Reporting on Current Obama Education Policies

The Common Core Face-off:
Hiding the Truth About Choice and Charter Schools.

“Those who have the privilege to know, have the duty to act.” Albert Einstein

Obama and ‘Conservative’ Groups Use Bait and Switch Tactics. They are using the momentum against Common Core to complete and further their agenda—“Choice” and Charter Schools.

The truth has uneasy consequences. ‘Conservatives’ and Republicans are revealing their so-called “Choice Plan” that mimics the Obama-Duncan Plan. In an article posted by the ‘conservative’ organization FreedomWorks, their entire proposed controversial agenda for “choice” in education demands rebuttal, discussion and dissection. The Einstein quote at the top of this article validates my decision to act on current documentation, explaining to the American people the danger that these ‘conservative groups’ represent to parents when they demand “choice.”

Republican Governors who say that Common Core is gone are using fraud and deception to further their cause. Their cause is government-controlled, taxpayer-funded “choice” and charter schools. Republicans are now conveniently using the slogan “No Common Core” as a litmus test—a popular hot button that will cue the Fall elections. But, are citizens and parents aware of where that path will take us? For example, see the following quote:

Common Core has emerged as the newest Republican litmus test for gauging candidates’ conservative bona fides, and experts say the controversial national education [Common Core] standard will help shape elections from school boards to the White House for the foreseeable future.
(See: link

This is the agenda that was divulged by FreedomWorks:

A draft action plan by the advocacy group FreedomWorks lays out the effort as a series of stepping stones: First, mobilize to strike down the Common Core. Then push to expand school choice by offering parents tax credits or vouchers to help pay tuition at private and religious schools. Next, rally the troops to abolish the U.S. Department of Education. Then it’s on to eliminating teacher tenure.
(See: Link)

Let me explain these real issues:

The ‘Anti-Common Core Movement’ is clouding the real issue. While states are thinking they have struck down Common Core, Obama is using the ESEA Flexibility Waivers to hide his real agenda—to Continue Common Core. Many ‘conservatives’ are—wittingly or unwittingly—helping Obama’s cause.

The move to “Strike Down Common Core” is a fake. It is a sophisticated machination to masquerade the real agenda embraced by ‘conservative’ groups who are working in tandem with the Obama Administration. “Race to the Top” and the Common Core Copyright made up the ‘foot in the door’ for standardizing the 50-state strategy. This was the first step towards nationalizing education—with national standards, a national test, and moving toward a national curriculum. Parents against Common Core are being used, especially by directing them to a new, easy answer to sidestep Common Core, i.e., government-controlled “choice.”

‘Conservative’ groups have told parents they can save their children from the federal government by supporting this “choice.” Little do these ‘new-to-the-system’ parents realize that they are being set up for a trap. Choice is that trap, and charter schools are right behind, for the bigger trap agenda. When this agenda becomes fully operational, parents will actually lose their voice. They will lose their vote in our representative form of government. There will be no true representation. The word “accountability” has meaning; it means being in compliance to federal law. You know, the federal strings attached to federal money. This fake “choice” is attached to federal strings.

What happens with Common Core? College and Career Ready Standards, or Workforce Readiness Skills, in a standards-based system will identify your child to the federal government as an individual future global worker. It doesn’t matter what name the standards use—it is within the power of the federal government to access your individual child through these individual standards. This plan was laid out by the U.S. Department of Labor in the Secretary’s Commission for Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS) report way back in 1992. Obama has set out his plan through “Race to the Top,” his plan to nationalize education. This is also hidden in the ESEA Flexibility Waiver, called Title I (explained below). Here is the hard part for people to understand—the fact is that this same plan was also once called the Reagan Plan, the Clinton Plan, the Bush Plan, and the Romney Plan. Romney called for using Title I funds and IDEA, which is Special Education, the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act for school “choice.” (See: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2012/05/romney_to_call_for_using_title.html .)

Here is the plan, or let’s call it “The Big Picture”:

Individual standards are to be met by individual students, taught by individual teachers. Individual students must be taught with validated—approved and certified–curriculum. All three entities are controlled through “accountability”—the federal test. This triad–controlled standards, controlled teachers, and controlled curriculum–is the plan.

This 3-faceted plan controls the outcome—your child or student. The ‘Conservatives’’ plan is to fund individual children wherever they go to school, so this “choice” money “follows the child” and extends the accountability even to private and religious schools.

Both the Liberal and Conservative plans take advantage (profit from) the money-making schemes that result from the expansion of for-profit charter schools. Both sides of the political spectrum have plans that converge. They all want the same results—nationalizing education with federal control of ALL children, ALL teachers, ALL curriculum, and ALL schools or “knowledge-dispensing centers.” Oh, and by the way, they want your local tax base, too.

Here is how this plan will work:

It is all about Title I

The Obama Administration has given states ESEA Flexibility Waivers to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which is Bush’s No Child Left Behind legislation. ALL ESEA Flex Waivers require College and Career Ready Standards. What we have seen so far is deceptive. A state will withdraw from the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), the copyright for Common Core, and then align Common Core into its own state standards when accepting the waiver.

