Surveys Containing Personal Behavioral/Emotional Questions Are Given To Oklahoma Students Through 21st Century Skills Programming

The latest email from the Oklahoma State Department of Education heralds the fact that we took yet MORE MONEY from the federal government in the way of 21st Century Community Center Learning grants (CCLC). This is exciting, we are told, because now, there are 59 total grantees in the state, each getting hundreds of thousands of dollars apiece. Thrilling! Or is it? Do we know what the CCLC's do? What are their performance records? What is going on in the course of administration of this program?

As I read the email, I remembered an incident way back in 2011 when I received a call from a friend, regarding a psychological survey his son had been given - without his permission -at his school in Hugo, Oklahoma. After some digging around, we were both able to find out about 21st Century Community Centers and what they did.

Because of the new fabulous grants being handed out this year funding further CCLC's in Oklahoma, I thought I would re-publish our findings. In order to update our research, I attempted to go out to the federal Department of Education and look up the grant information as I had done previously (see figs 2 and 3 below). Unfortunately, I found this message

The 21st CCLC Profile and Performance Information Collection System (PPICS) has been retired and a new data collection method is currently under development. Please visit this site after April 2015 for updates.

Unfortunately, this is October of 2015 and there was NOTHING on the CCLC page indicating a link to the 'new' data collection. No new performance reports - no nothing.

Apparently, all the CCLC data were moved to the Oklahoma State Department of Education where I found a page that contained a program evaluation report for 2012/2013. Page 30 begins to report the collection of SOCIOEMOTIONAL data for students enrolled in the program. In Oklahoma, it is against the law (HB3399) to collect SOCIOEMOTIONAL data via state testing, yet here it is in four full pages from 30-34. Don't you suppose that if Oklahoma legislators were upset enough about social emotional questions to make them illegal on state tests, they'd be just as concerned about this kind of data collection anywhere in the educational process? I think many would, yes. That is why it's extremely important to let your legislator know what is happening inside the boundaries of this program.

Here are 2 screenshots of some of the questions kids in this program are asked.

The reasons ROPE - and apparently the legislature - are so opposed to this kind of questioning is that it can be very effectively stored and used against kids at a later date, or used to pigeonhole them in programming that is unnecessary and/or costly.

At this point, I will interject our previous study from 2011 regarding CCLC's:

OVERVIEW:

1.  21st CCLC programming includes psychological testing that has been done in Oklahoma – illegally – without parental permission.
2. Due to changes in FERPA laws (governing student privacy rights in public schools), demographic and personal student data may now be collected and shared widely without parental knowledge or consent.
3. Collecting sensitive data such as that provided by psychological evaluations of any kind, creates enormous breaches in the right to privacy of minor children enrolled in public education.
4. 21st CCLC’s cost over 1 billion dollars per year and – according to their own annual reports – have failed every year - not yet once reaching the goals of their assessment descriptors.

BACKGROUND:

21st Century programming was the brainchild of a man named Marc Tucker - an acolyte of Hillary Clinton - the man also behind the Common Core Standards. He believes strongly in the John Dewey progressive education model - most commonly employed among communist countries - where school is to provide students EVERYTHING they need for successful lives. Teachers and parents are simply facilitators in the role of fitting the student in the role of 'worker'. Tucker is the progenitor of the standards-based education reform movement - another name for Outcome Based Education. Marc Tucker's organization is called, National Center for Education and the Economy.

ISSUES:

1. The entire 21st Century program is built upon a series of white papers that explain the above philosophy in great detail.

• Instead of focusing exclusively on math, science, reading/writing, social studies, 21st Century focuses on Global Awareness - Financial, Economic, Business and Entrepreneurial Literacy - Civic Literacy - Health Literacy - Environmental Literacy
• Please note: the P21 Toolkit tells how Common Core and P21 Align, and shows ZERO actual concrete standards or practice of basic skills – relying instead on endless group projects and 'explorations' - very progressive education.
• The Measuring Skills for 21st Century Education on page 1 "Unmet Challenges" of the document begins tying together John Dewey and Marc Tucker and explains that employers need workers to do more than simple procedures - or how the government (public schools) need to prepare students to be workers.

2. The 21st Century program (also called P21 - Partnership for 21st Century Skills) is actually four parts that includes the 21st Century after school programming.

3. 21st Century after school programs are ALL supported by federal grants –

• 86 Oklahoma school districts have been given 21st Century Community Learning Center (CCLC) grants since 2006
• FY11, Oklahoma was given $12,482,019 to serve 12,482 children = funding of 1 THOUSAND dollars per child?

