Reporting on Current Obama Education Policies

Stress Induced Belief & Value-Changing Curriculum
Do ‘College & Career Ready Standards’ cause harm? Is this outright abuse? The Common Core, coming to a school near you!

The ‘Common Core’ & ‘College & Career Ready Standards’ outright admit that the the objectives are in the affective domain of attitudes, values, & dispositions. What is happening to your child through this process?

What happens when your child’s beliefs are challenged? We, as parents, must oppose the techniques for behavior change that are being used in the classroom & on the computer when standards are diametrically opposed to basic traditional values that are based on our culture & our laws. We must demand to view all testing & assessments. Psychological techniques that are being used to identify & change a child’s attitudes, values, & beliefs unknown to parents must be exposed. Kohlberg defines inducing cognitive conflict as painful when students’ fixed beliefs are challenged. In the teaching of moral development, a student that has moral absolutes are on the first & lowest stage. This is commonly referred to as a ‘rigid’ set of values & beliefs or the authoritarian personality. The idea of cognitive conflict is to make the student question his beliefs so that he/she will progress up the ladder to the sixth stage of universal values. The student goes through periods of doubting of what is right or what is wrong. This method of inducing cognitive conflict creates disequilibrium. The student takes one view, becomes confused by discrepant information which involves a personal crisis & the need to reorder ones’ beliefs to fit into the group.

To resolve the frustration & confusion the child is forced to form a more collective position. The method is also called the dialectic process of Socratic teaching. The students give a view, the teacher asks questions which gets them to see the inadequacies of their views, and they are then motivated to formulate other positions along with the group through peer pressure. This is ” the people development business” that Dr. Holliday, Kentucky Commissioner of Education, was referring to in the ‘Innovation Lab Network’ in Obama’s Race to the Top education agenda. We must also remember that computer software is programmed to do the job. There may be teacher directed activities & also differing types of software/curriculum that have been validated to change values & dispositions. Who decides what the answers are when it comes to vague & subjective standards?

The College & Career Ready Standards are vague & subjective, like ethical judgment, honesty, or integrity. How will these affective standards be measured? How will ethical judgment be scored? Dispositions? Adapting to change? Getting along with others? Character? Diversity? Compromising? Argumentation? Persuasion? Citizenship? (Remember, the National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP, deceptively defined & measured Citizenship as ‘thresholds of compliance by reward & punishment” in Pennsylvania, not knowledge of government.) Who decides how much change is too much or too little, & who is agreeing as to how those values will be defined? Will teachers grade students through subjective observations or psychological testing? Will attitude testing be done on the computer? Will psychologists test the students? Will the school get informed written parental consent? Is this type of testing & teaching in violation of the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, PPRA? What type of questions are going to be included on tests like Smarter Balanced, PARCC & the ACT test which admits that career pathways will be testing the whole child & behavioral standards beginning in Kindergarten? Who has direct assess to this data when FERPA rediscloses personally identifiable information to outside contractors? Foundations? Businesses? Non-Profits? InBloom already disclosed personal data uploaded to a data cloud in New York. New York is also an Innovation Lab Network model. Parents were not happy about the disclosure of personal & sensitive information released on their children & families. Privacy groups are filing suit. Has Obama unlocked data & expanded FERPA to allow this personal data to be distributed for research, with no federal protections? Are children being experimented on for this reason? Will this collection of data that is released to others, be in violation of HIPPA?
Why is government data collection of personally identifiable information a serious issue for parents & students?

Does it really matter that the government is collecting this information on our children?
If you follow the technique of ‘feedback loop control,’ you begin to realize that once the data is collected on students, that is to quantify & document WHAT values the student has, the next step is to implement therapy, activities & techniques to CHANGE the student’s attitudes & values toward whoever decided what the desired standard will be. So the answer is, YES. This system is a decision making model committed to change your child’s attitudes, values, & dispositions. Please re-read the West Virginia standard #3 in Personal & Workplace Skills. Validated techniques will be used to change your students’ behavior. This is an example of how a conflict is created in a classroom setting taken from, “Promoting Moral Growth from Piaget to Kohlberg,” Hersh, Paolitto, Reimer; (page 189) This technique is called, cognitive conflict or cognitive dissonance, or creating a conflict in what the student believes:

Lisa: “The only thing -I can tell you I’m really confused because, since this class
I’ve had to consider an awful lot more than I ever would. And I’m so confused as
to what is really right & what is really wrong. I feel like in a sense that I know so
little about what is right and what’s wrong that I can’t say that Hitler was even
bad. Or that we have a right to our own lives. I don’t know.”
Teacher: “One thing, we are making a distinction between whether Hitler was
bad or whether he was wrong.”
Lisa: “I don’t really know whether he was wrong. Just because I don’t want to
say anything definite. I’m afraid of, somebody could prove me wrong in a
different way.”

The dialogue continues about Lisa’s stress & confusion in this episode. There are three areas of values that are usually targeted for behavior change; moral: right-wrong, social: good-bad, & aesthetic: beautiful-ugly. This particular book is a wake-up call for abusive techniques in the classroom implementing moral development. The only statistics you will find in this book is what level & how many students were forced to change their beliefs. Another moral dilemma used was to discuss whether you agree if a man should steal milk for his poor family, from a wealthy home or not, in an eighth grade social studies class. (Page 121). There is no mention of what happens to a student left at a certain level or the stress that is artificially induced. Understanding this technique is crucial, in that, if no conflict is applied, the student will retain their belief about what is right or wrong. If a student is taught that they should not steal, he/she will retain that belief. If cognitive conflict is applied, that student becomes a victim to moral relativism or situation ethics….Is it OK to steal under certain circumstances, or maybe Hitler wasn’t wrong? These types of techniques are imbedded in all subject areas & in many types of activities like a Radical Math class that uses percentages to discuss wealthy areas of the country versus poor & why being rich is unfair. Students will be pressured to change their beliefs according to the standards & the group. The Common Core Standards are just the beginning which will allow government, individual access to your child.

Many of these techniques were developed & researched in the 70’s & 80’s in federally funded research labs. Pennsylvania’s job was testing in the affective domain, or the testing of attitudes in the Educational Quality Assessment, EQA which incorporated affective measures from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) objectives. Michigan was heavily federally funded for teacher training called B-Step, & Sidney Simon’s values clarification. Oregon’s job was to code for computer retrieval, student learning objectives called the Course Goals Collection. Specific states had differing jobs in values testing, value laden curriculum, techniques to change values, & teacher training to teach values education. In 1983 A Nation at Risk was published that falsely determined that America was underachieving nationally & internationally. The controversial 90’s were laden in the Outcome Based Education, OBE, debacle where affective outcomes were being re-introduced & were included in student learning outcomes for graduation requirements. In 1992, the Department of Labor issued the SCANS Report, Secretaries Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills, where workplace skills first blatantly appeared that advanced the idea of placing values in workplace skills standards under the Goals 2000 mantra, ‘All Children Can Learn.’ They were introduced in ‘School to Work’ legislation & now they have resurfaced in the 21st Century Skills for a global workforce incorporated into the Common Core Standards as College & Career Ready standards. It is evident that our government continuously created a crisis to come right behind with a new model that did not reflect American values for indoctrinating our students to accept global citizenship.

This is just a glimpse of how many techniques have been validated to change values. The Taxonomies of Educational Objectives of Benjamin Bloom, cognitive domain, ( Book I), & David Krathwohl’s affective domain, (Book 2), are incorporated into the Common Core Standards & are being deceptively incorporated into the 21st Century Skills, the “whole child.” The agenda is to mold the child from their earliest years….mind, body, & spirit. Obama has presented new legislation for the federal government to pay for pre-school. This is not coincidental. The younger, the better, to indoctrinate. Nothing is new, again.

The Common Core Standards for Global Citizenship

The newest push for global citizenship comes with new names from the Assessment & Teaching of 21st Century Skills (ATC21S), with global leaders including OECD, Intel, Cisco, & Microsoft, who are combining efforts for an international push for 21st Century Skills. In the book “Education For Life & Work: Developing Transferrable Knowledge & Skills in the 21st Century,” Pelligrino & Hilton, explain three domains of competence—cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal, similar to Bloom, but expanding the interpersonal. (See Graph above) The cognitive domain involves reasoning and memory; the intrapersonal domain involves the capacity to manage one’s behavior and emotions to achieve one’s goals (Common Core & College & Career Ready Standards); and the interpersonal domain involves expressing ideas, and interpreting and responding to messages from others.