But, parents must realize that Common Core has been transformed with a new name. The state will still conform to College and Career Ready Standards mandated by “Race to the Top” (RTTTT) funding, but further explained in these flexibility waivers. Particularly, these standards must go beyond language arts and math toward workforce readiness skills, which originally started as Common Core. Sometimes a state will include P20W, pre-natal through age 20, standards into the workforce training, expanding the K-12 agenda. (See, for example, “Oregon’s Common Core Goes P-20”: Link/ and Kentucky, too: Link

NOTE: The following pilot states—Ohio, Kentucky, Maine, West Virginia, Wisconsin, New York, New Hampshire, and Oregon—are redesigning their educational systems to correlate with federal standards called Innovation Lab Network, funded by the international Organization of Economic and Cultural Development (OECD), Lumina Foundation, and Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). CCSSO is the group that copyrighted the Common Core Standards along with the National Governors Association.

Oklahoma’s passage of House Bill 3399, that supposedly removed Common Core Standards, stated this in their bill,

Upon the effective date of this act, the State Board of Education shall seek certification from the State Regents for Higher Education that the subject matter standards for English Language Arts and Mathematics which were in place prior to the revisions adopted by the Board in June 2010 are college-and career-ready as defined in the Federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Flexibility document issued by the United States Department of Education….
[emphasis added]

Oh no! The legislature put Common Core into law through their Flex Waiver! Governor Fallin is the Chairman of the National Governors Association (the other group that copyrighted the Common Core Standards). Oklahoma now calls their standards “Oklahoma Academic Standards,” and on the front of their Flex Waiver called their agenda “C3, College, Career, Citizenship Standards”—exactly the same as the CCSSO were calling it–to expand the standards to include dispositions, or attitudinal and value standards. We can assume that these standards will include testing and interventions in the non-cognitive domain. (See: Link )

Indiana’s supposed departure from Common Core is referred to as the “grand deception.” Indiana’s HB 1427 states

Provides that the state board shall implement educational standards that use the common core standards as the base model for academic standards to the extent necessary to comply with federal standards to receive a Flexibility Waiver.
[emphasis added]

South Carolina’s bill, H3893, to stop Common Core and the Smarter Balanced Test states

The summative assessment must assess students in English/language arts and mathematics, including those students as required by the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and by Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. For purposes of this subsection, ‘English/language arts’ includes English, reading, and writing skills as required by existing state standards.
[emphasis added]

Existing state standards? You guessed it! Common Core. Do you see a pattern here? This has happened in several states where Common Core is most controversial. While parents believe Common Core is gone, little do they know those standards were just embedded in the ESEA Title I Flexibility Waivers signed by your state’s secretary or superintendent of education. Unfortunately, Oklahoma, Indiana, and South Carolina have taken the bait. Common Core is still there, with other new forceful accountability measures, like Value Added Models (VAM), to be sure teachers are teaching Common Core, and interventions using special education funds from the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) called “Response to Intervention.” RtI is used for ALL students to make sure they are covered by IDEA to meet Common Core Standards.

The Plan to Use Title I to Expand School Choice to Private and Religious Schools

How will EVERY child become Title I? President Johnson’s “War on Poverty” gave schools funding, called ESEA Title I, to help those schools where there were concentrations of students who were poor. Interestingly enough, the term was “educationally deprived.” So, the issue with the ESEA Flexibility Waiver is that the poverty guidelines were removed. This means that children who qualified for free and reduced lunches, where a school had to have 40% of students that qualified under poverty guidelines, are now in a school where that requirement is reduced to “0%.” This means ALL individual children in an entire school can receive federal ESEA Title I funds for EVERY child: the funds “follow the child.”

This means that a child is considered “educationally deprived” if he/she does not meet standards. Interestingly, the ‘Conservative’ organization American Legislative Exchange Counsel, (ALEC) just released model legislation for choice and charter schools for every state in the country. They refer to students not meeting standards with the term “academically disadvantaged.” This is what is needed to move forward with federal “choice.” EVERY child must be identified for “choice” funds, no matter where they go to school. Obama has done this through the ESEA Flexibility Waiver.

Now that ALL children in public school are Title I, the Republicans can take over from here. They want “choice” [those Title I funds] for EVERY student who goes to private and religious schools, too! This is a terrible bait and switch deception for those parents and citizens who think that choice means freedom of choice for private and religious education! This is not freedom, nor true choice.

Where is the federal “choice” agenda now? ESEA Re-authorization Is held up by Senator Reid… at the moment.

The Re-authorization of ESEA is the bill in Congress that changes how funding will now follow the child. The Republicans in the House of Representatives added “choice” amendments to the ESEA Re-authorization in HR 5 that can “follow the child” with Title I funds into any private or religious school. This passed the House in July of 2013. The Democrats, on the Senate side, voted to have SB 1094 come out of committee, but it has not been brought up for an entire Senate vote. SB 1094 wants Title I funds to follow the child to any public or charter school. But, Obama’s Flexibility Waivers are doing most of that job already without the passage of the Re-authorization of ESEA legislation. Obama supports “choice” in the Flexibility Waivers in public schools. The passage of the entire ESEA package (with Republican amendments in conference committee using federal “choice” funding) will allow federal Title I funds to be attached to your child, to have the “choice” to go to any school, anywhere. This is the legislation that Obama and the ‘Conservative’ groups want to pass for federal “choice” to become a reality.

WARNING! There are strings attached! Title I Choice funds can be connected to your child to go to any charter, private or religious school you choose. Obama wants “equity” in education. This means the same amount of money for every child with federal accountability strings attached. The compromise will be “choice” for everyone, potentially even home schoolers. There will be no differences in schools anywhere, nationalizing education in the United States through “choice” and Common Core—all will have to “drink the Kool-Aid.” That’s what “equity in education” means. All schools will become government schools under the Re-authorization of ESEA. You get “choice.” But they control all the schools!