4. Page 4 of the Measuring Skills document ties the 21st Century Skills and 21st CCLC's together - how 21st Century uses the CCLC's to promote their agenda

5. Despite an increase in spending every single year, please note the following from the government's own 21st Century Community Learning Centers performance review:

• "The program as a whole continues to fall below the established targeted performance thresholds associated with the GPRA performance indicators for the program. A rigorous study of the program may result in the development of more relevant GPRA measures"
• In other words, taxpayers spend over a BILLION dollars on this program every year so that P21’s own assessments can show they’re having NO impact at all. In response, P21 will lower their assessment cut scores and change indicators to match their program results.

6. Grants are given to schools to institute a wide range of after school activities including the following:

• Drug and violence prevention programs and counseling programs
• Please note the “Glossary of Terms” on pages 40-41 of the Response to Intervention document 4 out of 24 apply specifically to BEHAVIOR issues
• Note all the manners by which children in the program are assessed and how specific data programs utilized by the program, can collect “HUGE” amounts of demographic data on students in the program (under the guise of accountability).
• This website sells psychological tests which are administered to assess behavior in the 21st Century programs.
• Psychological testing of students is PROHIBITED by the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA) excepting under specific conditions allowed by the parent.
•  Because of changes in the FERPA regulations that allow a large amount of student data to be collected from public school students AND then SHARED with other organizations WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT (pg 52), it is entirely possible for psychological profiles to be collected and digitized into a database without parental consent by those ignorant of the law.

7. Figure 1 represents a psychological assessment given to the child of parent Howard Houchen, in Hugo Elementary Schools.

8. Hugo Elementary Schools received a 21st CCLC grant in July 2007.

• Since that time, Hugo Public Schools has received $880,000 for the CCLC program (Figure 2) that Hugo Public Schools was providing various forms of counseling services.

9. Figure 3 shows that Hugo Elementary Schools CCLC program was funded in part by Hartsell Psychological Services and that the Hugo CCLC was tasked to provide behavioral counseling to students less than 18 years of age.

10. Appendix 1 contains the letter sent by Hugo parent Howard Houchen to Representative Lee Denney in response to HB2641, explaining his concerns about the 21st Century CCLC program in Hugo.

CONCLUSION: 

Under the 21st Century Skills program – a federal grant program paid for by tax payers – students are being administered psychological tests through public schools without parental consent. Because of the recent changes in FERPA laws, which allow student demographic and other personal ‘data’ to be collected and shared by public schools without parental consent, public education institutions should not offer these kinds of highly sensitive services. In order to protect student/family privacy, minor child counseling programs should be confined to those sought specifically/exclusively by the parent/family of the minor child in need of counseling, administered through private, non-profit organizations or through the Department of Human Services. Public schools should focus solely on educational matters and leave matters of physical and emotional health to parents, families and personal physicians.

Figure 1: Psychological assessment provided by Hugo Elementary Schools to the students in 5^th grade class without parental permission.

Figure 1: Psychological assessment provided by Hugo Elementary Schools
to the students in 5^th grade class without parental permission.

Figure 2: Screen shot of the Grantee Details for Hugo Public Schools’ CCLC grant.

Figure 2: Screen shot of the Grantee Details for
 Hugo Public Schools’ CCLC grant.

Figure 3: Screen shot from the 21^st Century Community Learning Centers website showing that Hartsell Psychological Services was a funding source for Hugo Public Schools 21^st CCLC where behavioral counseling was a part of the program.

Figure 3: Screen shot from the 21^st Century Community Learning Centers website 

showing that Hartsell Psychological Services was a funding source for 

Hugo Public Schools 21^st CCLC where behavioral counseling was a part of the program.

Appendix 1: Letter from Hugo parent Howard Houchen to Representative Lee Denney of the Oklahoma House Common Education Committee – author of HB2641 that all districts have access to individual and group counseling.

Rep. Denney, et al;

I would also ask that HB2641 be tabled and would like to offer some points for clarity purposes.  Both of my children attend Hugo Public schools. The youngest is in 5th Grade at Hugo Elementary, the oldest graduates (with Honors) from Hugo High School in three months.  The 'Durant" reference, I believe, comes from a finding that Hartsell Psychological Services also has an "after school program contract" with Calera Public Schools which is just a few miles away from Durant, OK.