Be prepared to accept the new mumble-jumble of names that the indoctrinators will place in these new models. The concept of getting into the personality of students including value judgments like “higher order thinking, deeper thinking, & metacognition” continues the idea of teaching the “whole child” theory for acceptance & understanding the international merging for a new world order. Not much has changed from the 70’s. The apple never falls far from the tree.

A Current Behavior Changing Activity reported in April, 2013, which includes roll playing & presumes that the Germans were the victims during the holocaust.
“Think like a Nazi,” Read more:

This following activity was news worthy April 12, 2013 of a value changing technique: “Students in Albany High School English classes were asked this week as part of a persuasive writing assignment to make an abhorrent argument: “You must argue that Jews are evil, and use solid rationale from government propaganda to convince me of your loyalty to the Third Reich!”
Students were asked to watch and read Nazi propaganda, then pretend their teacher was a Nazi government official who needed to be convinced of their loyalty. In five paragraphs, they were required to prove that Jews were the source of Germany’s problems.”

New York is a state involved in the Innovation Lab Network along with West Virginia & 5 other states.

The following excerpt was taken from testimony of a clinical psychologist about the Common Core Standards:
“A Mental Health Professional’s Perspective on the Common Core”, By Dr. Gary Thompson, Director of Clinical Training & Community Advocacy Services
Early Life Child Psychology & Education Center, Inc., March 25, 2013

Excerpt: Educational Testing
According to the U.S. Department of Education, CCSS will authorize the use of testing instruments that will measure the “attributes, dispositions, social skills, attitude’s and intra personal resources” of public school students under CCSS (USDOE Feb, 2013 Report). In a nutshell, CCSS simply states that it will develop highly effective assessments that measures….well….almost ”everything.”

Below are issues regarding CCSS “testing” policies that have not been addressed by the Common Core to State’s Governors’, State Superintendents, State School Boards, local school district superintendents, local school boards, to parents of children in public school education:

Common Core does not address what types of tests will be utilized on our children.
Common Core does not address, specifically, exactly who is developing these tests.
Common Core does not address the fact that these tests have not yet been developed, and are not available for public consumption or private review by clinical psychology researchers and psychometric professionals.
Common Core does not address if the soon to be completed tests will be subjected to the same rigorous peer review process that ALL testing instruments are subjected to prior to being released to mental health professionals for their use in the private sector.
Common Core does not state which public school employees would be administering or interpreting these tests. There is a reason that School Psychologists cannot “practice” outside of their scope in school districts. As hard working and as wonderful as this group is, their training pales in comparison to the average local clinical psychologist.
Common Core does not address the well documented, peer-reviewed fact that both African American and Latino students, due to cultural issues, tend to have skewed testing results when cultural issues are not addressed prior to the initiation of such testing. This should probably be addressed if these results are going to be following a student “from cradle to high school graduation.”
Lastly, once these highly intimate, powerful, and most likely inaccurate testing results are completed, who EXACTLY will have access to all of this data?

Comment from this author: Although Dr. Thompson has explained the privacy invading techniques & asked about the who & why of the testing components to the Common Core Standards & testing, we need to address one step further, the what’s next “therapy” that would be applied at school to change the student. This is the reason the collection of personal information is completely dangerous in the hands of government. The first step is the collection of information or data on the student which is a violation of privacy. The second step, remediation or therapy applied to the student in an individual education plan (IEP) or personal career pathway without the knowledge or consent of the parent, is a violation of freedom. The death of free will, individualism, & our concept of America as we know it.


Use the 5 Magic Questions developed by Anita Hoge to fight subjective & vague Common Core-College & Career Ready Standards.
1. How do you measure that standard?
For example: If a College & Career Standard states that “all children must have ethical judgment, honesty, or integrity,” what exactly is going to be measured? How do you measure a bias in a child? Must children be diagnosed? Will they be graded by observation or take a pencil-and-paper test? How will performance or behavior be assessed?

2. How is that objective scored, or what is the standard?
What behavior is “appropriate” and to what degree? For example, how much self-esteem is too much or not enough to graduate? Can government score the attitudes and values of its citizens in a pluralistic society?

3. Who decides what that standard will be?
The state has extended its mandated graduation requirement, or Common Core Standards, down to the individual child. This bypasses all local autonomy. What about locally elected school directors – will they become obsolete? Are we talking about a state or government diploma or certificate?

4. How will my child be remediated?
What are you going to do to my children to change them from here-to-there in their attitudes, values, & dispositions in order to graduate? How do you remediate ethical judgment, decision making, interpersonal skills, environmental attitudes, adapting to change? What techniques will be used? What risks are involved? What justification does the state have to change my child’s attitudes?

5. What if parent and state disagree on the standard or how it is measured in the classroom?
Who has the ultimate authority over the child … parents or the state? What about privacy? Can parents opt out of a graduation requirement mandated by the government?

The Death of Free Will, Charlotte Iserbyt,

West Virginia 21st Century Skills aligned to legislation
Begins coding for distinct behaviors laws connected to data sets Common core standards connected to data sets

Lesson plan with coding

Smart Inventory, Interests Inventory Grade 4

College & Career Ready Standards Task Force

ACT21S, Assessment & Teaching of 21st Century Skills, a global team for transformation,

Education For Life & Work, National Research Council, Pelligrino, Hilton, 2012

Promoting Moral Growth from Piaget to Kohlberg,” Hershey, Paolitto, Reimer 1979

SCANS, Secretaries Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills, US Department of Labor, 1992

Stupski workshop presentation, 6 states chosen for Innovation Lab Network,

‘Obama’s, Race to the Top Agenda’ – States Under Republican Leadership Fall For the Carrot: Children Sold-Out for a Profit, by Anita B. Hoge, March 18, 2013.

West Virginia Molds Cookie Cutter Kids In Their Incubator Lab: Codes Common Core Standards for Obama’s ‘Race to the Top’ Schools

When traveling west from Pennsylvania on Interstate 70 toward West Virginia, you see the bold sign on the border: Wild, Wonderful West Virginia. West Virginia is a ‘Race to the Top’ model state with an international agenda for our nation’s schools. Perhaps you will wonder why a state like West Virginia is being used as a guinea pig model for our nation’s children? America is not watching.

West Virginia had been selected through the CCSSO, Council Chief State School Officers, as a Next Generation School called Innovation Lab Network. There were 6 other states selected for this Race to the Top agenda, Kentucky, Wisconsin, Maine, New York, Ohio, & New Hampshire was added. Steven L. Paine, former State Superintendent of Schools, led West Virginia down the international path of 21st Century Learning Outcomes. The state created policies that set up an agenda that correlated those outcomes into strategies & learning objectives that would be coded for individual data retrieval in the Common Core longitudinal data collection. Dr. Paine was President of the CCSSO, member of the Governing Board of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP, the national test, Vice President Business Operations of CTB/McGraw Hill, a testing company, & now president of Partnership for 21st Century Skills, P21. He is now pushing the integration of 21st Century Skills in federal legislation, HR 347. (Link this information to the legislation currently passed by the Republican House of Representatives, HR 5.) However, workforce skills standards are already being swept in under the door mandated through federal ESEA Flexibility Waivers. HR 347 would make workforce standards law. The CCSSO, OECD, the international Organization for Economic Co-Operation & Development, & the Stupski Foundation funded the Innovation Lab Network in which West Virginia was a model state in Obama’s ‘Race to the Top’ schools.

Led by Paine, West Virginia is deeply engaged in systemically transforming the public school system with the goal of providing all West Virginia children with the skills for global citizenship. This agenda redesigns what the reformers are calling the old ‘Industrial Age’ style of schooling & ridicules the traditional education system that is based on intellectual knowledge & academic content, the Carnegie Unit (ABCD or failure), going to school for 180 days or seat time & grade separations ( freshman, sophomore, junior, senior). Our traditional system of teaching, identifies, challenges, & rewards intellectual excellence & hard work. The transformational, standards based system, where there is no competition, eliminates all this & is a radical change from schooling as we know it. A standards-based system is focused on the individual meeting specific standards that are being replicated across the country & duplicated from state to state in the Common Core State Standards. This type of education demands an IEP, individual education plan or career pathway that is developed to meet the standards. (See “Republican Leadership Falls for Obama’s Carrot” by this author.) The fallacy in a standards based system is that there is no identification of individual differences or IQ. This un-natural system eliminates the concept of individual accomplishments & freedom to choose your future, where the direction is a controlled, standardized authority where the government chooses for you in a caste-like agenda. The Common Core Standards eventually lead to a national curriculum controlled through testing, retesting, & standardization called ‘feedback loop control’ for continual monitoring & the eventual federal take-over of education. A state agreeing to the Common Core Standards is the first step, like getting the camel’s nose under the tent.

