents and/or private foundations outside the state of Oklahoma and then forced onto teachers, parents and schools as though written on a tablet by God simply because there might be a federal level post in it for someone somewhere
• micromanagement is NOT the way to achieve public school reform, as teachers tend to leave the profession in droves when assured that after a four year college degree and successful state certification they have no real clue about what to do in their classrooms, and as such, must be told what to do during every minute of every day 
• continuing to force administrators/schools to test their students over and over using methods that not only do not work, but can't provide the data the state insisted it have in order to comply with state law, did NOTHING but create animosity among everyone from school personnel to parents
• deciding the top position in public education meant, not only dismissing everyone with an opposing view, but name-calling and publicly flogging dissenters, creates such animosity that you come in dead last in a race where one candidate didn't even mount a campaign 

Today, as I write this missive, I have more hope than I've had in four years about the state of public education in Oklahoma. Unlike her predecessor, Mrs. Hofmeister has already made numerous attempts to reach out to ROPE (even having us appear before her transition team board), and, while we might not agree on every issue, we have been treated with dignity and respect during every encounter. This ALONE is more than we ever received under the previous OSDE regime and that ALONE raises our hopes immensely.

In that vein, we have asked Superintendent Hofmeister to consider a few items, including:

1. Invite a presentation from Iowa Basics and/or Standford testing to present options for the next test cycle outside the Common Core sphere.
2. Request a full audit of the OSDE and publish the results on line.
3. Form a committee (to include parents) to review the standardized tests Oklahoma students will take to assure that PASS are being tested and there are no behavioral test questions (as per HB3399)

Again, Mrs. Hofmeister has listened and we'll be happy to assist her with our requests in any way she should ask.

In closing, this year, ROPE's legislative agenda is not centered on a single issue, but several issues relating to our main philosophy of educational freedom and parental rights. This year, we will be asking you to follow us as we

1. Try to stop the grading of teachers via surveys and high stakes testing better known as TLE. Here is a blog from principal Rob Miller and our blog covering the issue.
2. Upgrade school choice in Oklahoma to include ALL those who would like to participate. We believe the way to do this is through the establishment of Education Savings Accounts.
3. Continue to fight for privacy protection for students from data collection.

I'm sure something will come up along the way - it always does - but these are our main interests for legislative calendar 2015. In addition, we will continue to watch the standards re-write process and report what we know. Our newly ELECTED superintendent needs to be involved in this process. This will be a trick as the current standards re-write committee has locked the office of Superintendent out of the meetings, so it will be necessary to watch and see how Mrs. Hofmeister's imput is added and speak out vociferously if she is not.

Don't forget to continue to follow us on Facebook and/or sign up for our email alerts on the homepage of our website www.RestoreOkPublicEducation.com. We look forward to working with Mrs. Hofmeister during the next four years, and we look forward to being able to call on you for help during this years' upcoming legislative session (between February and May). 

State School Board Members and Others Sue State Over HB3399

I told you in May that the national Associations of State Boards of Education (NASBE) had sent a letter to Governor Mary Fallin explaining they would sue Oklahoma over the Constitutionality of having the state legislature sign off on the standards.  I poo-pooed the whole letter as nonsense - how in the world could NASBE - an out of state lobbying organization have standing in Oklahoma to sue us over a law our own legislature passed?

Well, apparently they didn't, so they got Oklahomans as Plantiffs and had them file a lawsuit.  Here are the willing accomplices:  Heather sparks, teacher of the year, Leo Baxter, Amy Anne Ford, William F. Shdeed and Daniel Keating, Oklahoma State School Board members.  Also Nancy Kunsman, Elizabeth Luecke, Leonardo DeAndrade (doesn't he drive formula one race cars?), Mara Novy and Charles Edward Pack, II.  I don't know anything about the last two - apparently they are either teachers or parents as described by some of the recent news stories about this.

This is the Section with which they are alleging HB3399 conflicts:

Section XIII-5: Board of Education.The supervision of instruction in the public schools shall be vested in a Board of Education, whose powers and duties shall be prescribed by law. The Superintendent of Public Instruction shall be President of the Board. Until otherwise provided by law, the Governor, Secretary of State, and Attorney General shall be ex-officio members, and with the Superintendent, compose said Board of Education.

The lawsuit alleges that the legislature is encroaching on the right of the state school board to supervise instruction in public schools by allowing the legislature to review and modify state educational standards if that is deemed necessary by the citizens of Oklahoma.  Let's review a few reasons this is ridiculous.

• What did the legislature do when they passed SB2033 in 2010? That was two whole sets of standards passed together before they were even in finalized form. So it was ok for the legislature then and not now? 
• Where does it actually say that only the state school board can oversee standards?
• The way I understand it, the legislature can already vote down the rules the state board makes to accept the standards in the first place, basically negating the standards - we just did that with the National Science Standards re-named Oklahoma Academic Standards for Science.

Here are a few other observations:

• Isn't it interesting our own state board members are filing this suit? 
• Isn't it interesting they are appointed by Mary Fallin - current chair of the NGA? 
• Isn't it interesting this lawsuit would be filed the day after the historic election in which Janet Barresi - the incumbent, the Chairman of the Board and a Common Core proponent - came in dead last in a primary? 