Hartsell Psychological Services (HPS) first appeared on my radar in August 2011 as I was notified that Hugo Elementary had CONTRACTED with HPS (in conjunction with a 21st Century Grant) to provide an after-school program.  I will try and be as succinct as possible here: HPS pays the schools they have contracted with a sum of money that goes to pay for the salaries of the teachers used in the after-school program. 

In return, HPS gets their money from "counseling" children that they basically refer to themselves (in many instances).  This payment appears to range from $400.00 -- $600.00 per week, per student.  Who pays?  You and I do because the charges go to Medicaid and SoonerCare, however, I am unable to find a single SoonerCare payment to HPS.   

I was told, by an administrator, that HPS also has material that some teachers use during regular school sessions.  I was unable to determine what that material is and what it is used for.  Our youngest was given what I consider to be a psych assessment, by HPS, outside of the after-school program (in regular school session) AND he is NOT enrolled in the after-school program.  HPS claims to have these program contracts with many ISD's throughout Oklahoma.  I do know they are contracted with Hugo and Calera. 

The "assessments" which were attempted to be given to  my child were VERY personal in nature and the parents were never asked for consent to having our children take part in either of the assessments.  Approximately 7 weeks ago our youngest son came home and told us the following: "Ms. Harmon handed out another psychological test today."  I asked: "Did you take it?"  He replied: "No, I recognized it from the last one and walked up to her desk and asked, 'Is this from Hartsell?' and she said 'Yes' and I told her I didn't want to do it so she didn't make me." 

I can go on-and-on about this topic but realize you are under restraints of time.  I can tell you that when all of the information is properly analyzed relative to data collection on OUR children...it is my judgment that this MUST end.  I am fed-up with kids being utilized as mines for data and "Guinea-Pigs".

I can tell you that the administrators I talk with about this situation feel as if they are in a  "damned if  you do and damned if you don't" situation.  They see dollars leaving programs, such as the after-school program, and are willing to dance with the devil to recoup those dollars.  I have offered my opinion on this tactic and am unwilling to sell my child’s and my family’s' privacy through data collection.  HB2641 simply adds to this already exploitive and corruptible environment. 

Please feel free to contact me personally if you have any questions or comments;

Regards,

Howard Houchen

Schools As Institutions of Democracy? Whose Democracy?

I read an article today - I couldn't help it, the title begged me - called "Why Schools Must Talk About Trayvon Martin".  I had to find out why tax dollar supported public schools MUST talk about Trayvon Martin. 

This was a blog on EdWeek, written by a special education teacher in Boston and his thesis was that since schools are supposed to be institutions FOR democracy, we should be having "contentious conversation" because this discussion should ameliorate societal ills.

Perhaps this is why the National Social Studies Standards (now Oklahoma's own Oklahoma Academic Standards) calls America a Constitutional Democracy instead of the Republic it really is.

The whole blog smacked of John Dewey - the Father of Progressive Education - who believed that - among other things - schools were little microcosms of the world and that we could just change all of society by keeping kids in school and away from their parents.

I simply could not let the post go without commenting, and this is what I said:

"The questions around promoting contentious conversations are messy. We raise schools up as institutions for democracy, even when they have historically fallen short of this ideal when it comes to persistent social ills, such as segregation, student dropout rates, poverty, and school violence."

Oh I totally agree. That's why I would immediately institute a conversation about Christianity and its contributions to America in my classroom - certainly a 'contentious' topic by any real examination of world views today.

And, though I'm a Christian - don't worry - I can handle the topic evenhandedly, and make sure all religions - including atheism - are also discussed. There will be nothing to worry about - I'm a teacher - I can handle it.

Since classrooms are really extensions of the great social experiment that is 'democracy', there is no reason this topic shouldn't be discussed in depth.

Who is the "we" that believes in raising up schools as "institutions for democracy"? I'm a conservative and I certainly don't believe that. I expect schools to teach the absolute BASICS and let parents - who are the experts in raising their own children - do all the "contentious" stuff at home.

Yes, there are a lot of 'throw away' kids out there today and most are produced by the very system that claims to help them. Many may not have support systems outside of school, but schools are not - and were never meant to be - a place to "cure social ills". That was historically the role of the church.

I always find it curious that the people who seem to scream the loudest about democracy (and the First Amendment), are the last to really practice it. I wonder if that's why people "often feel uneasy about such dialogues" in schools?

As a past public school educator and now a home educator, I think it IMPERATIVE to confront this nonsense when and where we see it.