Here is the Set-up

Lets say the Re-authorization of ESEA is passed with the “choice” amendments. Your child has already been identified by the national database through the state longitudinal data system. Your child has been identified for funding under Title I because of the Flex Waiver. Now, with this “choice” the Title I funds will ” follow” your child to whichever school you choose.

Here is an example of what can happen once your child has the “choice” funds in his/her backpack, with their name allotted to the scholarship, and you (the parent) decide to use this “choice” funding to send your child to Immaculate Conception Catholic School in Washington, Pennsylvania. This school will be mandated by federal law to comply with ESEA, better known as Common Core. This will be disguised as academic standards or College and Career Ready Standards (CCRS). Under this sort of “choice,” there can be no discrimination for this Catholic school to turn down a student. [NOTE: This changes the hope that a private school can bypass this issue by just refusing federal funding. The private school must refuse the child. This is where discrimination comes into play.] So, Immaculate Conception must enroll your child. This would be the same for any private school or religious school.

Immaculate Conception will be mandated to administer the federal test. This national test will also evaluate the teachers. If Immaculate Conception School is not teaching Common Core, they will be targeted as a priority or focus school to be brought into compliance with the law. This will be the demise of “private” in your group of “choice” schools. This will be the end of truly private education in America, because your private or religious school just became a government school—it must use the standards passed in your state (Common Core warmed over), and take the assessment aligned to the national curriculum and national test. All schools become government schools with “choice.”

Is This the End of Public Schools?

Now, what happens to the old public school that your child just left? Your old public school will struggle. Your local district must pay for at least 50% of your child’s stipend or scholarship with taxes collected locally so that your child can go to another school. Your federal Title I “Choice” fund pays the other 50%. Your public school loses 100% of funding for every student who leaves to go to a “choice” school. Your public school system locally will collapse, because there will not be enough money in the budget to support your community’s school. Plus, your tax money will be following students everywhere, even across state lines.

Your locally elected school directors will be fired or retired. What happens to “voting” for locally elected representatives? What happens to your tax base, to property taxes that were collected to run your neighborhood school? Where will property taxes go if there are no public schools? What happens to wealthier districts if funding for students becomes equalized? This is the “punch in the gut” that Secretary Duncan was talking about when he chastised soccer moms that were against Common Core. (See: Link)

Meanwhile, everyone is fiddling around with Common Core, states are taking the caps off the number of charter schools, expanding them, closing down public schools, and sometimes transforming a public school into a charter school. Parent trigger bills are allowing parents to set up charter schools. Charter schools are not private schools. Charters are public schools. They have no elected boards, but they do have access to public funds.

A June 24, 2014 article in the Detroit Free Press explains the powerless authority of a Charter School Board when told, “none of the board’s business” as to how the school was run. (See:link

“In its investigation into how Michigan’s charter schools perform and spend nearly $1
billion a year in taxpayer dollars, the Free Press found board members who were kept
clueless by their management companies about school budgets or threatened and
removed by a school’s authorizer when they tried to exercise the responsibilities that
come with their oath of office. Board members removed by an authorizer have no
recourse in Michigan.”
“There have been board members who have basically said, ‘We tried to make changes,
we tried to instill our rights as board members overseeing a public school’ and were
essentially told to back off,” said Casandra Ulbrich, vice president of the state Board of
Education, which sets education policy and advises lawmakers. “You have to
question who’s really running the show here because technically and legally, it’s
supposed to be the board.” In traditional school districts, with elected boards,
members can’t be removed for asking tough questions. Voters get to decide
whether to re-elect a board member.”
[emphases mine]

By supporting the Common Core agenda you have just agreed to diminish our American representative form of government by supporting “choice” and charter schools. Taxation without representation. Will taxes be centralized or regionalized toward a central base? Will the people have any power or voice to change this system?

So, think again. “What is your choice?” Charter schools, private schools, religious schools, and remaining public schools—all conforming to the ESEA federal law with Common Core embedded in the standards. Your state will continue to reduce caps on charter schools, and some public schools will become community “hub centers” or school-based clinics. And lest you forget, SB 1094 also changed the definition of a “Family Member.” You, the parent are demoted to a “partner” who is responsible for your child along with many “other” government officials. Please do an Internet search for the definition of partnership. You won’t like it when the government takes away your authority as a parent, your voice and your representative voting power is lost forever and your child belongs to the state, with reduced in authority to “partner.” And if your child moves to another city or state to go to a school more suited to his/her abilities and can produce more “human capital” from your child, who will “partner” with him/her there?

Will these ‘Conservative’ groups and Obama give you the straight talk about ESEA and ESEA Flexibility Waivers? Will they tell you the truth about what will happen to your private, Catholic, or Christian school with federal “choice”? No! They are NOT talking about it! They continue to insist that “choice” is the answer. Keep in mind that there is a profit motive for many of these groups to continue to advocate this phony “choice.”

What Will Happen if the U.S. Department of Education is Abolished?

So, what about abolishing the U.S. Department of Education? Watch the switcheroo!

Who better to monitor human capital than the U.S. Department of Labor? Plus, another aspect of SB 1094 (Re-authorization of ESEA) is that they want a national assessment board that monitors compliance to the national test, most likely the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Well, this “appointed” commission was the plan all along, too.