Does anyone wonder here whether Governor Fallin signed the bill knowing they were going to bring action against it, hoping to stop the oversight process and therefore slip Common Core back into the standards?

Yes, these are all fascinating questions upon which to ruminate.  Sadly, they all make some kind of sense in a statist, sour grapes kind of way!  The Board were Barresi supporters.  Why?  Because Governor Fallin is a Barresi supporter.  The Board serves at the pleasure of the Governor, therefore the Board does as the Governor - NOT THE PEOPLE - wishes.

Here's another gem: The filing attorneys are saying the lawsuit must be heard quickly because school starts in several months and it will create havoc for schools and teachers if it's not promptly heard. That's GARBAGE! This particular issue doesn't even apply until the standards are re-written and that can take up to two years.  Teachers are not going to be inconvenienced if this lawsuit isn't settled before school begins in the fall.  It has nothing to do with the standards themselves, just the process of completing them.  We've gone back to PASS and nothing will change that now until new standards are written.  You know lawsuits are full of garbage and hot air when they affix so much unnecessary drama to them.

It's awfully fun to point out here that our Oklahoma Constitution SPECIFIES that Oklahoma will only provide an education to children until they are 16.  

Section XIII-4: Compulsory school attendance. The Legislature shall provide for the compulsory attendance at some public or other school, unless other means of education are provided, of all the children in the State who are sound in mind and body, between the ages of eight and sixteen years, for at least three months in each year.

Why aren't high school parents suing for warehousing their kids until they're 18 or older?  Kids, you don't have to attend public school once you turn 16!  Make sure to tell your principal and superintendent you'll sue them if they call you in truant after that time.  

Not only that, but Pre-K and Kindergarten programs HAVE TO GO!  Until your child is 8 years old, the state cannot educate them!  We need to go back and remove all that money we're spending on Pre-K.  That will be an outstanding way to free up some extra cash for teachers and classrooms!

But wait!  The state doesn't have to provide Special Education classes either.  How about if taxpayers begin to sue the state for using taxpayer money to fund Special Education classes?  What would this do to legislation such as the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship which most certainly falls under the category of special education?  What would it do to school choice?  Well, never mind,  I think it's a grand idea!  I'm with the state school board!  Let's follow the Constitution!  Let's just play this game all the way out.

I think ROPE should go on a campaign to make parents aware of the Constitution immediately.  Thanks for the idea of sticking to the state Constitution Fellers/Snider/Blankenship/Bailey and Tippens law firm!  Too bad our points are actually spelled out in the text of the document and yours are contrived to make a point and stymie parents that were simply trying to make their voices heard on behalf of their children and families. 

Teachers, Parents Boot Barresi

There are several sayings that come to mind tonight..."When Momma ain't happy, ain't nobody happy", and "You can't win 'em all".  Actually, I think the latter is because of the former.  As Dr. Barresi found out, you simply can't win an election as State Superintendent of Public Instruction if you don't have the support of parents - and most of all - YOUR teachers.

My dad has been in advertising - except for a tour in the Navy after college - his whole adult life.  I remember him telling me early on, that you could get people to buy even the most repugnant stuff if you just sold it right.  Well, Dr. Barresi couldn't have sold hand warmers to Eskimos. 

Honestly, I think that's the main reason she lost; she has no real leadership abilities.  Oh, yes, she was able to tell people where to go alright, but not in a constructive way.  I remember the first meeting I had with Janet after we had helped her win the general election in 2010.  I met her at her campaign office and I said, "Now that you've been elected, we've got to stop this Common Core nonsense".  She looked right at me, cocked her head in that, "oh never fear little person, I'll handle this" kind of condescending manner and said, "Common Core is just the framework we hang curricula on - it's not that big a thing, we've always had standards."  I think I mumbled something about loss of control and federal involvement, to which she says, "I can control this.  I can control the feds". 

I remember thinking at that moment, "Oh cr*%, can I have my vote back?"  But it was too late - and it only got worse from there.  

Over her very short tenure, I've created a long list of Janet's 'missteps' (to be super charitable) in several of my blogs, so I don't need to beat that dead horse, but I think it's entirely fair game to point out that her loss wasn't just about Common Core.  Dr. Barresi's historic (according to my sources, never in Oklahoma history has an incumbent come in last in a crowded primary) loss to Joy Hofmeister was - just as I've characterized the repeal of Common Core in Oklahoma - a perfect storm.  Barresi

• had a problem telling consistent stories to everyone from teachers to parents
• appeared to have contempt for everyone from lawmakers to teachers to parents
• wasn't interested in consensus of any kind unless it was going to turn out in her favor
• made it clear regularly that it was her way or the highway
• name-called those who weren't 'on her team' - example; you were a liberal if you didn't agree with her positions
• became a Chief for Change and worked with Jeb Bush and his Foundation for Educational Excellence on many education 'reform' plans
• fought for Common Core to the bitter end
• consistent blame shifting/shaming cycle perpetuated on school administrators and teachers

So many teachers left their jobs in the four years she was in office she herself had to call a task force to study how to bring in more teachers to the Sooner state.  In fact, I remember going to the capitol one day and walking upstream to some of the task force participants leaving.  I wanted to rush up to the group of them and scream, "Until you get rid of our Super, you're not going to bring in more teachers."  Between the testing and the Common Core and the IEP silliness and all the paperwork they were being required to fill out in order to satisfy Federal and state mandates, teachers have left the profession in Oklahoma in droves.  It needn't have taken a task force to figure out why.