Public school's lack of results today is simply an extension of Dewey's failed prescription for public schooling.  How can I say "failed"?  Well, let's look at the observable evidence.  Since the 1970's SAT scores have been falling. 

College Board National Report on 1996 College Bound Seniors - http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/CBS%2096%20National.PDF

 

Progressive education began under Dewey in the late 20's and has been churning out teachers from Dewey-seeded teacher colleges since that time.  In fact, the liberal bend of universities is well documented, particularly by David Horowitz.

When I speak, I often refer to a section in the book "To Kill A Mockingbird" where Scout gives an account of the new teacher (she has red nails and high heels) and how she told Atticus to stop letting her read from the Wall Street Journal because she was now in charge of Scout's education and she would take care of that in class.  Scout then goes on to regale the reader with her frustration that this "Dewey Decimal System" of education as Jem called it, forces her to create project after project while everyone she ever knows - like Jem and her dad - were smart because they read books - something she itches to do over 'projects'.  That story was to have taken place in the 1930's - as Dewey's legion were crisscrossing America to take root in primary and secondary schools from cities to sleepy rural towns.

If this has been going on since the 30's, what in the world would it be like today?  Just what we're seeing - Common Core and all!

John Dewey Would Be So Proud

I am closing out my day today and just realized. My post yesterday is absolutely the dream of John Dewey, our Marxist/Socialist "Father of Progressive (read 'modern') Education". He is taught like a God in teacher ed courses at Universities and Colleges everywhere - just as his followers had hoped.

School will provide all your needs.

That is what he wished - his Utopian fantasy. In fact, he thought parents were mostly morons and that the state could do a better job of raising little American young people than they. After all, some of them were getting divorced - as the Industrial Revolution began to re-define the stable, two parent family - some of them were neglecting their children to go to work...(if you want to really get a good feel for Dewey and his plans for public education - all of which have now come true - I urge you to get the book, John Dewey and the Decline of American Education - How the patron Saint of schools has corrupted teaching and learning by Henry T. Edmondson III)

Think on this a minute...I was told by a superintendent just recently that the reason why his district provided 'early childhood education' (tax-payer subsidized day care) was because the district 'next door' did. He would lose students as parents moved their kids to the OTHER school to take advantage of the program.

Butts + Chairs = dollars in public schools.

So...it was either provide free state-provided day care to parents, or lose his students AND his funding.

Yes folks, it's about the kids.

No. It's about class warfare, it's about building fiefdoms, it's about power, it's about MONEY. That's what public education is about in America today.

Here's what it will be soon - and a big shout out to ROPE board member Jo Joyce for this little nugget today:

Swedish Officials To Take Permanent Custody of Home Schooled Boy

Yes, according to the Home School Legal Defense Fund, little Domenic Johansson, son of Christer and Annie Johansson, has been in foster care since 2009 when he was seized from the plane on which the family was attempting to flee to his mother’s native India.

Home schooling is legal in Sweden, however, it is necessary to get materials with which to home school your child from the principal of the school of your child's prospective attendance.

However, this principal was not in favor of homeschooling and was hostile to the parent’s request.

“He was very short and not at all in favor of homeschooling,” Christer told the HSLDA. “I told him that it was my right under Swedish law to home school and that I was making contact with him to make the necessary arrangements and to get the materials. We were planning to leave Sweden in just a month or two. Mr. Eneqvist told me that he ‘didn’t care about my right’ that I didn’t have a ‘right to educate my son like that’ and that he was going to take the matter farther.”

The couple, who are devout Christians, had been planning to return to India where they were going to start a new ministry with the poor, but decided to delay the trip in order to get their son’s schooling arrangements made.

And so, as it was, the principal was a man of his word and somehow got the 'state' to remove little Domenic from his parents care. He has now been a 'ward of the state' for 24 months.

Let's see. That will never happen here in Oklahoma...REALLY? We now have the FOOD NAZI'S telling kids what they can and can not eat at school and a legislator that every year submits bills to try and kill the home schooling option in Oklahoma.

Even reasonable legislators like Representative Janine Noland expresses 'concern' over the idea of home schooling because she is acquainted with a family made up of crack-addicted parents who 'home school' their kids because they are often too stoned to get them there.

If you have reasonable legislators with this perspective, what about those like the one that tries to outlaw home schooling every year?