The Gordon Commission has already been set up by Obama and the Educational Testing Service (ETS),the contractor for NAEP, which calls for an unelected board to manage the national test. Want to talk about top down control? Why not just use the U.S. Department of Labor to monitor the “human capital” (your child’s economic value to the state) that is being processed by all schools in America? The national testing, along with the National Center of Education Statistics (NCES), will monitor compliance from the national database on ALL aspects of education.

Who needs the U.S. Department of Education? Who needs state control of funding when Title I federal funds “follow the child” and do NOT pass through state government? Who needs locally elected school boards when public schools fail?

CEO Reed Hastings of Netflix, who is a big charter school supporter and an investor in the Rocketship Education charter school network, agrees. His big idea is to “kill” elected school boards. “At a meeting of the California Charter Schools Association on March 4, he said in a keynote speech that the problem with public schools is that they are governed by elected local school boards.” (See: Link

Effectively, this charter school system destroys representative government.

Why the System Needs Traditional Teachers Out of the Way

Traditional teachers must be gotten rid of. The Vergara case in Los Angeles ruled teacher tenure unconstitutional, and it serves as the precedent doing away with teacher tenure. Soon you will see lawsuits erupting all over the country against teacher tenure with the Obama gang members presiding. (See: link

Teachers unions are girding for a tough fight to defend tenure laws against a coming blitz
of lawsuits — and an all-out public relations campaign led by former aides to President
Barack Obama.

But, wait a minute! Wasn’t that the so-called ‘conservative’ FreedomWorks agenda? So, now you know the rest of the story. Who is on whose side?

Teachers will be manipulated to leave the education system through the Value-Added Measurement Model (VAMM) incorporated into the ESEA Fexibility Waiver. Teachers will be evaluated by how their students score on the national test. Teachers MUST teach to the test, and must be evaluated with the Charlotte Danielson Evaluation, spelled out in the Flex Waivers. [NOTE: Charlotte Danielson was an official with the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory during development of the original Course Goals Collection, the forerunner of Outcome-Based Education and the Common Core.] All curriculum used will be developed with total alignment to the standards aligned system (SAS), which matches curriculum, teaching, and testing to the standards. Teachers must perform and teach the standards, period.

Removing teacher tenure easily allows traditional teachers who know what is best for children, to be replaced if they do not conform to the Common Core agenda. The Flexibility Waiver is very clear about replacing the principals and the teachers not in compliance. Young, inexperienced Teach For America members are standing on the sidelines ready to jump at the chance to replace traditional teachers. Eager and committed, they will comply with the plan.

All barriers are now removed for federal takeover.

A Little Background on Choice

When the controversy exploded in the 1990’s over Outcome Based Education (OBE), the education bureaucrats did not expect the explosion of fury from parents against OBE and the subjective learning outcomes that were trying to be placed in every state at that time. OBE failed. The bureaucrats have gotten smarter, but very little else has changed.

Copyright the standards, call them academic, and align them to “Race to the Top” funds so every state could be the same. Change Title I in ESEA for every child to be funded the same, equity in education. Test every child to see where their weaknesses are in meeting standards that were expanded to values and attitudes. Then use Special Ed funds for remediation or intervention to meet those standards. Monitor and force teachers to teach the standards, and implement choice to throw the net over everyone. Here was the sentiment then, as it is now:

“TO OBE OR NOT TO OBE?” WAS THE QUESTION POSED BY MARJORIE LEDELL, ASSOCIATE of William Spady’s in his High Success Network in her article for Educational Leadership’s January 1994 issue. On page 18 of her article we read the following:

Finally, raise the real issue and depend on democracy. Don’t let “to OBE
(common core) or Not to OBE (common core)” or “to implement or not implement efforts to improve student learning” cloud the overdue national debate about whether public education should exist or be replaced with publicly funded private education.

[Emphasis added. OBE quote taken from the deliberate dumbing down of america. By Charlotte T. Iserbyt.]

Sorry, FreedomWorks. Freedom doesn’t work this way.

20140210-103851.jpg

Teacher, Teacher, I Declare

Although, published in the mid1990’s, nothing explains Common Core Standards and the impact on teachers in the classroom, as this expose’ on the coming revolution in teacher education and teacher evaluation based on how well students perform on tests.

Common Core is not new. It is a revised, failed education system that has been systematically being forced on American students and American teachers since 1969, when NAEP began implementing a planned economy through education.

Common Core Global Communion PART 2
Democratic Engagement-The New Term for Global Citizenship Beginning at Birth Through College

Once the envy of the world, the brightest, most productive, creative, economic power the world has ever known, the United States will fall to its knees. Not because we don’t have smart citizens, because we have indoctrinated citizens who have had heavy doses of psychological manipulation and mastery learning and cooperative education since kindergarten. Remember, Common Core Standards identify Johnny in the classroom, and federal funding, ESEA Title I and IDEA (Special Ed), (HR 5 plus SB 1094), proposed by the Obama administration, the Democratic held Senate, and the Republicans pushing Charter Schools and Choice to individualize educational plans for EACH student, there will no longer be doses of manipulation. It will be constant manipulation by computer programming and Master Teachers, no matter how long it takes. Different models have kids graduating from high school at the age of 19, 20 or older. More indoctrination will be needed before those students are released as global workers, but the indoctrination must begin at birth.