West Virginia’s Global21 program is focused on the development of international curriculum standards, an assessment that measures & tests those standards, research-based instructional practices & curriculum taught to meet the standards, a parallel accountability system that aligns teacher performance with school performance based on the standards, development of a 21st century mastery teacher continuum; emphasis on pre-K programs to identify interventions early on, and integration of technology tools and skills in every classroom…all centered around meeting standards that government controls.

There are currently 46 states that have adopted the Common Core Standards for Obama’s ‘Race to the Top’ schools mostly because of the Elementary & Secondary Education Act, Title I, ESEA Flexibility Waivers given to states applying for flexibility in the ‘No Child Left Behind’ legislation under the Bush administration. The waivers require explicitly that an accountability system of assessments along with College & Career Ready standards must be devised. Another incubator state, Kentucky, has also transformed their focus of education toward the international standards. Dr. Terry Holliday, Kentucky Commissioner of Education is quoted on Oct. 29, 2010,…” [that] we will change from school- to the people development business.” In December 2010, Holliday was named to the board of directors for the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) for 2010-11. In September 2011, Holliday was appointed to serve a four-year term on the National Assessment Governing Board. These key change agents have mastered the agenda for moving entire states to an international agenda of molding students for global citizenship & accepting Common Core Standards.

West Virginia Department of Education focuses on three goals for all children & blatantly professes the fact that attitudes, values,& dispositions are a focus of their curriculum:
Goal 1: To meet or exceed state, national and international curriculum standards that incorporate acquisition of 21st century skills.
Goal 2: To develop the personal skills and dispositions of wellness, responsibility, cultural awareness, self-direction, ethical character and good citizenship.
Goal 3: To graduate from high school prepared for post-secondary education and career success through personalized pathways and guidance.

What are Common Core Standards & 21st Century Skills? These standards, taken from the Partnership for 21st Century Skills or P21 under Life & Career Skills, are incorporated into West Virginia standards. Notice in the graph above, the personal & workplace productivity skills. Many are in the affective domain, or in the area of attitudes, values, beliefs, & dispositions. No longer is school focused on academics. The agenda to educate the child is now referred to as the ” learning genome” – evaluating personality & teaching the whole child. That means the way a child thinks or what they believe, what they feel or their values & attitudes, & what they can do or their behavior or how they act. It’s not about academics, it’s about control & molding the child to the state desired minimum standard. This is the new school & these are the steps that are being taken.

West Virginia Codes Unique Data Sets for the Common Core Standards: Each standard and each objective will have a Unique Electronic Number (UEN) that will always remain the same.

The next several paragraphs teaches how to code standards & the objectives so that the Common Core Standards can be duplicated for computer retrieval. This also sets the stage for individual students to be monitored toward meeting those standards. A standards-based curriculum includes learning standards and instructional objectives. The learning standards are the broad descriptions of what all students must know and be able to do at the conclusion of the instructional sequence. The objectives are specific descriptors of knowledge, skills and attitudes that the student must master to attain the standard. The instructional objectives guide curriculum planning and provide a basis for determining specific assessments, instructional strategies and resources validated to meet the standards. Objectives build across grade levels as students advance attaining the appropriate knowledge, skills & attitudes. This is known as scaffolding where all activities are related & controlled toward meeting the standards.

Understanding the Numbering of Standards & the Codes for Computer Retrieval are explained below:

The number for each content standard is composed of four parts, each part separated by a period: the content area codes are LS for Learning Skills and TT for Technology Tools, the letter S, for Standard, the program level, and the standard number
Illustration: 21C.S.PK-2.1 ( 21st Century Standard, PreK thru grade 2, content standard #1.)
Numbering of Objectives: The number of each objective is composed of five parts, each part separated by a period: content area code (LS for Learning Skills; TT for Technology Tools),the letter O is for Objective, the program level, the number of the content standard addressed, and the objective number.
Illustration: 21C.O.3-4.1.TT2 (21 Century Objective, grades 3-4, addresses standard #1 in Technology Tools, and is the second objective listed under that standard.)

Unique Electronic Numbers (or UENs) are numbers that help to electronically identify, categorize and link specific bits of information. Each objective will have a Unique Electronic Number (UEN) that will always remain the same. The only additional set of numbers that will be added to each code to formulate its UEN will be a prefix that indicates the year and month. These codes will follow individual student attainment of the Common Core Standards in a longitudinal data base Pre-k through career.

UENs (Unique Electronic Numbers) are unique numbers that facilitate implementation of Standards into Electronic formats such as Databases and XML Files. The WV Department of Education encourages everyone to use the WV Content Standards in any kind of electronic distribution, alignment, or software development to use the UENs so that all efforts can be cross- referenced and there is consistency across initiatives. The key to the transformation is standardization. The standards, the coding, the teaching, the curriculum, the testing, all must conform to the blueprint.

This is the blueprint. So. What will be taught? Let’s fill in the blanks & look at the actual standards:

West Virginia Openly Measures & Molds Student Attitudes: Discussing Affective Issues in Common Core & College & Career Ready Standards

Under the federal Elementary Secondary Education Act, ( ESEA) Flexibly Waiver under Title I, a state applying for the grant must meet certain guidelines. A state must also incorporate college & career ready standards & assessments into their state plan that would align to Common Core Standards.

West Virginia blatantly states what those standards will be. The standard #3, Personal & Workplace Skills in the graph below, proves that students will be forced to change their beliefs & attitudes. The 3rd standard is: “The student will exhibit leadership, ethical behavior, respect for others, accept responsibility for personal actions considering the impact on others, take the initiative to plan & execute tasks, & interact productively as a member of the group.”

Notice in the graph under Learning Skill Objective #1, that the student is being pressured to “go along with the group, even under stress.” The student must work collaboratively. They must “willingly align their personal beliefs & goals to the goals of others,” forcing the student to change through cognitive conflict “under stress” as a positive goal. The standard concludes that the student “derives personal satisfaction from achieving group goals.” This objective creates artificial stress on the student. What if the standard conflicts with what the student believes or what the student has been taught at home? What is the roll & responsibility of a teacher to facilitate changing of these beliefs & attitudes? Does this effect the student’s personality? Are clinical psychologists involved or are school counselors & teachers acting as clinical psychologists?

“Moral issues often involve the examination of authority roles. Classroom discussions of what is right & fair inevitably turn to a questioning of authority relationships in class, school, and family. This is so because our beliefs about authority figures are a vital part of our moral judgment.” ( Promoting Moral Growth from Piaget to Kohlberg,” Hersh, Paolitto, Reimer.) What will happen to the rugged individualist? What will happen to the creative child? This example is the most chilling outcome that we could possibly put children through. This is people molding, not teaching & learning. What’s happens to a students’ psyche when there will be continual stress/conflict induced activities? Why are we moving to this type of teaching at school? Is enough stress placed on the child to commit suicide? To commit crimes? Will this technique cause a change in personality? Depression? Are there studies to conclude that these techniques are NOT harmful? What is the end result of standards that force ALL students to be non-thinking, non-feeling programmed robots that respond only to the group & to specific stimuli? Why MUST these standards & techniques be used in American schools allowing experimentation on our children & why is it so important? Perhaps, American children must think differently & prepare for something their parents are NOT preparing them for. Welcome to the 21st Century Skills for global citizenship.

Cookie Cutter Common Core Kids

West Virginia Values Standards

To the Advocates For Choice and Vouchers-
Choice Means Chains

The Accountability That Comes With Private Schools Taking Federal Dollars.

The direction of education is moving toward customized individual plans for all children aligned to Common Core-College and Career Ready Standards. Federal funds in choice vouchers will follow a student to the private school of their choice, with federal strings attached. Don’t be deceived. If your students are granted a stipend of federal dollars from federal ESEA (Title I) or IDEA (special ed) monies under the guise of choice, say good bye to the private, Christian, or Catholic in your name. You will be a public school, just like all charter schools. Beware that HR 5 recently passed in the Republican held House of Representatives will make Obama’s dream of federalizing education come true.