I guess, in the end, not only do we get the government we deserve, we also get the life we deserve - we're either free to pursue our lives under the Constitution given us by our Forefathers - which requires WORK to keep in place - or we can live our life in the chains of governmental tyranny because it just takes too much time out of our little Dancing With The Stars, Blackberry-texting, salon-going, lunching-out day to make the effort to secure our liberties for ourselves and our posterity.

A Review of the Partnership for 21st Century Skills White Papers

A Review of the Partnership for 21^st Century Skills White Papers

Pertaining to

H.R. 2536 “21^st Century Skills Readiness Act”

By Danna Foreman, Restore Oklahoma Public Education (ROPE)

The philosophical beliefs expressed by the Partnership for 21^st Century Skills in this white paper are contrary to the principles of our sovereign constitutional republic. Restore Oklahoma Public Education opposes H. R. 2536 (Open Congress) on the following grounds:

1. An international consortium should not be writing the Educational Policy of the United States.
2. The whole child philosophy endorsed by the Partnership for 21^st Century Skills was developed by and for socialists and best serves a socialist society not the Republic of the United States of America.
3. The Partnership for 21^st Century Skills promotes information based learning in order to produce skilled workers for the global economy rather than the traditional model of education where knowledge is obtained through the rigorous study of truth, facts and principles resulting in an educated citizenry.

The Intellectual and Policy Foundations of the 21^st Century Skills Framework

The Partnership for 21^st Century Skills White Paper entitled “The Intellectual and Policy Foundations of the 21^st Century Skills Framework” (Partnership for 21st Century Skills) openly espouses the child-centered philosophies of socialists John Dewey, Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky and their theory of social constructionism as it pertains to the “social collective” (page 5).

This white paper is rife with the language of the socialists of whose views they espouse. This cannot be ignored. Americans should not be embracing socialist and couching them as education reform.

Further quotes from this paper include, “John Dewey, perhaps the best-known educator of the 20th century, also responded to the transformations around him. “It is radical conditions which have changed,” he wrote, “and only a radical change in education suffices… Knowledge is no longer an immobile solid; it has been liquefied” (page 4).

And, “Unlike Cubberly, though, Dewey believed the aim of 20th century education was not the production of a labor force, but the enrichment of the individual and society by developing a child’s “social power and insight” (page 5). “Dewey advocated learning by doing and a curriculum that involved the mind, hands, and heart” (Page 2).

Redefining Education

P-21 purports to advocate critical thinking while at the same time stating that the memorization of facts is antiquated, yet how can one reason without a foundation of absolute truths, facts and principles.

“These technologies also change our relationship with information and thus, suggest changes in educational goals. With instant access to facts, for instance, schools are able to reconceive the role of memorization, and focus more on higher order skills such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation” (Page 6).

“For ages, traditional education, with its emphasis on rote learning and memorization of static facts, has valued conformity over novelty of thought. But in today’s world of global competition and task automation, innovative capacity and a creative spirit are fast becoming requirements for personal and professional success. Robinson says, in fact, that humanity’s future depends on our ability to “reconstitute our conception of human capacity” and place creativity and innovation in the forefront of our educational systems” (Page 15).

Interdisciplinary Themes

P-21 proposes integrating interdisciplinary topics with core subjects. Green math is an example. The Common Core Standards content P-21 supports and many states have adopted has been gutted and transformed from knowledge based education to informative learning. A tweet on the P-21 site boasts "Maryland leads in mandating environmental literacy requirement for all grads.” (Williams).

“The Partnership’s Framework stresses interdisciplinary topics focused on four themes with special relevance to modern life: Global Awareness; Financial, Economic, Business and Entrepreneurial Literacy; Civic Literacy; and Health Literacy (Page 10).

“The Partnership believes interdisciplinary topics are best approached through the core subjects listed above, as their effectiveness, according to curriculum expert Heidi Hayes Jacobs, depends on a solid grounding in the same core disciplines that are linked by these interdisciplinary themes” (Page 10).

Globalism

The P-21 vision for education is unquestionably global in nature. Any ideas of American exceptionalism or achievement are noticeably missing from all papers and P-21 websites.

In the section titled “Education and Global Convergence” it explains how education in the 21^st century “must be attentive to the needs of the individual child and to society as a whole” and “we can build on educational goals that have long been a part of our global heritage” (Page 7).

What about our American heritage?

The 21^st Century Learning Environments

Whole Child Movement

The white paper entitled “The 21^st Century Learning Environments” (Partnership for 21st Century Skills) directly advocates the Whole Child Movement which leaves behind the traditional classical method of education rooted in truth and facts in favor of experienced based activity. The whole child philosophy considers rote knowledge antiquated and emphasizes present experience as a preferred means of learning.