Cradle to Age 21

Remember, it doesn’t matter that your child is smart or has a high IQ…what matters is the right attitudes and values. Benjamin Bloom’s “whole child theory” of teaching, which is challenging the student’s fixed beliefs, includes the affective domain and must be taught from early ages to change American thoughts and values. SB 1094 calls for testing ‘across domains,’ the whole child, values included starting at birth.This is why the Pennsylvania EQA is so important. The test, which was a model for the nation, shows you exactly what is wanted in the future citizen. This is why ACT, who developed Work Keys for career readiness, is creating career tests for Kindergarten. (“Five Year Old Put to the Test as Kindergarten Exams Gain Steam”, by Stepheny Simon, Rueters,9-25-2012.) The earlier, the better, to mold cookie cutter kids ready to bow to the master plan after years of indoctrination. Career training for Kindergarten? Really? This is the “cradle to grave” indoctrination being put in place.

The Obama administration accelerated the trend in 2011 with a $500 million competitive grant to bolster early childhood education. States that pledged to assess all kindergarten kids earned extra points on their application. The Obama administration grant guidelines encouraged states to develop holistic assessments that measure a 5- year olds social, emotional, and physical development as well as their cognitive skills ( the whole child). About a dozen states including Georgia and Maryland have developed such broad assessments according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Now, Obama is proposing paying for pre-school for early detection and molding of attitudes and values. Attitudes and values are NOT so hardened or fixed if caught in early years. Senate Bill 1094 starts funding at birth through age 21.

Lately, the interesting thing about the education establishment is that they are sometimes blatantly saying what they are doing. The public is just not catching on as clearly can be seen in this article, “ACT to Roll Out Career and College Readiness Tests for 3rd-10th Grades” By Caralee Adams on July 2, 2012, Ed Week Oct 9 2012, “The assessment would look beyond academics to get a complete picture of the whole student,” he says ( Jon Erickson, the president of education for ACT, the Iowa City, Iowa-based nonprofit testing company.) “There would be interest inventories for students, as well as assessment of behavioral skills for students and teachers to evaluate.” This statement tells you a lot about the agenda.

Yes, each state is agreeing to the agenda of the Common Core Standards, as well as, all testing that is aligning to the NAEP. Standardization and accountability will be aligned internationally as the Bologna model strives to undermine our colleges and universities with their indoctrination.

Civic Education and Democratic Engagement is being taught in the United States as Global Citizenship-the dismantling of the idea of patriotism, individuality, and greatness in the world. Will American students bite the bait of indoctrination that our country is on the same level as other countries and to merge with other nations? Does the “Occupy” movement understand the implications? Do young voters know the consequence of changing the American concept of freedom? Lets hope so. The goal…acceptance of a global new world order. We are a nation at risk.

The Degree Qualification Profile-A New University Diploma-What College Students Must Know and Be Able To Do in Order to Graduate in Higher Ed-With International Standards

While the Common Core is sweeping the nation, HR 5 and SB 1094 will ultimately fund the take-over of education in the United States. Colleges appear to be the next target for the future to change and mold young adult student attitudes. Civic Engagement is on the move to redefine “quality” to be sure ALL college students are drawn into the agenda. The updated proposal to control higher education by providing compatible and comparable international benchmarking is escalating toward the international Bologna Model. Pilot projects are being implemented now in three states as models…Indiana, Minnesota, and Utah. The Bologna model refers to “tuning”. Tuning means matching US standards to the European international standards model. As of today, many colleges are turning a deaf ear to this model, thankfully. But the international push is on. You can be sure that NAEP, National Assessment of Educational Progress, and its international clone, the IEAP, International Assessment of Educational Progress, will be used for data comparisons in the international testing. Once standardization is complete, the psychological experimentation and manipulation to change older American students towards this socialistic, communistic system will move at triple speed targeted to individuals in college

January, 2011, the Obama Administration released its Road Map for civic learning, “Advancing Civic Learning and Engagement in Democracy.” In October, 2012, the National Task Force on Civic Learning and Democratic Engagement released a new study that explains how the convergence to world citizenship will function for our nation’s colleges called, ” A Crucible Moment-College Learning and Democracy’s Future.” Great detail is placed on the development of personality and values of the graduate student. (Page 4) This current proposal of civic education is a direct link to the European nations agreement for converging their higher education systems of standards-international benchmarks for all colleges world-wide. Many papers have been written that call for the standardization of all colleges, worldwide, to agree on global standards and outcomes. The doublespeak begins: entrusting a student’s responsibility and influence on civic values, assumptions; responsibilities to a wider public is stressed. Critical inquiry, also known as higher order thinking skills, universal democratic principles, deliberation and bridge building across differences, are central to building world citizenship. The new degree is called the Degree Qualification Profile.(page 54)

20130903-232943.jpg

This is the complete list of international values that each college student must attain for their degree listed in the Crucible document:

Focus on this partial list:
Respect for freedom & human dignity,
Empathy,
Open-mindedness,Tolerance, Justice, Equality, Ethical integrity,
Responsibility to a larger good,
Collective Action,
Integration of knowledge, skills, and examined values to inform actions taken in concert with other people,
Moral discernment and behavior,
Navigation of political systems and processes, both formal and informal,
Public problem solving with diverse partners,
Compromise, civility, and mutual respect.