There have been many questions asked about the role of federal money involved in the choice and voucher movement racing across the country. The questions range from:
Are these stipends funded with federal dollars?
Are there strings attached?
What happens when federal dollars “follow” a child, with a choice stipend, to a private school?
What does “accountability” mean when a Catholic or Christian school accepts a Title I child through a choice or voucher stipend?
What if a homeschool takes federal dollars for digital instruction?
Must a homeschooled ‘choice’ child take the state assessment for accountability?
Is a “charter school” a public school that must abide by all regulations but without a locally elected school board?
Will private schools, as well as charter schools, have to align to the Common Core Standards and take the state assessment which is aligned to the federal test, NAEP?
If a private school child is failing Common Core Standards, will the school have to engage in ‘specialized student support’ for accountability aspects and change their curriculum?
If a private school is deemed ” failing” Common Core Standards, will this indicate that they are not teaching to the standards?
Will private school teachers need in-service training when choice students fail?
Can this private school be targeted through “academic bankruptcy” by the government if they fail to meet federal guidelines called assurances?

According to ALEC, American Legislative Exchange Council, (the NOT conservative think-tank,) in their model “choice” legislation, please read the fine-print in Endnote 5 which states: “Unfortunately, tapping federal dollars may bring some unwanted federal regulations to choice schools.” I agree. Choice means chains.
(See the link below, scroll down to Endnote 5)

Let’s look at pending federal legislation that sets up a choice/voucher program through legislation. Note: federal money in Title I (your child is disadvantaged if they do not meet standards) and IDEA (special ed) are funding sources to expand choice. Student and curriculum interventions are called ‘specialized student support’ to meet Common Core Standards put in place through HR 5.

HR 5-Federal Legislation Passed in the House

See the NOTES at the end of this article for all of the Republicans that attached amendments to HR 5 to destroy private schools through Choice.
My overview of the Summary of HR 5 follows: my comments are in bold.

HR 5 Under Academic Standards: (emp. Mine)
Achievement standards used for judging student and school performance must align with content standards,

My comment: The end result, achievement, must align to standards. Each student must meet Common Core if those are the standards passed by your state.

HR 5-Under Direct Student Services: The bill requires states to set aside 3 percent of Title I money to provide competitive grants to school districts that wish to offer tutoring or public school choice to their students, including those in poor performing schools. (Notice the name of the stipends are competitive grants. In some states they are called scholarships.)

My comment: Under Title I the definition for disadvantaged changes to students meeting standards and needing “specialized instructional support” for meeting outcomes. This means Title I funds that follow the child. Although its only 3%, this is the start of undermining representative govt. This is federal money going to private schools with Title I. Poor performing schools (your private school) could be targeted for under-performing. Interventions apply.
(Eric Cantor placed an amendment that allows Title I to follow the child.)

HR 5-Under Accountability: The bill eliminates the federal Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) metric and the unrealistic requirement that all students be proficient in reading and math by the end of the next school year. In their place, states are allowed to develop their own accountability systems that must comprise only three broad parameters:
HR 5- Annually measure the academic achievement of all public school students against the state’s academic standards (including growth toward the standards) using the statewide assessments in reading and math and other academic indicators.

My comment: Adequate Yearly Progress was designed for school aggregate data to compare how schools were doing. Eliminating the AYP will set the stage for individual student yearly progress monitoring IEP’s for all students. The new term is “specialized student support,” a special education term. Under State Plans there is a section calling for “individual student interpretive, descriptive, and diagnostic reports regarding achievement on assessments.” Plus, what are other academic indicators? Why not reading & math? If a state has agreed to Common Core, this will mean the exact same agenda as before. This will include the College & Career Outcomes & Common Core Standards that go beyond academics. This is testing in the affective domain. The statewide assessments are aligning to those standards, like PARCC, ACT, & Smarter Balanced using NAEP objectives. If the Feds can blame everything on the states, they get off scott-free. Most states have changed their tests to reflect Common Core already or are in the process. This means federal access to an individual student.

HR 5- Annually evaluate and identify the academic performance of each public school in the state based on student academic achievement, including the achievement of all students and achievement gaps between student subgroups.

My comment: Define academic achievement for all students. On math & reading or other indicators? Does this set up the IEP for each student? College & Career Ready Standards could be used here instead of academics. College & Career standards are work force standards like SCANS, Secretaries Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (affective outcomes).

HR 5-Include a school improvement system implemented by school districts that includes interventions in poor performing Title I schools.

My comment: If a Title I school is identified as failing the Common Core Standards, the school is named a school-wide program. Because individual students are monitored, interventions will be identified for each student. Teachers will be targeted. Individual students will be targeted to improve scores. This is the opening for an IEP or individual learning plan in which the school can use flexibility funds for IEP interventions or ‘specialized student support.’ This could also open the door for private schools having to introduce Common Core and school improvement plans if they accept choice funding.

HR 5-Funding Flexibility: The bill allows states and school districts to use federal funds for special population programs for any activity authorized under any of the other programs. Instead of having to comply with a host of federal program requirements each dictating exactly how funds may be spent, state and local officials will be able to use federal funds to meet their own unique needs. While school districts will not be allowed to use Title I funds outside of those schools, they can move additional funding to low-income schools.

My Comment: This is exactly what the ESEA Flexibility Waiver that Obama gave the states this past year. (Use the money however you want, just meet the Common Core Standards.) Now the waiver will become law so the state can use Title I funds to establish the Common Core. Very clever. Get the states to agree to national Common Core Standards so the feds can identify individual students. Get the federal boot in the door. Then allow the states to use federal funds however they want to meet Common Core, but the feds will monitor individual students and the states in order to achieve compliance. This would eliminate the violation of the federal government supervising and directing curriculum, underhanded as it is. Notice how every thing is being changed to Title I. Schools could be tagged school-wide program under Title I. There is a distinct reason for that. Blanket compliance with percentage of free and reduced lunches. This is complete federal takeover of all states’ rights and all schools. A state accepting Common Core Standards was the first step to federal take-over of all public schools and relinquishing their individual power of states’ rights. Your local neighborhood school is now a federal government school. Your local school board has no authority except to meet Common Core Standards. What happened to states rights? Local control? One more huge erosion of the Constitution. The Republicans are in lock step with Obama.

Indiana “Choice” Application-Please read carefully.


Assurances (emp. mine)

As a condition of becoming an eligible school, the school makes the following assurances by the representative’s signature:
School will administer accountability assessments including Indiana Statewide Testing for Educational Progress Plus (ISTEP+) and End of Course Assessments (ECAs) to all students at the testing grade levels and participate in all required training and security measures.
School will not discriminate against any potential students based on race, color or national origin, and will follow the school’s admissions policy in regard to choice scholarship students.
If the number of applicants for enrollment in an eligible school under a Choice scholarship exceeds the number of Choice scholarships available to the eligible school, the school will draw at random in a public meeting the applications of applicants who are entitled to a Choice scholarship from among the applicants who meet the requirements for admission to the eligible school.
School will not transfer or attempt to transfer the choice scholarship to any other student.
School agrees to inform IDOE via a prescribed form within five (5) business days of a choice scholarship student being withdrawn or expelled.
School acknowledges that: 1. retroactive reimbursement to the State of Indiana may be required, or 2. future payments may be adjusted, as a result of the withdrawal or expulsion of a student. (It’s all about federal money.)
School agrees to participate in any data collections required by the department pursuant to IC 20-51-1-4.7, IC 20-51-4-6, IC 20-51-4-7, or IC 20-51-4-10.
School understands and agrees to the requirement that parents must co-sign a claim form provided by the department for the distribution of monies, on a schedule set by the department.
Upon eligibility, school agrees to complete and file a vendor application with the Indiana Auditor of State.
School agrees to provide prospective parents with a statement about any costs beyond the required fees, including whether the school participates in the Free / Reduced Lunch Program. (Title I) School acknowledges that any fees in excess of the amount of the choice scholarship must be funded through other sources.
School agrees to provide prospective parents with information about (free) transportation, including whether it is provided and whether the school is located along any existing bus routes that may be utilized.
School acknowledges that, by July 1, 2013, it will have a staff performance evaluation plan as required by 20-28-11.5-4(a) and (b).
School shall certify to the department annually that the eligible school is complying with the following legal requirements and that the school will cooperate with any visit made to the school by the department to verify compliance with these provisions, including granting the department reasonable access to its premises. School further understands that violation of any of the following requirements under the law or failure to comply with these assurances is grounds for loss of eligibility, and has the right to an administrative hearing upon loss of eligibility.

The federal strings are all attached here: testing, data collection, staff performance, accountability.

ALEC Pushes Choice in Colorado

Choice Scholarships

Beware of any ” help” from the government.
Acceptance of Common Core means takeover of education by the federal government. No more local control. Charter Schools eliminate representative government with no locally elected boards or taxpayer oversight. Private Schools must say ‘no’ to choice funding.