“To educate the whole child, though, schools must devote themselves to more than the mind-body connection alone. They must attend to the emotional and social learning needs of children, as well as to more traditional objectives of academic achievement and physical education. While the roots of the whole child movement date back to the child-centered philosophies of John Dewey, current educational research and a new broader conception of student achievement add even greater significance and urgency to its appeal” (Page 4).

Internet Access - a Right

A theme throughout the P-21 Learning Environment white paper is the necessity for all students to have high-speed internet access and this access must be provided in order to ensure “educational effectiveness” and close the “digital divide.”

“Organizational efficiency and educational effectiveness also depend on a flexible telecommunications infrastructure or backbone, with sufficient bandwidth to handle anticipated telephony, Internet, and local area traffic, plus overage to allow for future growth and new applications. To provide guidance, a recent SETDA report, “High-Speed Broadband Access for all Kids,” describes desirable performance standards for both local and wide area networks. A Local Area Network (LAN) for a school or school district needs to cover all physical areas, including classrooms, the library, cafeteria, administrative, counseling, and special services offices. Thus, the LAN should cover instructional, transportation, food service, nursing, and ground and facilities personnel, as well as provide virtual areas for distance learning and remote access for educational purposes.”

“The same SEDTA report calls on communities to provide 24/7 high-speed broadband access in order to create “rigorous, technology-infused learning environments” for students.” (Page 20)

“The report notes that broadband access is especially critical in overcoming the digital divide in rural and low socio-economic areas.” (Page 21)

National Data Centers

The collection of data raises a myriad of privacy concerns such as: Who will have access to the data? With what countries will the U.S. be networking? Why are FERPA guidelines being changed (Regulations.gov) this year to allow the collection of data from a minor without parental consent?

How does the collection of data in the name of education help a child learn to read or excel in mathematics?

“In addition to local area networks, states and countries need to consider deployment of a broadband network linking schools together with their central administration or ministry of education. It may also be advantageous to link such a broadband network to higher education institutions, thereby creating national research and education networks. Data centers, located on the broadband network and centrally running multiple academic and administrative applications, can enable economies of scale and lower servicing costs across a number of educational institutions, while facilitating research, scholarship, and learning at all levels” (Page 21).

School Replaces the Family as the Center of Life

Should America’s schools aspire to overreach into every area of a child’s life when they aren’t even effectively fulfilling the role for which they were established – academics.

“John Dewey long ago conceived of schools as ‘miniature communities.’ ” (Page 22)

“Schools in the 21st century do more than meet academic needs; they function like miniature cities, providing food, facilities, health, security, transportation, and recreation services for their students. Likewise, technology must do more than support than instruction. Powerful enterprise management applications can knit together the many functions of a school, and help make a complex organization coherent and efficient.” (Page 20)

Federal Control

The P-21 is concerned with “decentralized” (state and local) control of our education system and advocates the use of policy to create alignment toward centralized federal and global control.

“Educational policy is never a simple matter, especially in the United States. Much policy originates at the state level, as states are chartered with providing public education. The federal role has been increasing in recent years, though, in particular since the passage of the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act. Local policies abound as well, as district- and building-level officials determine how to implement state and federal policy.”

“Having a clear sense of overarching objectives can help with alignment. When policies are aimed at the same goals, conflicts among them are reduced. So, as in any planning process, the first step in creating good educational policy is articulating what education should accomplish.”

“Policy must serve as the steering mechanism to guide the creation of learning environments that are both more expansive and more inclusive – spaces for learning that offer more people more access to more places and information while also allowing for close-knit social relationships among community members to flourish. Making all this happen is the task before us. It will not be easy, inexpensive, or quick. But it is essential” (page 27).

Conclusion

Knowing the Partnership for 21^st Century Skills is a global initiative as stated on their own website, why are any elected United States Representatives considering an education policy proposal from an international consortium whose goal is to produce a skilled worker for a global economy rather than an educated citizen necessary to preserve the Republic of the United States?

The P-21 white papers conclude with a quote from John Dewey reiterating their vision of society which is undeniably socialist.