Hopefully politicians have learned a thing or two from this race;

Common Core + statist overlord masquerading as state superintendent = big, big primary loss

Congratulations Joy Hofmeister and Doug Cox, we look forward to continued work together not as liberals or conservatives, but educators and parents interested in improving public education for our children.

Joy Hofmeister - In My Opinion - Jenni White

Seriously, who doesn't love Three Dog Night?  Who doesn't love Jeremiah the Bullfrog?  Yes, I am dating myself, but seriously, you're humming the song right now, I know it!

Though I could wax philosophic about late '60's music, we need to discuss Joy Hofmeister.

In late summer of 2012, ROPE decided that, since our Superintendent had no intention of listening to a word we had to say on Common Core, we would try to speak with each State Board Member.  Consequently, we drove to Enid to see then-member Brian Haden, we traveled to Lawton to speak with General Baxter, I personally drove downtown to Bill Price's law office and met with him and then-ROPE Board member, Danna Foreman and I met Joy Hofmeister at Starbucks in Edmond near one of her Kumon franchises.  (We never seemed to be able to catch up with Bill Shdeed and from our observations at State Board Meetings, we believed a meeting with Amy Ford would simply be a waste of time for all of us.)

Bill Price is as intractable in his opinions of school 'reform' as Amy Ford.  Brian Hayden listened, but we didn't believe he really understood our concerns (he has since left the Board).  General Baxter was a lot of fun to talk to and we thought maybe he was hearing our concerns, but it became obvious he served "at the pleasure of the Governor" and not long after our meeting , it seemed clear he had done his due diligence and moved on.

Joy Hofmeister was another story.  As Danna and I met with her that day, I found her instantly likable.  She listened, took notes and asked questions as we talked.  She took our materials gratefully and warned us she didn't know much about Common Core at all - a fact clear from our chat.  It was also clear she was an independent thinker - she wasn't on the school 'reform' train - she seemed as though she wanted to do what was best for kids, not simply what was expedient or trendy.  We talked about local control of education and how she had seen the effects of parental involvement through her work at Kumon and how important it was to engage parents in their children's education directly.

To me, Joy appeared warm and open and willing to listen.  Consequently, we kept in touch.  She would call or text asking my opinions about various issues the board was addressing or to ask questions about Common Core and other 'reforms'.  Not long after we met, I found our youngest son had a type of mathematical dyslexia.  Among other things, he was reversing his numbers (90 became 09), making it very frustrating for he and I to do math at home.  Knowing Joy owned several Kumon franchises, I called and asked her opinion.  She gave me several ideas, we chatted for a bit and hung up.  Three days later, a learning tool Kumon uses to help kids get their numbers straight appeared in my mailbox.  Sam and I used it, he showed improvement quickly and Joy and I developed a friendship.

Over the course of the last year and a half, I have watched Joy change.  When I met her, she was fairly ignorant of a lot of the new 'reforms' our superintendent, governor and legislature had adopted for our state, but she knew she didn't like the imperious nature of our superintendent or the adversarial feel of the board/superintendent relationship.  She never balked at any education we attempted to give her, but instead read our materials and frequently contacted me with follow-up questions, seeking to broaden her view.

No, Joy did not come out whaling away against Common Core when she began her campaign for superintendent.  This frustrated many of our ROPE friends.  I understand their perspective, but it's important to remember what perspective is and that there are frequently multiple views of the same issue.  As I talked to Joy about Common Core, it became very clear she was not going to move the way a group wanted, she was going to continue researching until she could make the decision on her own.  The implied hypocrisy in the statement "She was for it before she was against it" is completely ridiculous.  I was an atheist at one point in my life.  Now I am a follower of Jesus Christ.  So, I can't grow into a relationship with the Lord?  This argument is sound for anyone who considers themselves to be an educable individual on any issue at any level.

Our current superintendent has shown she is not educable.  She knows what's right and by Hell or high water, she's going to do that/those thing/s.

That is not Joy.  Joy will study, deliberate, debate and discuss before she comes to a conclusion.  In my experience she's not going to be led around by the nose, or decide she has the only solution, she's going to work to find her true north and move in that direction.  This is why I was so disappointed to see Charlie Meadows of OC-PAC repeat misinformation about Joy in his latest "Charlie's Picks" email.  He said the following:

Let me suggest the differences, when Janet ran 4 years ago she was a strong advocate for school choice. Much of her ideas for school choice are charter schools, a form of school choice for which I am not a huge fan. However Janet is also favorable to home schooling and other forms of school choice. On the other hand I believe Joy was encouraged to run by many in the education establishment, especially the Tulsa area school superintendents who most likely despise Janet. I believe Janet is more committed to school choice and thus children, while I believe Joy is more committed to school systems. I have a trust problem with both of them and may not vote in this race. If I decide to vote, I am leaning toward Janet. 