Accountability=Forced Compliance=Loss of Freedom of Choice

NOTES-Republicans Put Obama’s Agenda Into Law

HR 5
Republican’s Move to Make Choice Part of Title I federal funding-Strings Attached
Beware Private Schools-The Government Wants to Control You.

ALERT: passed in the House dated 7-19-2013. Please read the amendments that the Republicans have attached to HR 5. This is a total sell-out. Republicans are putting in place Obama’s ‘Race to the Top’ pilot programming from the Innovation Lab Network. One Democrat aligned all rules to charter schools, as well.

Scroll down to the right to see the Republican Amendments at the link below:

Cantor (VA), Bishop, Rob (UT) Republican Allows Title I funds to follow students to other public schools or charter schools, upon the state opting to allow it. Made In Order

Bishop, Rob (UT) Republican Makes Title 1 funds portable to public (including charter) schools and private schools. Submitted

Salmon, (AZ) Republican Late Provides States with the flexibility to allocate Title I grant funds in a manner that follows the child. States may allocate these funds based on the number of eligible children enrolled in the public and private schools served.

Tierney (MA) Democrat Late Ensures a state’s accountability system is applied to charter schools in the same manner as to other public schools Submitted

Duncan (SC) Republican SUBSTITUTE Late RevisedSubstitutes the text of the bill with the Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success Act (A-PLUS, which allows states to completely opt out of the programs that fall under NCLB and empower state and local leaders to direct funding to their most pressing education needs. Specifically, A-PLUS sends funding under NCLB back to states in the form of block grants, and states would then be able to direct that funding to any education purpose under state law.

Use the 5 Magic Questions developed by Anita Hoge to fight subjective & vague Common Core-College & Career Ready Standards.

1. How do you measure that standard?
For example: If one of the Common Core-College & Career Standards state that “all children must have ethical judgment, honesty, or integrity,” what exactly is going to be measured? How do you measure a bias in a child? Must children be diagnosed? Will they be graded by observation or take a pencil-and-paper test? How will performance or behavior be assessed? Are the standards meant to change personality? These are subjective and vague standards that cannot be measured to a criterion unless we are molding all children to cookie cutter status.

2. How is that standard scored, or what is the right answer on the state assessments that mimics the federal test?
What behavior is “appropriate” and to what degree? For example, how much self-esteem is too much or not enough to graduate? How do you score honesty? Responsibility? Can government score the attitudes and values of its citizens in a pluralistic society? Will students get grades on personality traits?

3. Who decided what that standard will be?
The Common Core Standards are copyrighted by the National Governor’s Association & the Chief State School Officers creating a de-facto national curriculum. Once a state accepts the common core standards & federal funding for Race to the Top, the authority, power, & control is removed from the local & state level. The federal government now controls the mandated graduation requirement, or Common Core Standards reaching down to the individual child. This bypasses all local autonomy. What about locally elected school directors – will they become obsolete? Are we talking about a state or government diploma or work certificate?

4. How will my child be remediated?
What are you going to do to my child to change him/her from here-to-there in their attitudes, values, & dispositions in order to graduate? How do you remediate ethical judgment, decision making, interpersonal skills, environmental attitudes, adapting to change? What techniques will be used? What risks are involved? What justification does the government have to change my child’s attitudes & personality? Will everyone think the same to the same standard?

5. What if parent and government disagree on the standard or how it is measured in the classroom?
Who has the ultimate authority over the child … parents or the state? What about privacy? Can parents opt out of a graduation requirement mandated by the government?


B. F. Skinner’s Perfect Laboratory-Race to the Top

” I could make a pigeon a high achiever by reinforcing it on a proper schedule.” B. F. Skinner

What are Common Core Standards? What is Mastery Learning or Competency Based Education also known as Outcome Based Education, OBE? What happens when you combine the standards with the process? There is a school of thought that presumes all children can learn if they are provided with the appropriate learning conditions. Learning for mastery or mastery learning are terms coined by Benjamin Bloom in 1968 and 1971 respectively. Bloom hypothesized that a classroom with a mastery learning focus as opposed to the traditional form of instruction would reduce the achievement gaps between varying groups of students (Guskey 2007). What is true is that biology is biology. Everyone is different & the only way to reduce achievement gaps is to lower standards & eliminate the time it takes for All students to meet the standards. With “conventional instruction”, there is recognition of individual differences & intelligence. The individualized computerized concept of mastery learning “uses conditioning,” (reward & punishment) manipulating students to master the below standard, standards in this unnatural process. Only the standards will be taught & tested. Traditional education is opportunity, mastery learning is a controlled environment.

Mastery learning has little to do with specific content, but rather is a description of the process of mastering particular learning objectives. This approach is based on Benjamin Bloom’s Mastery for Learning model, with refinements made by Block. Mastery learning may be implemented as teacher-paced group instruction, one-to-one tutoring, or self-paced learning with programmed materials using direct teacher instruction or computerized models. It requires well-defined learning objectives organized into smaller, sequentially organized units, otherwise known lately as Common Core Standards. Individualized, computerized instruction is a perfect partner used with mastery learning. The computer is a perfect programmed teacher to reach a perfect controlled goal.

Block discussing “redistribution of brains” in an article published in Educational Leadership (November 1979) entitled “Mastery Learning: The Current State of the Craft.” Block explained that:
“One of the striking personal features of mastery learning, for example, is the degree to which it encourages cooperative individualism in student learning as opposed to selfish competition. Just how much room is there left in the world for individualists who are more concerned with their own performance than the performance of others? One of the striking, societal features of mastery learning is the degree to which it presses for a society based on the excellence of all participants rather than one based on the excellence of a few. Can any society afford universal excellence, or must all societies make most people incompetent so that a few can be competent?”

The concept of mastery learning can be attributed to the behaviorism principles of Skinner’s operant conditioning. According to operant conditioning theory, learning occurs when an association is formed between a stimulus and response (Skinner, 1984). In line with the behavior theory, mastery learning focuses on overt behaviors that can be observed and measured (Baum, 2005). The material that will be taught to mastery is broken down into small discrete lessons that follow a logical progression. In order to demonstrate mastery over each lesson, students must be able to show evidence of learning the material before moving to the next lesson (Anderson, 2000). Just think of constant reinforcements like bells, pop-ups, & errors made by students on computers. This is operant conditioning.

The Race to the Top model does away with the-knowledge based model, seat time, the calendar year, grade groupings, & competition. A personalized, student education plan or career pathway uses mastery learning & is the system to be taught for the Common Core Standards.The reason Obama unlocked data under FERPA, Family Education Rights & Privacy Act, is to develop & research these programs & monitor individuals for compliance toward those standards.

A computerized, personalized student plan or career pathway is called a ‘learning genome.’ The child’s learning style, background, & dispositions will be monitored & assessed through the entire process. The “process” that is used to teach the dumbed down Common Core Standards is Mastery Learning. Operant conditioning takes away the normal process of thinking so that the transfer of knowledge in normal human thinking activity is stunned. This is a dumbing down technique purposely being used on American children. Mastery Learning, Master Teachers, Common Core Standards, NAEP, National Assessment of Educational Progress, & data-trafficking is the foundation for a national curriculum, national testing, national teacher certification, & a national data bank to monitor & force compliance. This is the footprint of nationalizing & redesigning education in America.
This is what is being called accountability toward a New World Order School.

The graph on the previous page & photo pictured on this page were taken from “Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance: Critical Factors for Success in the 21st Century,” February, 2013, U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology

This entire excerpt that follows is Kentucky’s ‘Race to the Top’ Model State Using Mastery Learning called STEAM Academy in Fayette County, Kentucky

Fayette County Public Schools and the University of Kentucky imagine a 21st-century school that is flexible and adaptable, technology rich, responsive to student and teacher needs, and recognizes and extends learning beyond the traditional school day and classroom. The STEAM Academy, an urban public school opening in fall 2013, will incorporate mastery learning, personalized instruction, internships, and dual/college credit opportunities. The goal: to ensure that students will graduate college and career ready, and experienced. Low-income, first-generation college, and traditionally underserved students will have enrollment preference.

The STEAM Academy will use an innovative, hybrid instructional program based in student‐paced, mastery- and problem‐based experiential learning. Technology will help deliver content and real-time assessment to provide students with greater autonomy, help instructors better diagnose and address each student’s needs, and engage parents more effectively.