“In creating such learning spaces, we will have come closer to the vision John Dewey articulated over a century ago: “…to make each one of our schools an embryonic community life, active with the types of occupations that reflect the life of the larger society, and permeated throughout with the spirit of art, history, and science. When the school introduces and trains each child of society into membership within such a little community, saturating him with spirit of service, and providing him with the instruments of effective self-direction, we shall have the deepest and best guarantee of a larger society which is worthy, lovely, and harmonious” (Pages 28 & 29).

John Dewey and his plan (Novack) for education has been reiterated throughout American education since Lyndon Baines Johnson inexorably tied the states to the bidding of the federal government (White) through 1965’s Elementary and Secondary Education Act (United States Public Law). The progressive theory of education as authored by Dewey so many years ago, has been a proven and dismal failure. Why are we continuing failed policy that not only undermines the ability of students in America to learn, but our sovereignty as well?

End Notes:

_________________________________________

Open Congress. H.R.2536 - 21st Century Readiness Act. n.d. August 2011 .

Partnership for 21st Century Skills. 21st Century Learning Environments. n.d. August 2011 .

—. The Intellectual and Policy Foundations of the 21st Century Skills Framework. n.d. August 2011 .

Regulations.gov. Document Details: Family Educational Rights and Privacy. 8 April 2011. August 2011 .

United States Public Law. Sribd. 11 April 1965. August 2011 .

Warde, W. F. Marxists.org. 2005. August 2011 .

White, Jenni. American Thinker. July 2011. August 2011 .

Williams, Matt A. Twitter/P21CentSkills. August 8 2011. August 2011

Universal PreK, What Would the Founders Say?

Universal PreK, What Would the Founders Say?

In response to the Capitol Beat OK article on the Oklahoma State Department of Education FY 2011-12 budget, ROPE is floored that our new Superintendent would remove the stipend for teachers with National Certification, but funnel 100 MILLION dollars from the budget into early learning opportunities.

National Board Certified teachers have to go well above and beyond their required work at the state or collegiate level to attain this certification (National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, 2011). Final competencies for teachers undergoing this rigorous certification come from peers (Oklahoma's Official Web Site) after a thorough review process. This does not parallel the certification process for Oklahoma classroom teachers who are certified after completing an education degree (not a degree in the subject to be taught) and passing three competency tests (Oklahoma State Department of Education).

It seems a huge disappointment to remove the incentive for teachers to attempt this more rigorous certification. OCU, for example, requires only 19 hours of Biology (Oklahoma City University) to get a teaching degree in Biology and 37 hours of Chemistry for a Chemistry Ed degree. Any further attempt by teachers toward making them better able to produce learned students should be lauded.

This disappointment comes into stark relief when realizing that 100 million dollars will be spent on programs for pre-K.

Over the years, researchers have argued about the value of prekindergarten programs – especially those implemented with state or federal tax dollars. More research is coming to light today, however, indicating pre-K programming to be a failure (Burke, Long Overdue Head Start Evaluation Shows No Lasting Benefit for Children, 2010), overall (Schaeffer, 2008).

As an example, the federal government contracted a large study of the publicly-funded Head Start program in 1998 only to squelch findings until last year, possibly because results indicated ZERO (Burke, Long Overdue Head Start Evaluation Shows No Lasting Benefit for Children, 2010) long term benefits to children. (Head Start, as well as the first federal funding of education [dubbed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, ESEA], were begun in 1965 during President Lyndon Johnson’s “War on Poverty”, based on the incorrect assumption that poverty causes illiteracy. (Schlafly, 2000))

Darcy Ann Olsen of the Cato Institute wrote the following in her paper,” UNIVERSAL PRESCHOOL IS NO GOLDEN TICKET (Olson, 1999) Why Government Should Not Enter the Preschool Business”, “Public preschool for younger children is irresponsible, given the failure of the public school system to educate the children currently enrolled. The desire to "do something" for young children should be tempered by the facts and proposals for universal preschool should be rejected.”

Preschool was begun in Oklahoma in 1998. In 2009, Lindsay Burke of the Heritage Foundation assessed a number of studies done on Oklahoma pre-K and concluded the following (Burke, Does Universal Preschool Improve Learning? Lessons from Georgia and Oklahoma, 2009), “The experiences in Georgia and Oklahoma suggest that a federal program to encourage states to offer universal preschool would be costly and ineffective in delivering the significant, long-term benefits that its supporters promise.”

Beyond the studies, however, is what we believe to be a real conflict of interest on the part of the Oklahoma State Board of Education.