He "believes" Joy was encouraged to run by Tulsa area school superintendents.  So?  As ROPE followers know, I'm not necessarily a fan of administrators (certainly on the Common Core issue), but what difference does that make?  The education of children isn't about ideology, it's about finding practical solutions to help all children learn the most they are able in the best environment we're able to provide as Oklahoma taxpayers.

The ladies of ROPE are not 'school choice' proponents per se.  We don't support charter schools (schools with private boards using public money), but we like Education Savings Accounts - FOR EVERYBODY not just minorities and those below the poverty line.  To us, this is true school choice - choice that will bring about real competitive market results.  I have talked this out with Joy.  Joy is committed to education competition and local control - not school systems or state systems or out-of-state systems.  In fact, she has LOST funding since coming out against the Common Core and a restoration of local control - yes, she has had donors request their funds to be returned.  THOSE would be the 'education establishment'.

When I chose to support her in 2010, I knew  Dr. Barresi was authoritarian and brash - I had worked under her long enough to know that.  I simply hoped those traits would be used to clean up the State Department of Education as she promised during her campaign.  Obviously, the brash authoritarianism turned against us as she strove to implement the programs statist Republicans (the 'education establishment'?) ordained in lockstep with their counterparts in the Obama Administration.

Charlie says he doesn't trust either Republican candidate for state superintendent.  Well, many of us 'trusted' Janet and look where that got us - Common Core, A No Child Left Behind Waiver, 3rd Grade Reading Retention; more and more and more 'edicts' with which state schools can shove parents out of the picture. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again expecting different results.  If you've been unhappy with the last two years, further supporting Dr. Barresi then, seems insane.

If you're a voting Republican in the Oklahoma primary elections on June 24, that leaves Joy Hofmeister.  Joy is not authoritarian or brash - she has shown herself to me to be just the opposite.

Instead of repeating hearsay and 'believing' a candidate to be one thing or another - either talk to the candidate themselves or to someone who knows the candidate - as a person will, at some point, reveal their true selves during the course of a personal relationship.  Joy has revealed nothing to me that indicates she doesn't deserve a stab at the job of State Superintendent, and I for one, am willing to give her the chance.  Wouldn't you rather have a listening, learner than a know-it-all?  I know I would.                                                    

Setting the Record Straight On Janet Barresi - OK Supt. Of Public Schools

During the local KFOR-TV show, FlashPoint (approx. minute 2) which aired on Father's Day, Dr. Barresi clearly uses me personally (Jenni White) as a pawn in her political game of tall tale telling by explaining to the audience that she has met with me/us (ROPE) to hear our concerns.  This made me angry enough to respond.  In the following blog, you will find the history of Jenni/ROPE and Superintendent Janet Barresi.  I hope you will come away with a clear understanding of why ROPE could never support her as State Superintendent again.

In the spring of 1999, I accepted a job at Independence Charter Middle school teaching 7th grade science on the same team where my mother taught 7th grade English.  Dr. Barresi had created the school and maintained a supervisory capacity, having worked very hard to create an environment where students (including her two sons) would be provided a rigorous curricula (we used E.D. Hirsch's Core Knowledge curriculum - not Common Core) and parents would be accountable for their children's behavior.

By the time we left in 2002 (my mother formally retired after decades of teaching and I left to stay home with our first son), we believed our voices no longer appreciated in the present and future plans of Independence.  Nevertheless, I was impressed Dr. Barresi could work so hard and organize so well as to create an entire school.  ROPE fully backed Dr. Barresi believing she could provide the accountability our former Superintendent had not seemed to do.  I personally staked out campaign signs, wrote blogs, marched in parades and spoke across the state to help Dr. Barresi's campaign for election.

My thought process changed immediately after Dr. Barresi won her election and by December 2011, I had written the following blog,  Marveling at The Nuclear Fallout Of Partisan Politics.  I urge you to read this post.  It details how Dr. Barresi used partisan politics and her friendship with Governor Mary Fallin to create a situation in which she could gain complete control over the Department of Education - neutering the State Board.  

Here are specific reasons ROPE will NOT support Dr. Barresi again:

1. The week (or so) after her election in November 2010, I was granted an appointment with Dr. Barresi at her campaign headquarters.  At that time, I told we needed her help to stop Common Core.  In a very domineering tone, she told me she was moving forward with Common Core (begun under DEMOCRAT Brad Henry).  I shouldn't worry because she could "control it".  She would control the Feds.
2. Though I tried to engage her via email, continuing to make my case against Common Core - even after she took office - I got the same 'assurances' for a few exchanges and then no further correspondence.
3. In 2011, Representative Sally Kern wrote the first bill to stop Common Core in Oklahoma, which was blocked by both the Senate and House Education Committees.  ROPE engaged in a letter writing campaign to Dr. Barresi asking her to help give the bill a hearing.  In attempt to solicit the superintendent's aid, Representative Kern made an appointment to see Dr. Barresi and took me along because she had not responded to my requests for a meeting.  I clearly remember sitting across her desk from her as she gestured to her computer screen and said with great exasperation, "Why are you having these people email me? You are not even giving them correct information. They don't even know what they're talking about."  That was followed by further assurances she had it covered - she knew what she was doing when it came to implementing Common Core.
4. That fall (2011) Representative Kern was allowed an Interim Study on the Common Core.  She asked ROPE and Lindsay Burke of the Heritage Foundation to speak.  Dr. Barresi and a Senator from Arizona were allowed to speak following our presentations.  As she took the microphone, the first words out of her mouth were, "We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts."  A clear insult aimed at moms - moms with advanced degrees there on their own dime and their own time.
5. Dr. Barresi was asked to refute our comments to the Interim Committee after the 2011 study.  Representative Kern had to ask repeatedly for the response. 