Student voice and student agency are central to the school model. Students will take ownership of their learning by choosing their instructional delivery, schedule, and learning style and engaging in real-world problem-solving projects that interest them. At the classroom level students will work to mastery with time as a variable. Some students may move thorough the coursework in two years and matriculate into classes at the University of Kentucky while others will need four years to be ready for college or career. Demonstration of mastery will be determined by summative assessments and evidence collected in an e-portfolio.

Upon entering the school, students will be assigned an adviser who will remain with the student until graduation. Advisory groups will meet bi‐weekly throughout the year to provide guidance in college and career readiness skills, personal goal setting and monitoring, and problem identification and solution finding.

The district is taking advantage of an environment ripe for innovation. Innovation waivers provide unprecedented flexibility in seat time, enabling a true competency-based approach. The University of Kentucky P20 Innovation Lab (part of CCSSO’s Partnership for Next Generation Learning) is helping create the innovative infrastructure and instructional model. In addition, teachers will work with Innovation Lab faculty members and other UK faculty who will provide training across a range of instructional innovations including project‐based learning, performance assessment, and technology integration. Preparation of these teachers will also include a mentoring component with master teachers, teacher leaders, and content specialists with Fayette County Schools. Ultimately, the STEAM Academy will serve as an incubator – where pre-service and master teachers gain experience in a mastery-based blended learning environment, and a lab – where UK faculty can research and pilot new innovations.”

Kohlberg on Skinnarian Techniques.

“Skinner may dispense with ideas of freedom & dignity to arrive at a theory valid for explaining studies of reward in animals & children. A theory that ignores freedom & dignity in the learning process leads to the practice of constructing “teacher proof” materials. It also leads to kits designed to be “student proof,” that is, to modify the student’s behavior without his understanding or assent to the theory and methods applied to him.” Lawrence Kohlberg in the Foreword to “Promoting Moral Growth from Piaget to Kohlberg,” Hershey, Paolitto, Reimer 1979, about Skinnarian techniques.

Standards Based Basketball-Otherwise known as doing away with competition.

STANDARD: All players will make 10 baskets at the game tonight & feel good about it.
(The basket is lowered 6′)
All players did make all 10 baskets at the game last night & both teams won.
All players received mastery of the goal. They are all treated to candy bars. They are rock stars.

Historical documentation on Mastery Learning, “Deliberate Dumbing Down of America,” Charlotte Iserbyt

Richard I. Evans, 1968, “B.F. Skinner: The Man and His Ideas.” Skinner, “I could make a pigeon a high achiever by reinforcing it on a proper schedule.” (p. 10)

“Our Children: The Drones,” Ann Herzer

Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance: Critical Factors for Success in the 21st Century,” February, 2013, U.S. Department of Education Office of Educational Technology,

Kentucky Race to the Top, STEAM,

Race to the Top model presentation:



Could Your DNA Target You for Government Intervention?

Congress did not legislate any changes to the Privacy Laws to expand the access to personally identifiable records. Obama, the US Department of Education & Secretary Duncan, with a swipe of a pen, issued new regulations to be written. Please read the following changes to FERPA, Family Education Rights & Privacy Act.

This is the definition for Personally Identifiable Information or PII that should be a concern to every parent:

(a) The student’s name;
(b) The name of the student’s parent or other family members;
(c) The address of the student or student’s family;
(d) A personal identifier, such as the student’s social security number, student number, or biometric record;
(e) Other indirect identifiers, such as the student’s date of birth, place of birth, and mother’s maiden name;
(f) Other information that, alone or in combination, is linked or linkable to a specific student that would allow a reasonable person in the school community, who does not have personal knowledge of the relevant circumstances, to identify the student with reasonable certainty; or
(g) Information requested by a person who the educational agency or institution reasonably believes knows the identity of the student to whom the education record relates.

Biometric record,” as used in the definition for “personally identifiable information,” means a record of one or more measurable biological or behavioral characteristics that can be used for automated recognition of an individual. Examples include fingerprints; retina and iris patterns; voiceprints; DNA sequence; facial characteristics; and handwriting.

The shock begins in Florida. Parents in Polk County, Florida are outraged after learning that students in area schools had their irises scanned as part of a new security program without obtaining proper permission. Reuter’s announced on May 30, 2013,

“It simply takes a picture of the iris, which is unique to every individual,” Rob Davis, the school board’s senior director of support services, wrote home to parents in a letter dated May 23. “With this program, we will be able to identify when and where a student gets on the bus, when they arrive at their school location, when and what bus the student boards and disembarks in the afternoon. This is an effort to further enhance the safety of our students.The EyeSwipe-Nano is an ideal replacement for the card based system since your child will not have to be responsible for carrying an identification card,” he added.

Big Brother monitoring every move you make is suffocating. Think about the future of these students when they become adults. ‘Big Brother is Watching’ has new meaning.

The DNA sequencing of an individual child could also be considered “the learning genome.” This could be a way of detecting defects or government desired behaviors, in a student’s personality. Whether your child has strong attributes, aggressive behavior, shyness, low self-esteem, slow to adapt to change, or whatever, detection of these personality traits could be indicators & determinations for experimentation. Identifying a “bully” at school could have severe consequences. Will the school psychologist prescribe drugs &/or psychological therapy, perhaps a directed corrective curriculum or therapy in his or her IEP, individual plan, before your child has a chance to mature & develop. (I have included in NOTES, a link to a video of: “Can’t Control Genes, But Can Control Behavior”, a clinical psychologist that talks about the negative DNA identification possibilities) Kristene A. Doyle, Ph.D., Sc.D. at the Albert Ellis Institute
( Kristene A. Doyle, Ph.D., Sc.D. is the Director of the Albert Ellis Institute (AEI). Dr. Doyle is also Director of Clinical Services and a licensed Staff Psychologist)

The old argument of nurture vs. nature comes into play. Are you born a “natural born killer?” Does your genetic make-up determine what you will do or how you will act in the future, or is your personality framed by your environment? Whatever the issue, the question that MUST be asked is, “Can government rightfully be able to target a child that hasn’t done anything wrong without due process?” This is a new direction for mental health in our schools. The Constitutional rights of parents & children are being trampled & no one can assure you that your child will be protected from these invasive techniques.

Will genetic mapping be used to detect “aggressive or evil” tendencies without due process? Can you be arrested for something you did not do but your genes may mark you for having future aggressive or criminal behavior? Obama has penned 23 executive orders at the Center for Disease Control, CDC, to research “gun violence” & mental health.

In January 2013, President Barack Obama issued these 23 executive orders directing federal agencies to improve knowledge of the causes of firearm violence, what might help prevent it, and how to minimize its burden on public health. One of these orders directed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to, along with other federal agencies, immediately begin identifying the most pressing problems in firearm violence research. The CDC and the CDC Foundation asked the IOM, in collaboration with the National Research Council, to convene a committee tasked with developing a potential research agenda that focuses on the causes of, possible interventions to, and strategies to minimize the burden of firearm-related violence. Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence focuses on the characteristics of firearm violence, risk and protective factors, interventions and strategies, the impact of gun safety technology, and the influence of video games and other media.

Obama calls on Congress to spend $100 million next year to map the brain.

Dr. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, said new understandings about how the brain works may also provide leads for developing better computers. While current brain-scanning technologies can reveal the average activity of large populations of brain cells, the new project is aimed at tracking activity down to the individual cell and the tiny details of cell connections, he said

This is food for thought when the government does brain research & develops “interventions & strategies” digging deep into genetic markers that can be used in the future against its citizens. This is the danger of personal data in the hands of government when decisions are being made about you, that you have NO control over. Will the Columbine pair & Colorado movie killer be used to take away your freedom? Remember, Adam Lanza, who allegedly killed the 22 people in Sandy Hook, Connecticut has had his DNA researched by the CDC looking for an “evil gene.” So what happens if science can detect an “evil gene?” Will the National Security Agency be looking for “bad people” from blood types in personal records? In Obamacare records? A blood test is always done at birth. What happens next? “Minority Report” the movie comes to mind…determined at birth, fixed for life.

Who has access to our student & family personal data?
There are three main changes in FERPA that should be considered dangerous: the definitions of PII, who can redisclose data that was collected, & who can use or have access to the data collected.

Under FERPA, please note that a “contractor, consultant, volunteer, or other party to whom an agency or institution has outsourced institutional services or functions may be considered a school official under this paragraph….”.(99.30 B). In essence, the CDC, acting as a school official, can analyze your child’s DNA to determine if they MIGHT have an “evil gene” without your permission. Is that possible? Are there no protections?