Phil Lakin is the newest member of the OBOE. Mr. Lakin’s profile on the State DOE website says the following, “Phil serves as a director of the George Kaiser Family Foundation, Tulsa Beautification Foundation, and Tulsa Educare (Education, 2011).” Just last month (June) George Kaiser of the George Kaiser Family Foundation joined with the Obama administration in announcing the new Race to the Top contest (Editorial Board, 2011).

Wouldn’t EduCare (Oklahoma City EduCare, 2011) stand to gain some of the 100 million budgeted? It does seem odd that a board member presiding over millions TAX PAYER dollars might stand to want to see his organization benefit from such largesse.

But that isn’t all. Just this month ROPE completed a large body of research (Jenni White, 2011) including, among other things, relevant history of public education in America.

We show that the ‘father’ of universal preschool is none other than Dr. John Dewey, a neo-Marxist and the Father of Progressive Education. Dewey, who witnessed the socio-economic and family upheaval of the American Industrial Revolution first hand, came to the conclusion that urban families (particularly) were ill-equipped to raise their children. Schools, therefore, must be all things to all children and supplant the family as the ultimate center of life (Warde, 2005). Unfortunately, this tenet has been advanced through presidents and education policy analysts and spread throughout public education across the US since.

Americans have always had the freedom and opportunity to express Socialist or Marxist thought, but these thoughts may not be placed into American Republican government through a state-run institution using taxpayer funds. In fact, Samuel Adams said that the Founders had done everything possible to make the ideas of socialism and communism unconstitutional (Skousen, 1981). Not only would the Founders of this country be dismayed by Universal PreK, it is decidedly un-American and ineffective to boot.

END NOTES________________________________________

Burke, L. (2009, May 14). Backgrounder on Education. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from The Heritage Foundation: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2009/05/Does-Universal-Preschool-Improve-Learning-Lessons-from-Georgia-and-Oklahoma#_ftn53

Burke, L. (2010, January 14). The Foundry. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from The Heritage Foundation: http://blog.heritage.org/2010/01/14/long-overdue-head-start-evaluation-shows-no-lasting-benefit-for-children/

Editorial Board. (2011, June 2). Editorials. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from NewsOK: http://newsok.com/article/3573278?highlight=%255b%2522new%2522%252C%2522race%2522%252C%2522to%2522%252C%2522the%2522%252C%2522top%2522%252C%2522a%2522%252C%2522good%2522%252C%2522fit%2522%252C%2522for%2522%252C%2522oklahoma%2522%255d

Education, O. S. (2011). Members of the State Board of Education. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from Oklahoma State Department of Education: http://sde.state.ok.us/Law/BoardsofEduc/state.html

Jenni White, L. H. (2011, June 13). Common Core State Standards and Race to the Top - An Introduction to Marxism 101. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from Restore Oklahoma Public Education: http://www.restoreokpubliceducation.com/node/687#content

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. (2011). The Standards. Retrieved August 2011, from National Board for Professional Teaching Standards: http://www.nbpts.org/the_standards

Oklahoma City EduCare. (2011). Home. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from Oklahoma City Educare: http://www.okceducare.org/team.html

Oklahoma City University. (n.d.). Department of Education, Biology and Chemistry Requirements. Retrieved August 2011, from Oklahoma City University: http://www.okcu.edu/petree/education/science_ed.aspx

Oklahoma State Department of Education. (n.d.). Professional Standards Teacher Certification. Retrieved August 2011, from Oklahoma State Department of Education: http://sde.state.ok.us/Teacher/ProfStand/default.html

Oklahoma's Official Web Site. (n.d.). Education Leadership in Oklahoma. Retrieved August 2011, from Oklahoma Commission for Teacher Preparation: http://www.ok.gov/octp/National_Board_Certification/index.html

Olson, D. A. (1999, February 9). Policy Analysis. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from CATO Institute: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa333.pdf

Schaeffer, A. (2008, June 27). CATO at Liberty. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from CATO Institute: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/ok-preschool-study-provides-no-evidence-of-lasting-benefits-from-preschool/

Schlafly, P. (2000, April). The Phyllis Schlafly Report. Retrieved August 16, 2011, from Eagle Forum: http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/2000/apr00/psrapr2000.html

Skousen, W. C. (1981). The 5000 Year Leap. In W. C. Skousen, The 5000 Year Leap (p. 337). National Center for Constitutional Studies.

Warde, W. F. (2005). Marxists.org. Retrieved August 2011, from John Dewey’s Theories of Education : http://www.marxists.org/archive/novack/works/1960/x03.htm