Since that time, there have been continuing efforts to belittle our organization and demean mothers and others interested in public education, making nearly every battle partisan - as though she personally represents every Republican in the state and we all want exactly what she wants.  While Joel Robison, Barresi's Chief of Staff, has made several attempts to stay in contact over the last several years, Dr. Barresi herself has gone out of her way NOT to.

1. During the March 2013 Board Meeting, several of us went to speak against the A-F grading system. I was cut off rudely though I was finishing a sentence.
2. During the June 2013 Board Meeting, we were told we couldn't speak at all - we were not even allowed our 3 minutes because we wanted to address the board on Common Core and it wasn't on the agenda - though Common Core testing was addressed in the meeting.
3. During the July 2013 Board Meeting, I began to give my thoughts on Common Core and Dr. Barresi left the room.
4. During the August 2013 Common Core Forum in Tulsa, Dr. Barresi stopped taking questions as soon as I got to the mic. 
5. Dr. Barresi has had any number of times made available to her in which to debate me if she had really wanted to 'listen' or engage our concerns.  She has never taken one.   True, there are scheduling issues, but if she really wanted to debate me, she could have made time in four years to do it.

In closing I would like to create a list of reasons why ROPE asks you to vote AGAINST Dr. Barresi June 24th.*

• Though seemingly determined to frame every argument about education in a partisan issue where she is a "conservative" and everyone who does not agree with her is a "liberal":

• Barresi determined to push the CCSS - originally enacted by Democrat Governor Brad Henry, embraced by Sandy Garret, the previous Democratic Superintendent and utilized by the Obama Administration via no less than three separate federal programs

• Hires John Kraman - a previous employee of Achieve (the offspring organization of parent National Centers on Education and the Economy started by known liberal Marc Tucker - which produced "Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring US Students Receive a World-class Education" - the precursor to the CCSS), further cementing into place a 'liberal' agenda

• Hires Joel Robison, former chief lobbyist for the Oklahoma Education Association - the organization Barresi touts as "liberal"

• Actively, personally fought allowing parents to voluntarily put their kids into kindergarten two months later in the year. Barresi fought such a change based on the perennial liberal argument that such legislation, "would discriminate against low-income families 

• Chose to remove a $5,000 per year stipend for teachers with National Board Certification while allotting 10 million dollars for pre-k programming to be matched with a grant from the very liberal Kaiser Family Foundation 

• Though telling voters she wants the federal government out of education, Barresi has applied for no less than 3 major (and administers many others such as the 21st Century Skills grants) federal programs including, No Child Left Behind Waiver, Race To The Top Early Childhood Grant and State Longitudinal Database Grant.

• Joins Jeb Bush's group Chiefs For Change from his Foundation for Educational Excellence. The Chiefs for Change has published their manifesto of what they want seen in the re-authorization of the ESEA. Please note how it is nearly exclusively dictating MORE federal control.

• Instead of working with parents, has fought parents

• Fought changes to the Reading Sufficiency Act that would bring parents into the graduation decision from 3rd to 4th grady by saying,  "It is unconscionable that anyone would think it’s too much to ask that a school teach a child to read", implying that government knew better than parents as to whether a child was prepared to read. 

• During the End of Instruction Exam appeals in 2012, Dr. Barresi opened the private records of those students requesting an appeal to public scrutiny over the State Department of Education's website.  In addition, the entire EOI process - Dr. Barresi's requested legislation - cuts out the role of parent, reducing graduation from high school to a series of tests.

• Made excuses for her Chief of Staff, Jennifer Carter, calling superintendents in Union and Jenks, "dirtbags". Carter, though possessing no experience in classroom education on any level, was instrumental in state Department of Education budgetary issues such as the removal of National Board Certification as alleged by the Oklahoma Truth Council.

Honestly and sadly, I could go on.  I feel like one of the Founding Fathers enumerating the various acts of tyranny by King George.  No public official is 'perfect'.  That's not the issue.  The issue here is, does the candidate respect the authority of those she serves?  In this case, I believe the facts show the answer to be NO.  

*Though ROPE can not endorse candidates for public office or support their campaigns, I personally will be voting for Joy Hoffmeister for State Superintendent on June 24th.

Mary Fallin Wants Common Core Whether You Want It Or Not

Just so we are all clear, Governor Mary Fallin is absolutely Hell-bent on thrusting Common Core down the throats of Oklahomans through the legislature whether they want it or not.  Even in the face of a LETTER asking her to stop signed by many, many educational leaders and others all across the nation! Here's one of the latest articles being used to entice the legislature to stop bothering with us 'little people', aka 'parents'.