Any disclosure is allowed to organizations conducting studies for, or on behalf of, educational agencies or institutions to:
(A) Develop, validate, or administer predictive tests;
(B) Administer student aid programs; or
(C) Improve instruction. 91.31 (6)(i)

Of course, improving instruction means the student will be monitored for meeting Common Core Standards. Corrective techniques are being researched by big business as you read this passage.

New regulations took effect January 3, 2012 that drastically change the law by under cutting any protections for PII, personally identifiable information, that can be released.
The new rules allows for “data sharing” beyond government agencies to any outside organization that is “evaluating ” or ” auditing” an educational program. The “unlocked” data on an individual is now allowed to be accessed by “others” deemed school officials other than the Strict guidelines that was proposed under the Hanson Memorandum which required that under the ‘‘audit or evaluation exception,’’ only an authorized representative of a State educational authority must be a party under the direct control of that authority, e.g., an employee or a contractor to access the data. Obama has allowed the Hanson Memorandum to be rescinded which opens the flood gates of data flowing to outside contractors.

The issue becomes, who has direct access? If Obama wants to study your child’s DNA, he can do it under these new provisions without your permission.

Lining the Pockets of Donors & Friends

Who’s making money on the data? If there is value, then someone must have a right to that value. Does this data have value? The Department of Education in collusion with “big data piggy business” that is promoting data mining could be defined as the taking of property without compensation similar to the government collecting phone records from Verizon, AT&T, Apple, Google, Facebook & others without due process. The testing & curriculum developers are in the same boat, whether PARCC, ACT, ETS, Smarter Balanced, Pearson Foundation, & Gates, all have access to your child’s data without your permission. Is it piracy to take what belongs to you (data on individual children)? Permission is granted to take data, but permission is not granted from those who produced it, nor is permission granted to those who want to know about it. Why should we wait for Congress to ‘rebalance’ our property rights? Do you have to wait before calling the police when your car has been stolen? And why should Congress deliberate at all about the merits of this theft? Do we ask whether the car thief had a good use for the car before we arrest him?”

There appears to be a concentration of power to control the uses of culture & data that has been unquestioningly accepted but there are consequences to this form of irruption by very powerful players. Government doesn’t make investments in firms without an “end customer” ready to test out that company’s products. Big data collection & big data trafficking by big business is feeding at the federal government trough. Our children & our country is at risk of being eaten alive. Parents have a right to be “angry birds.”

We must insist on an investigation.

It is our property & it should be protected just as any other property is protected. Lets review the “big data” sharing aspect of data trafficking. Students have personal records, take soft affective classes, & take state & national tests that have gone haywire beyond academics. It’s a psychological profile. Your local school or state/federal department of education through a “written agreement” can give this data to anyone for free. These testing contractors, curriculum developers, the Center for Disease Control, foundations, you name it, can use the data for research, to create curriculum & testing to sell back to the schools, testing programs in pre & post testing results to see if your child is changing to desired government goals, anything goes. Anyone can access your students files for any reason deemed how they define “educational!” Your child is the guinea pig for government & big business & it must be stopped. Plus, what happens in the future if DNA sequencing is allowed to be accessed by your government? Eugenics is not a pretty word. Can you trust the decisions of your government in place of you, the parent? Absolutely, NOT.

The questions of the day, “Will government make decisions on its own people that would determine an outcome not in the best interest of that person in the future?” or “Could government issue a directive against the will of a person who has done nothing wrong without due process? Can you be arrested for what you think?”
Our Constitution is being torn to shreds.

Request an investigation into FERPA. Dismantle the Department of Education. Stop funding NAEP & all test clones. Stop funding the CCSSO.
Stop the data trafficking.


Historical documentation from, ‘The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America’ ,
by Charlotte Iserbyt, mentor & friend

Dossiers on Americans Hardwired_for_Life, Kristene Doyle: Can’t Control Genes, But Can Control Behavior

July 28, 2013

FERPA, Privacy

(No comments)

News Out of New York: Experts, Parents, Lawmakers Blast Database Providing Personal Student Information To Vendors March 14, 2013
NEW YORK (CBSNewYork/AP) –” A new national database that compiles personal student information for educational companies that contract with public schools is being blasted by privacy experts.

In turn, inBloom reportedly plans to put this private information on a data cloud and share it with for-profit vendors. The information will include personally identifiable information, including student names, test scores, grades, home addresses, email addresses, linked to grades, test scores, disciplinary and arrest records, special education status, race, economic status and health conditions, according to Class Size Matters, a non-profit organization that advocates for class size reduction in NYC’s public schools.”

What allowed this incident to happen? What exactly is in the records that were released? What authority was given to the schools or the state or federal departments of education to release this information to big business? This is only the beginning.

The Rape of Your Personal Records. It’s more than, ‘What grade did you get in Algebra?’ Or ‘Government tapping personal phone records & emails.’ It’s All about You.

Government has been listening to your conversations & scanning your emails. But, do they know how you think? Does the government know your predispositions of how you will act in the future or your thoughts? Let’s take a step by step process so you can easily understand what is at stake & how your neighborhood school is involved in collecting data about your family. Let’s define psychological.

psychology noun (Concise Encyclopedia)
“Scientific discipline that studies mental processes and behaviour in humans and other animals. Literally meaning “the study of the mind,” psychology focuses on both individual and group behaviour. Clinical psychology is concerned with the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders. Other specialized fields of psychology include child psychology, educational psychology, sports psychology, social psychology, and comparative psychology. The issues studied by psychologists cover a wide spectrum, including learning, cognition, intelligence, motivation, emotion, perception, personality, and the extent to which individual differences are shaped by genetics or environment. The methods used in psychological research include observation, interviews, psychological testing, laboratory experimentation, and statistical analysis.”

So, if I told you the schools are doing psychological work-ups on children to change their personality & study their genetic make-up to change how they think or act, would you be upset? Would you be upset if I told you about a data base that collects this information & gives it to big business? Lets talk more about the process.

FERPA, Family Education Rights & Privacy Act, was unlocked & allows data to be gathered on your children & dispersed for research. The floodgates open up a trove of priceless personal data of not only what your child thinks, but what you as a parent think, too. Once psychological mapping is done of what your child thinks, the record will show what their parents taught them to think & believe. Psychological data is being collected in school records. Obama authorizes FERPA to Disclose & Distribute Personally Identifiable Information on Families & Students Without Congressional Authority. FERPA was amended & new regulations went into effect January 3, 2012, Family Education Rights & Privacy Act 34 CFR Part 99. These new regulations were written & put in place allowing access to all Personally Identifiable Information, PII, which means all records on students & families can be accessed by any organization to do research, experimentation & evaluations without your permission. But why? Why must every child be accessed in America & kwhy is this dangerous?

“Every child in America entering school at the age of five is insane because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well – by creating the international child of the future.” Dr. Chester M. Pierce, Psychiatrist, address to the Childhood International Education Seminar, 1973

Using Clintons take on, ‘Its the economy , stupid!’ My comment is, “It’s about Mental Health, Stupid! ”

The ‘Race to the Top‘ models explicitly state that “authentic affective engagement” must be used for interpersonal & higher order thinking skills to be developed. What does this mean? Affective means attitudes & values. Interpersonal means your child’s personality & how he/she reacts to the world around them. Higher order thinking skills are value judgments, opinions, or decision making. This is the new term coined for brainwashing. Wipe the slate clean from what you have been taught by your parents, your grandparents, your minister, your elected officials. Learn new ways of thinking about your country, your God, your family. Your child is being primed as a global citizen that moves & thinks like a drone, together & in cooperation with each other.

So, what type of information is in those records? ‘Race To the Top’ programs & all software contractors & testing contractors can now easily move forward to create individualized education modules, testing, & curriculum referred to as “learning genomes.” Remember, the Common Core-College & Career Ready Standards are being approved in over 46 states. Federal funding, ESEA, Title I flexibility waivers, are being approved in almost all of the states bypassing No Child Left Behind. With federal money comes federal accountability.

The Next Generation Learning Innovation Labs contracted through CCSSO (Chief State School Officers) & the Stupski Foundation (which ceased operations in July 2012) were guinea pig models for these individualized programs where the money will eventually follow the child with the proposed changes in the federal Reauthorization of ESEA, Elementary & Secondary Education Act, & IDEA, (Special Ed), Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, regulations. The agenda will move forward by-passing local & state representative government when federal money directly goes to the child.

Why is this concept important? Because, in order to move toward global citizenship, the government must be able to access the individual. FERPA had to be expanded to allow access to individual records & to be able to start at a young age. What better place to start than in school & pre-school. Compulsory attendance makes it so. This is a “sea of change.” This is your country that is being taken over by rogue socialists who want to control people & this country entirely.