This is the EQA, the NAEP, and the Common Core-College and Career Ready Standards for college students. How do you measure and score integrity, empathy and justice or other subjective values? Here we go again. The push is on to psychoanalyze and internationalize college students, too. (Just in case a student from homeschool or a Christian school slipped through the cracks.)

The Degree Qualification Profile, funded through the Lumina Foundation, defines ‘expected learning outcomes that graduates need for work, citizenship, global participation, and life’ that aligns with the Bologna Model. This is the blueprint that will force the standardization of college degrees to be equally and universally accepted worldwide. The Bologna Process ensures that the United States is prepared for convergence and urges the United States “for your eyes only” to take the most far reaching and ambitious reform of higher education ever undertaken. Our nation’s colleges and universities are far from approving this agenda. However, the agenda exists and is moving forward to standardize the process.

The Lumina Foundation explains that, “Preparing students for responsible citizenship is a widely acknowledged purpose of higher education. Like other forms of application, civic inquiry requires the integration of knowledge and skills acquired in both the broad curriculum and in the student’s specialized field. But because civic preparation also requires engagement — that is, practice in applying those skills to representative questions and problems in the wider society — it should be considered a discrete category of learning.”

“Higher education is experimenting with new ways to prepare students for effective democratic and global citizenship. Virtually all of these efforts use experiential or field-based learning as a means to develop civic insight, competence in public affairs and the ability to contribute to the common good. By definition field-based learning about civic issues is likely to immerse students in public debate about contested positions.”

“In developing civic competence, students engage a wide variety of perspectives and evidence and form their own reasoned views on public issues. Civic Learning — which is related to but goes beyond the Intellectual Skill we have labeled “Engaging Diverse Perspectives” — also involves active engagement with others. Exposure to these different perspectives helps students develop their own responses to social, environmental and economic challenges at the local, national and global levels. ”

The Bologna Model will first begin to introduce the ideas of unifying course credit, accountability and transferability internationally. The next steps are to ridicule the United States for no longer being on the “cutting edge” or the assumptions of world dominance to shame our universities and colleges into submission. The Executive Summary tells the story called the “macroeconomic theory of convergence”. Surely, our universities and colleges nationwide have big enough egos and self assurance not to allow this to happen. We pray it so.

Executive Summary: “The undertaking is known as The Bologna Process, named for the Italian city that is home to Europe’s oldest university, where the education ministers of 29 countries first agreed to the agenda and “action lines” that would bring down education borders in the same way that economic borders had been dissolved. That means harmonization, not standardization. When these national higher education systems work with the same reference points they produce a “zone of mutual trust” that most far reaching and ambitious reform of higher education ever undertaken. for their students. Everyone is singing in the same key, though not necessarily with the same tune. In terms reaching across geography and languages, let alone in terms of turning ancient higher education systems on their heads, the Bologna Process is the most far reaching and ambitious reform of higher education ever undertaken.

What has transpired since 1999 cannot be but lightly acknowledged in the United States. While still a work in progress, parts of the Bologna Process have already been imitated in Latin America, North Africa, and Australia. The core features of the Bologna Process have sufficient momentum to become the dominant global higher education model within the next two decades. Former Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings’ Commission on the Future of Higher Education paid no attention whatsoever to Bologna, and neither did the U.S. higher education community in its underwhelming response to that Commission’s report. Such purblind stances are unforgivable in a world without borders.

But since the first version of this monograph, a shorter essay entitled The Bologna Club: What U.S. Higher Education Can Learn from a Decade of European Reconstruction (Institute for Higher Education Policy, May 2008), U.S. higher education has started listening seriously to the core messages of the remarkable and difficult undertaking in which our European colleagues have engaged. Dozens of conferences have included panels, presentations, and intense discussions of Bologna approaches to accountability, access, quality assurance, credits and transfer, and, most notably, learning outcomes in the context of the disciplines. In that latter regard, in fact, three state higher education systems—Indiana, Minnesota, and Utah—have established study groups to examine the Bologna “Tuning” process to determine the forms and extent of its potential in U.S. contexts. Scarcely a year ago, such an effort would have been unthinkable.

Economist Jeffrey Sachs calls ours “the age of convergence,” and, indeed, that is what we witness when U.S. higher education opens its borders to learning. We’ve had a good run, as the saying goes, but we are no longer at the cutting edge. U.S. higher education can no longer sail on the assumption of world dominance, oblivious to the creative energies, natural intelligence, and hard work of other nations. We cannot rely on 50 research universities and 50 selective liberal arts colleges—some of which boast budgets and endowments (however diminished) greater than those of entire countries—to carry the day for the mass of our students. We cannot live in a room of mirrors, claiming that we are so unique that nothing occurring beyond that room matters. Mirrors lead to delusions, and to short-term, positivistic bean counting. We are mesmerized by the immediacy of “how much,” absent a historical “how well.” It’s time to break the mirrors. The point is not that other countries produce more degrees; it is that they just might be producing better degrees, certainly degrees whose reference points in student learning outcomes and meaning is transparent—something that cannot be said for the degrees we award.

The End of Higher Education and Freewill
Its all about equality and what is fair. Equalization across the board. Socialism. Those universities in the United States that think they are exceptional, well, think again. You are each a target for international tuning, equalization.The United States creeps closer to a world without borders. We are a nation at risk from losing all that’s dear to us, freedom. The individualists of our country are being identified and psychoanalyzed. Strong willed students and leaders of the Constitution are zeroed in on for psychological cleansing and group thought. Will your child survive? Will our country survive?
It is up to us!