GOP Pollster: Republicans should be careful on Common Core. Basically this article makes the case that sampling of 'likely Republican voters' indicates that despite their votes on Common Core, all will keep their seats.  There are three things wrong with this notion:

1. Poling can say whatever pollsters want it to say - can anyone say 'skew the data'? 
2. 'Likely' Republican voters are more than not - NOT parents.  Sad to say, but most people today fall into two categories 1.  I'm too uninterested/lazy/busy to vote, and/or 2. I only vote at the last second based on commercials.  HOWEVER, you mess with kids, parents - especially moms - get furious.  Ask ex-Jeb-Bush-Cheif-For-Change Tony Bennet about that.  He lost his superintendency in Indiana over Common Core - among other 'Republican' 'reforms'.
3. You think Oklahomans aren't going to run to the Democrat saying, "No Common Core"?  If not, you're dead wrong.  Oklahoma can swing in Governorship from red to blue in a year - everyone knows that.  If you choose to ignore that here in Oklahoma, you definitely do so at your peril.

Again, voters may be at best agnostic over many issues that activists come out of their chairs over, but when you mess with their kids, the Grizzly comes out and those agnostics become activists too.

My gosh!  Even with the number of low-information-voters out there today, we managed to get HUNDREDS of people to the capitol to protest our Senate not hearing Common Core bills, blocking the will of the people and to ask our Senate to vote for the repeal of Common Core on St. Patrick's Day.  The only thing we DIDN'T do, was to get primary challengers for every seat in the House and the Senate where the legislator was firmly in the court of education 'reform' - including Common Core.  Legislators who legislate via polls and the Governor tells them to do, need to be reminded they are responsible to the people in their districts who elect them.  It's sad to acknowledge, but there are some legislators who hear the cry of those that fund their campaigns over those of the 'average voter'.

So, "WHY WON'T OUR GOVERNOR LISTEN TO HER PEOPLE?".  It is obvious that Common Core is an issue people do not want - overwhelmingly in Oklahoma. Polls show that - if you want to play the polling game - and there are candidates out there with whom I have had discussions that have gotten polling data to indicated such.

So why?  Clearly, as much as I've written on the topic of Common Core - the jury is out as to it's effectiveness as a college and career ready tool and the tests have been a nightmare.  There is NO WAY to collect enough data in the time we've had Common Core in Oklahoma because it wasn't mandated for use until 2014 and few schools have utilized it to 100%.  There is no way to cite accurate data - let alone ANY data - on whether or not kids are doing better under Common Core because there hasn't been any time to collect it.  Even if there had been, in order to be relevant at all, there would have to be a minimum of 6 years of test scores to even make any kind of comparison (kids would have to get through k-5 and the upper grades would have to fully matriculate through 4 years of high school).

Interestingly, there have been enough years of NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress - a national test given to a sampling of kids in each grade in each state and compared across states) data using PASS to make that determination.  Grades have continued to climb in mathematics particularly and also in reading, yet the Oklahoma Department of Education waives this data away by saying this data is do to "excellent teaching".  Are you kidding me?  Who could even write that with a straight face?  Isn't that what study after study after white paper have said for years - that standards don't really matter as long as teachers are doing a great job in the classroom?

Seriously, both the Oklahoma State Department of Education, and the office of the Governor seem to be simply switching the talking points on whatever facts and figures we find to argue against Common Core to their benefit - even if it makes no sense.  

So, again I ask, "WHY?"   Why, Governor?  Why Superintendent?  Why do you so desperately need to get all Oklahomans onto the Common Core even when Oklahomans do not want them? 

Every reason both these elected officials have given as Common Core necessity, we have debunked.  So, as I've asked a hundred times, is Common Core about parents and kids, or about political power and money?  I think we only need to acknowledge this fact:  If Common Core was about parents and kids, this nonsense would stop.

NO TEACHING FOR YOU! Dr. Barresi and 3rd Grade Retention

I should have put State Superintendent Janet Barresi's face on the Soup Nazi (Seinfeld).  I can just hear her saying, "NO TEACHING FOR YOU!"

Here is her statement on the third grade reading retention act:

Superintendent Barresi comments on bill to weaken third-grade reading law
OKLAHOMA CITY (March 28, 2014) — State Superintendent of Public Instruction Janet Barresi made the following remarks concerning House Bill 2625. Slated for a vote Monday in the state Senate Education Committee, the measure would repeal automatic retention of students who score Unsatisfactory on the third-grade reading test and who don’t meet a good-cause exemption.“To deny children the opportunity to learn how how to read is to deny them an opportunity for success. Reading is the most fundamental aspect of an education. It is unconscionable that anyone would think it’s too much to ask that a school teach a child to read.
“Extensive research shows that moving children forward in school without the ability to read proficiently sets them on a course of falling further and further behind. It condemns them to frustration and failure. But there are also severe consequences for the students who are able to read proficiently, as fourth- and fifth-grade teachers must increasingly spend their time in remediation with the struggling readers.
“The Reading Sufficiency Act has been in existence for 17 years to identify and provide intensive remediation for struggling readers as early as kindergarten. And yet after 17 years and more than $80 million in funding, the percentage of Oklahoma students reading below grade level has remained flat. We cannot allow this to continue. We cannot continue sabotaging the promise of future generations.
“I urge Senate Education Committee members to continue to support high standards by ensuring that our children can read. I would ask that they let the RSA work. There already are good-cause exemptions to address an array of special circumstances. Predictions of catastrophe are simply incorrect. When the State of Oklahoma mandated end-of-instruction exams as a condition for high school graduation, critics made similar predictions that the sky would fall. Instead, Oklahoma’s young people rose to the occasion, with the passage rate at 99 percent.  
“The good news is that RSA already is working. It is igniting attention and innovation in reading instruction. We see school districts in Tulsa, Bartlesville, Putnam City and elsewhere making impressive gains in reducing the numbers of children with reading difficulties. It would be a mistake to start weakening the law just as it begins to show glimmers of its anticipated positive impact.”