Of course we have seen this before in OBE & other named agendas. This time it is different. Never has the federal government been allowed to access the individual. Obamacare made this possible, thank you, Justice Roberts. Spoon feed the masses a little at a time. Research & scheme for years. Redefine terms. Start with a pilot, a model in a few states. Model states in the Stupski experiments were Kentucky, Maine, New York, Ohio, West Virginia, Wisconsin, & New Hampshire. The Obama model eliminates the Carnegie Unit, (ABCD& failure); eliminate grade bands, like sophomore, junior, senior, etc; & expand the time it takes to meet outcomes, there is no time limit. The new parameters expand the grouping from P-20…pre-natal to 20 years old. Preparations are being planned for college students also with a new degree program that older students must go through to graduate called the Degree Qualification Profile. Each child will have an individualized education plan to meet outcomes with pre-planned curriculum in individualized modules. This can only be done with technology to monitor progress & the computer for data trafficking. The new concept is called, “the world to one.” The Obama administration is covering all bases.

To prepare for the global workforce, we must first assess the student through testing, now called assessment. The definition of assessment is the value or worth of something or someone. Hence you have the definition of ‘human capital,” the worth of a person. The idea of the learning genome is primarily taking each child, their learning style, biographical data, medical records, & all student information for knowledge integration, to plan a precise & customized IEP, individualized student educational plan with pre & post testing & an assessment data library that will be pre-planned. Pre-planned means that the government has established what type of citizen is needed for global citizenship. No freedom loving Americans allowed. Performance assessments will be used & will be imbedded in the curriculum. This customized model ensures compliance to Common Core-College & Career Ready Standards. The technique used is mastery learning or Skinner’s operant conditioning modules to meet dumbed down world-class knowledge & drone skills for a global workforce. Mastery Learning uses operant conditioning which produces functional literates, much like Pavlov’s salivating dogs, & Skinner’s high achieving pigeons, which matches the child to their job potential or worth of creating monetary value for government. The implied intent is the “world to one” or each worker bee will be given a precise plan as his or her worth in the new global workforce.

How will children be remediated? In West Virginia, a Race to the Top model, the use of IDEA (Special Ed) funds allow Support For Personalized Learning or SPL. “This includes Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS). Improving student academic and behavior outcomes is about ensuring all students have access to the most effective and accurately implemented instructional and behavioral practices and interventions possible. PBIS provides an operational framework for achieving these outcomes. More importantly, PBIS is not a curriculum, intervention, or practice, but is a decision-making framework that guides selection, integration and implementation of the best evidence-based academic and behavioral practices for improving important academic and behavior outcomes for all students.” West Virginia is on the path to “cookie cutter kids.”

With the loosening of data sharing possibilities, our children’s lives will be totally exposed, our privacy will be stripped, & the access to our children in the classrooms to be forced to conform to extreme leftist agendas through technology, will be “fait accompli.” It will be very difficult for a parent to grasp what is being taught in the classroom & there are no protections to shield your child from the aggressive model to change their attitudes & behavior toward this global communion.

The massive student & family privacy risks and the agency’s lack of legal authority to make changes to the privacy law without explicit Congressional intent has broad & damaging implications for the individual. Personal information now can be shared with any organization with a written agreement in any educational program from birth thru adult. In other words, Obama had the regulations amended & opened the flood-gates of data sharing on our children & our families. There are no federal protections for you & your family whatsoever.


Charter Schools are a Trap-
Choice is the Bait:
Are You on the Hook?

Heritage’s Promise for ‘Great Schools For Maine’ Spreads Fallacies About Charter Schools & Choice
Something Fishy is Going on in Augusta

“Any agency, public or private, which receives federal funds directly or indirectly through a grant or contract .. .or by way of a voucher plan” must meet all programs that are set down for public schools . Acceptance of Federal funds is an agreement to abide by the requirements .”

In March, 1984, the U .S . Supreme Court ruled that private schools are subject to government regulations because they enroll students who receive tuition money from the government . Even though the checks are payable to individual students, not the school, the Court says any scholarships, loans, or grants to students “constitute federal financial assistance.”

“Whatever government funds, government controls,” quote from Charlotte Iserbyt, Former Senior Policy Advisor U.S. Department of Education

Governor LePage’s agenda for ‘Customized Learning’ opportunities for Maine students falls for Obama’s federal take-over of all private education in America. This is a trap. This is a Republican failure.

Why are Republicans & the Heritage Foundation pushing choice in education when accepting of federal monies to have a “choice” will mean government intervention? One part of the proposed legislation reveals that federal dollars will be permitted to be accepted by religious schools. Beware all private & religious schools. Once you accept federal monies, you will be forced to accept the Common Core-College & Career Ready Standards. If your students are granted a stipend of federal dollars from ESEA, Title I or IDEA monies under the guise of choice, say good bye to the private, Christian, or Catholic in your name. You will be a public school, just like a charter school.

When the legislation states that parents will have customized learning opportunities (public and private options) for kids who are eligible for the free or reduced-price lunch program, this means that federal dollars, Title I, will be used for an individual education plan or an individual career pathway for your child to meet government mandated Common Core-College Career Ready Standards. With choice money, comes Common Core Standards. With choice money comes mandated national testing & assessment. With choice money, that will follow the individual child, will mean the end of private education or homeschooling. You will be forced to use Common Core-College & Career Ready Standards & tests. This is the federal take-over of education in America. Maine, you are Obama’s prize.

Maine is Mimicking Obama’s ‘Race to the Top’ Choice & Charter School Agenda & Heritage is Joining Forces With Obama.

Maine is a pilot state for the Innovation Lab Network under the Obama administration. This agenda is pushing to transform education toward a standards based program which must move toward an individualized education plan or career pathway. This agenda can only be implemented with “choice” by using federal funding to monitor individual students. These are major steps to removing representative government on the local level. Federal funds will bypass the locally elected school boards. Federal funds will follow the child, wherever that child goes to school.

Charter schools are already public schools that are publicly funded, mandated to conform to those same standards & testing. Plus, there is no accountability to the public or parents since there is no elected school boards, only appointed non-elected board members. Using tax payer money to fund private for profit charter schools is blatantly unConsitutional.

When looking at the 6 pilot states in Obama’s Race to the Top agenda, (Innovation Lab Network) there is a surge in re-designing Americas schools. The Obama agenda is pushing choice & charter schools because it aligns with controlling all education including private schools. The move to grant more charter schools plays into the hand of eroding representative government on the local level-no elected school boards. When a student is given federal dollars & decides to go to a private school, where’s the accountability for those federal taxpayer dollars? It’s fairly easy….Common Core & College & Career Standards & testing & assessment of those standards. How will the Commissioner of Education help failing schools? They will be forced to change their curriculum & retest for better government accountability usually referred to as ‘academic bankruptcy’ or the takeover of private schools. Beware of choice in education that mimics the Obama agenda.

What federal pieces of legislation are enabling this agenda to go forward to fund “customized learning opportunities? Elementary & Secondary Education Act, ESEA Title I; Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA (HR 347)
Why do charter schools play into the false choice agenda? Taxation without representation- privately owned public schools with no elected school board members yet uses public funds & public property. Walking down the unConstitutional yellow brick road. Abolishing representative government, local control & locally elected school board members.
What is government funded will adhere to government regulations. Common core standards align to government aligned testing. NAEP, & NAEP clones, will align to all state Assessments & embedded assessments. Accountability standards will be in place once you take government funds. Accountability=Forced Compliance=Loss of Freedom of Choice
Charter schools will eliminate locally elected representative government.
The choice argument sounds good, but is the fox in the henhouse. If choice legislation is passed the money follows the child in ESEA Title I or IDEA. Students must take the TEST & meet government standards. Private schools will be forced to accept ANY child who has a choice stipend. All private schools will become public schools where they must administer the test & teach to the test.
Republican Governors & the Heritage Foundation are leading Americans down the wrong path.
Charter Schools & Choice in Education is Obama’s big catch. Don’t be deceived.


HR 5, Student Success Act, passes in the House, July 19, 2013, initiates Title I, choice stipends, to follow the child in amendments brought by Republican representatives.

‘Innovation Lab Network’ States-Transforming Education in America

A Policy Statement of the Council of Chief State School Officers
March 2010

Romney’s Education Plan- Mimics Obama’s Race to the Top Education Plan, Romney Calls for Using Title I, IDEA Funds for School Choice-A failure for Republican leaders.