NOTES

Read Charlotte Iserbyt’s historical book, deliberate dumbing down of america and Soviets In the Classroom, which details the history documenting how our country has been taken over from within through massive education funding, treaties, and deception. She Identifies names and the who. This extremely important background information and her expertise will connect you to the ‘internationalization’ of education and inevitable global citizenship. Whatever name you want to call the control, socialism or communism, the agenda is people control, and the United States has been the prize.

http://www.newswithviews.com/guest_opinion/guest229.htm

Getting Inside the EQA Inventory, Pennsylvania Department of Education

Resources for Improvement, Citizenship, Pennsylvania Department of Education

Interrelationships to the Pennsylvania Quality Goals: http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED238146

http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/The_Degree_Qualifications_Profile.pdf

http://www.aacu.org/civic_learning/crucible/documents/crucible_508F.pdf

http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/A_stronger_nation.pdf

http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/road-map-call-to-action.pdf

NAEP Civics Frameworks: http://www.nagb.org/content/nagb/assets/documents/publications/frameworks/civicsframework-word.doc#_Toc234923502
Chapter Three: The Civics Assessment: Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions

Tuning USA Indiana Committee. (2010). Tuning USA Indiana final report. Indianapolis, IN: Author.

Tuning USA Minnesota Committee. (2010). Tuning USA Minnesota final report. St. Paul, MN: Author.

Tuning USA Utah Committee. (2010). Tuning USA Utah final report. Salt Lake City, UT: Author.

Common Core Global Communion Part I
Background On Testing Global Subjective Standards

Pennsylvania EQA, Educational Quality Assessment, the test that I filed my federal complaint against, was the model for the NAEP, National Assessment for Educational Progress. The NAEP Civic Frameworks of today continue to test the same dispositions as were developed in the EQA. Ditto that for the workforce standards. Ditto that for the new degree for Higher Education. Pennsylvania was the “affective” test for the nation that tested attitudes and values. Responsible Citizenship was not what normal Americans thought was being measured and taught. The government goal was to collect information on the individual and the family. But, how do you measure and score a standard like honesty or integrity in our free society? We must ask these questions to clarify when measuring workforce skills and values, what will the standard be… what will be taught? What is the cut-off for how much honesty, integrity, and responsibility that a student needs to graduate? Liberals as well as conservatives should be very concerned about the manipulation and psychoanalyzing that comes with vague and subjective standards. Here is why!

EQA and NAEP background questions were always asked in the beginning of the test to categorize your family: books in the home, education of parent, race, do you own a computer, college education of the parent, salary of father, salary of mother, do you like to study, all related to as conditions or variables. There were also over 300 questions on values, 30 in math, 30 in reading analogies.

Deception, betrayal, and using our children as guinea pigs was the only way the behavioral educrats could access our kids. The educrats got away with this subversive agenda for a long time by deceptively using words and phrases you would agree with. There were 10 Pennsylvania Quality Goals in 1965 that were taken from the 10 Cardinal Principles of the NEA from 1913. The goals were expanded to 12 in later years including: communication skills, mathematics, science and technology, citizenship, arts and humanities, analytical thinking, family living, work, health, environment, self-esteem, and understanding others. Every goal and stated objectives could be taken from Blooms Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Pennsylvania was the pilot in the affective domain for the world. Lets look at one of the goals, Citizenship.

Tempest in a Test: the Pennsylvania EQA, the model test for measuring attitudes and values for World Citizenship.

The top behavioral scientists of the world were in Pennsylvania in 1965 formulating the Pennsylvania EQA which was the model for the national test, NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress.)The Advisory Standing Committee included: Urie Bronfenbrenner, Cornell University; Warren Findley, University of Georgia; Joshua Fishman, Yeshiva University; Eric Gardner, Syracuse University; David Krathwohls, Michigan State University; Robert Thorndike, Colombia University; Melvin Tumin, Princeton; Ralph Tyler, Palo Alto, UCLA, along with ETS, Educational Testing Service. ESEA was the federal funding that secretly moved this agenda along.

Pennsylvania Goal:Citizenship. Quality education should help every child acquire the habits and attitudes associated with responsible citizenship.”

We can ALL agree to the idea in this goal, but, what you, as an American, thought was really being measured, was totally opposite. The information that follows about the testing is scientific and complicated, but important. Please bear with me while I try to explain what B F Skinner was all about and how the social engineers above, went about the task of measuring our children’s attitudes and values. I have the tests and the scoring materials. Lets dig in….but hold onto your hats.The following quote was taken from the Pennsylvania Resource manual, “Getting Inside the EQA Inventory,”

The National Assessment of Educational Progress developed 9 citizenship objectives. These national objectives were used to provide a frame of reference for what was to be measured. Objectives in the factual domain, knowing structure of government or understanding problems of international relations were not considered in developing the scale. Arriving at a satisfactory definition of citizenship was much less complicated than applying the definition to the assessment of students’ attitudes and behaviors. The display of responsible citizenship behaviors like honesty or integrity are most often situational. A person’s display of good citizenship under one set of motivating conditions tells us little about the way he or she can be expected to act if those conditions are altered. The context in which the behavior is elicited therefore becomes at least as important in determining the outcome as the preposition of the individual involved.”