No, Dr. Barresi, despite your continued use of Webster-sized, emotionally-charged, finger-pointing words (unconscionable), NO ONE I KNOW WANTS KIDS NOT TO READ.  I mean, NO ONE.  I've never met a person who has said, "Oh, throw kids out in a forest, they'll figure out reading for themselves", or "Shoot, kids don't need to read to get a job."  Obviously, you're thinking of people on some other planet here.

Several things about this statement make me just insane:

1. So the RSA has been around for 17 years and it wasn't going to work until we made the whole thing punitive?  So it's the kids who aren't wanting to read but get passed onto fourth grade?  NO!  I've been a teacher, I know how it works.  You tell the kid they aren't going to pass ______ (fill in the blank - reading, this class, this test...) if they don't do ______.  You then tell the parents and the principal this.  You then don't pass the kid.  You then get called into the carpet in the principals office where he/she says, "The parents are really upset about little Johnny not passing this ______.  I need you to just let him go on."  You say, "Yes sir/ma'am", because you know' they're going to be passed and you move on with your day knowing that at least YOU followed the rules.  So, who's fault is it that kids aren't reading by fourth grade?  I was watching Star Trek again this weekend and I'm always struck by Spock's (in this case Kirk's) line, "The needs of the many out way the needs of the one".  Interestingly, that's how government is SUPPOSED to work.  We just don't work it that way, we punish EVERYONE for the one or two teachers/principals/administrators allowing kids to move to the next grade to save a little grief.  What a giant load.
2. Dr. Barresi urges Senators to support high standards.  What?  I am beginning to think there is nothing more important in the world of education than Accountability.  I mean, who cares about the kids' well being or what the parents want - it's "Damn the torpedoes! Full speed ahead" at our department of Education.  Then, to follow up this statement, she tells us about the "good cause exemptions" that make this bill well worth its salt.  What?  The good cause exemptions are all things teachers and parents were most probably doing anyway to make sure kids are reading appropriately, yet when you put the oneness for a child's passage to the next (elementary!) grade on ONE single test, the teacher has little time create portfolios of student work  in order to make sure they are available if they flunk the ONE test because she/he is too busy trying to beat them to death with reading curricula.  So why the necessity for RSA testing?  Because it's in the NCLB Waiver.  Yes, third grade reading retention is part of the assurances given to the federal government under 1B - "Transition To College and Career Ready Standards".  In effect, we have to have RSA in order to keep with the Common Core State Standards Initiative which is required by our NCLB Waiver.  Again, what a giant load.  Who do we owe for an excellent educational experience - parents/students or the federal government?
3. How in the world could you possibly determine RSA was working?  How?  This program has really only started this year and there have been no results from testing.  How in the world can you say that, although the program has been in existence for 17 years, we are suddenly seeing progress because of a test in the first year?  That has to be the silliest thing I've ever heard of from an organization that told OSU and OU researchers they didn't know what they were talking about when they condemned the Department's A-F grading scale.

In closing, we MUST allow teachers, principals - and most of all parents - to determine the course of students through public education - not our current superintendent!  I have no idea when the Oklahoma Department of Education became the Politburo, but it needs to stop.  The OSDE needs to let teachers teach and parents parent and stay out of the way.

PARCC or not to PARCC - That Is The Question?

Since the Common Core has been taken to task in Oklahoma by HB3399 and a number of stellar lawmakers who apparently have the best interests of Oklahoma children at heart, there have been a number of concerns about testing.

Here's a bit of background on the state of Common Core testing from Ed.gov:

ABOUT THE RACE TO THE TOP ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
The Race to the Top Assessment program was authorized as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). In September 2010, the U.S. Department of Education (Department) awarded competitive, four-year grants to two consortia of states, the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (Smarter Balanced).

Though Common Core naysayers have been given names the likes of 'misinformed' when it comes to the idea that Common Core is a federal program, it is impossible to argue with these facts:

1. What is tested is taught, thereby creating a situation in which testing drives curricula - especially since Common Core tests are high stakes tests tied, not only to our state's A-F grading system for public schools but teacher 'grading' as well
2. The Common Core tests are federally subsidized via ARRA funds given to PARCC and Smarter Balance
3. The federal government is now reviewing the tests they paid to develop, further entrenching the federal government in the Common Core process

Now, as the state attempts to abandon Common Core, we have explained to lawmakers that Oklahoma should move up to PASS rather than stay with Common Core (Oklahoma Academic Standards) in the interim period while new standards are being written.  We have encountered resistance with this idea however, as Oklahoma's contract with Measured Progress is brought up over and over again as though contracts with state agencies are iron clad and contain no exclusion clause. 

Our main concerns with MP tests follow:

1. Superintendent Barresi made an enormous issue out of removing Oklahoma from PARCC testing (as did many other states) - most probably because the argument provided earlier about the federal government intervention into Common Core, but also because of costs.  PARCC costs were listed as one reason why Dr. Barresi dropped out of the testing consortium.  Evidently, the costs are ever-increasing as PARCC had to reorganize as a C3 (non-profit) organization in order to receive private funding to cover the costs (with help from the National Governor's Association).
2. MP was granted subcontractor status to PARCC through PARCC's contract with Education Testing Services (ETS).  Consequently, any test written or provided by MP would be a PARCC test.

Why get out of PARCC if we're just going to go right back via a different name (like Common Core vs Oklahoma Academic Standards)?  Why disregard Mary Fallin's Executive Order on testing (#2) that states:

The state of Oklahoma will be exclusively responsible for deciding the assessment methodology to be used to measure student performance.

Clearly, if Oklahoma is using MP, we will be unable meet this requirement, as this company is a subcontractor to PARCC and ETS.

Finally, the Common Core state standards are being fully digitized and each standard placed into a database.  This database will then be utilized by the testing companies contracted/subcontracted to PARCC to determine the exact standard/s the student missed during testing because the testing database will align with the standards database.  Truly, this could result in a situation in which career counseling would remove a career opportunity for a student simply because they missed career-similar test questions on the Common Core-aligned testing.  This situation would not only have to violate Governor Fallin's Executive Order on student privacy (#5), but would create a European system of public education expressly frowned on by those who founded our country on the idea that any American could be anything.

We must not only stop Common Core State Standards in Oklahoma, but Common Core testing through Measured Progress as well!

Is Oklahoma Education Being Sold to Out Of State Interests?

UPDATE 3/27/14 see bottom of post

As Dorothy chanted "There's no place like home" in reference to Kansas, I feel the same way about Oklahoma.  As a 51 year resident of our fair state, imagine my frustration then, at the following situations occurring in our own Oklahoma education system:

• Last year about this time, we wrote about the fact that numerous FOI'd emails from the State Department of Education (OSDE) indicated that state education policy was being written by Jeb Bush's Foundation for Educational Excellence (FEE)- particularly Oklahoma's NCLB waiver and the A-F grading system.
• We then wrote about Oklahoma's new Secretary of Education and the Workforce, Robert Sommers, a former employee of Governor John Kasich in Ohio who also has ties to FEE.
• John Kraman, the Executive Director of Student Information at the OSDE came to Oklahoma from Washington D.C. where his previous post included working for Achieve, where he was the Lead Research Analyst for development of the Common Core State Standards.
• And now we have Wes Bruce.  Wes has taken over for the 'retiring' Meredith McBee, Assistant Superintendent for Accountability and Assessments. Wes Bruce was formerly the Chief Assessment Officer for the Indiana Department of Education.  Wes also currently chairs the PARCC Technology Committee (Barresi made Oklahoma a member of PARCC) and served on the US Department of Education's technical advisory Committee.  He was the 2006-7 Chair of the Education Information Management Advisory Consortium (EIMAC) for the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).  He chaired the NCES Forum task force on accounting for student exits, dropout and mobility.  Wes previously served as an administrator with South Bend Community School Corporation, and also served 11 years in the Kanawha County Schools of Charleston, West Virginia.  He has a B.A. in psychology from Rice University and a M.S. in computer science from the University of Charleston, West Virginia. 

In order to jog your memory, Indiana was where Jeb Bush favorite, Tony Benett was State Superintendent until he was fired by Indiana citizens in a snit over his love of Common Core.  He then went on to become Education Commissioner in Jeb Bush's backyard - Florida.  Unfortunately, he had to resign that post after it was found he changed grades of an Indiana charter school to make them look better on the Bush-designed A-F grading system.

March 20, 2014, another new hire was made at the State Department of Education. 

Lisa Chandler is the agency's new assistant superintendent in charge of assessments.  Chandler earned a Master's Degree in Public Policy and Administration from Northwestern University in Evanston, Ill. and a Bachelor's Degree from the University of Texas at Austin.  After 20 years at the Texas Education Agency, she worked as a national measurement consultant for Pearson PLC.

Hmmm.  So first, we have Kraman - a previous employee of Achieve - and now Chandler - a previous employee of Pearson (the world's largest textbook company, the world's largest supplier of Common Core-aligned books, ancillaries and testing!).  

As a longtime resident of the state, I'm incensed.  We have no good Oklahoma candidates for these jobs?  Apparently not - since the latest Barresi hire comes from the same revolving door as all the other employees in positions key to implementing Dr. Barresi's NON-LOCAL, NON-OKLAHOMA education reforms that come via Jeb Bush via President Obama.  Nothing to see here.  Business as usual.  Please drive on.