“To assess citizenship, a behavior-referenced model incorporating elements related to the psychological notion of threshold is used. In reference to citizenship, threshold refers to that set of conditions necessary to bring about the desired responses. Thus by varying the situation & introducing conditions of reward & punishment, we are able to determine the cutoff levels at which the student will display positive behavior. In this way it is possible to assess not only the students’ predisposition to behave in a manner consistent with responsible citizenship but also to provide some measure of intensity of that predisposition across a wide spectrum of situations.”>br/>

Betrayal and Deception. Let me remind you that positive behavior was the government desired responses, not what you as a citizen might think. Thresholds were being tested by reward and punishment. This is BF Skinner to the MAX. This was the only way the federal government could do its research on unassuming children at our neighborhood schools. EQA was really the national test. Parents were uninformed. Teachers were uninformed. The federal Department of Education has been testing attitudes and values of your children for years and monitoring behavior change.
Let’s define predisposition: Noun: A liability or tendency to suffer from a particular condition, hold a particular attitude, or act in a particular way. Synonyms: inclination, tendency, propensity, proclivity

The test questions were hypothetical situations or ‘social situations’ in which the students were asked to decide what they would do or what action they would take. Each story had 3 items which listed positive or negative consequences resulting from the action. There were 3 sub-scale objectives which were used to SCORE the behaviors to a minimum positive desired response according to the government;

The Science of Scoring Attitudes and Values Toward Collectivism: What Was the Government Looking For: Read The Question Carefully. Look at the Sub-Scales.>br/>

NAEP Sub-Scales
(1)willingness to protest unfair treatment, tendency to accept new members into a group, degree of restraint from teasing or degrading others and concern for others feelings
(2) willingness to report law breaking of others, obey authorities during emergencies, prevent
classroom disruptions, restraint from violence to harm others or damage property
(3) personal responsibility and integrity, willingness to honor self made commitments to individuals or groups, willingness to take responsibility for one’s own mistakes, report mistakes made in one’s favor.

Citizenship Question On the Test

20130903-225446.jpg

20130903-225830.jpg

Situations were used for the student to respond to. The answers were “yes, maybe, no.” One story is about Midnight Artists that go out late at night and vandalize. The student is placed in a vandalizing situation and made to roll play in the first person, and asked if they personally would join the club to vandalize.

The first question is, ” in this situation I would join the club when I knew,” ‘my best friend had asked me to join’. Scoring to sub-scale #3, what is your willingness to honor self-made commitments to individuals or groups; you got 1 point for yes, (I would join the club if my best friend would join,) 0 points for no. If the student said ” No” I would not go out to vandalize with their best friend, that is a weakness, that student got a zero because there was not a willingness to commit to a best friend. Thresholds measure at what point your child will act. The sub-scale was looking for your loyalty to your best friend. So the government desired answer was “Yes” you would go out to vandalize if your best friend was going to do it. Everything was geared to group goals and group action.

The 2nd question is the same sub-scale, I would join the club when…’most of the popular students in school joined the club’, both positive reinforcements. What is your commitment to the group: 1 point for yes, 0 for no.

The 3rd question is interesting using a negative reinforcement. I would join the club when…’my parents would ground me if they found out I joined’. In this response, Skinner would want to know if punishment is incurred, will the student obey. The correct response is ‘no’. You got 1 point for no, 0 for yes. In this question, the government was looking for obedience to authority. The idea of collecting this particular information from this question on the student, explains what personality tendency the student has and will the student respond to punishment. The idea is to get information on the disposition of the student in differing situations, obedience….What would you do if? (Re-read the NAEP objectives on dispositions. You will begin to understand. The government is looking for information. )

So, you see, if your school had enough students that portrayed ‘weaknesses,’ ( that they wouldn’t go out to vandalize with a friend or a group of friends,) that was a target for specific curriculum to begin behavior change. Noble sounding goals would be used to hoodwink the parents while a sinister deceptive test was being used to develop an analysis that measured attitudes and behavior to find out how a person would act in certain situations. Citizenship was defined as measuring compliance to group goals & group action. The Skinnerian agenda measured the personality of the child according to a minimum positive attitude according to what the government standard was, which was scored toward collectivism, group think. They are measuring what you, as parents, have taught your children. Remember, this was only one goal. There were 11 others goals that tested the psychological profiles of your family and your child. (Remember, this was the test my son came home and said the test was weird. This is where my journey began fighting Outcome Based Education.)

20130903-230621.jpg

20130903-230846.jpg

When a controversial activity shows up in your school, it is not by accident. Or, oh gee, we’re sorry, that wasn’t OK’d by the school board. Your school was pinpointed by research to receive curriculum to change the students in your school by the government scored tests for interventions and school improvement. Unfortunately, parents are usually upset about certain books being used or a specific activity. These controversial activities count. Little do the parents know that it’s more, a complete transformation of education. What I’m describing is the total ball of wax.

Common Core Global Communion:
The Debate About Which Flavor of Poison For the Masses

Our nation is being hypnotized and manipulated by skillful propagandists. Most debates about Common Core are very off-track. Stay focused. This is a power-play. The Common Core Standards aligned to funding in federal legislation, HR 5 and
SB 1094, will ultimately have total control of education, nationalizing education in the United States of America. Common Core will be used to TRACK individual students to meet individual standards. By stopping the Common Core Standards in your state, the federal government will not have the legal authority to access your child for tracking individual workforce plans and funding attached to your student.

Choice legislation is waiting in the wings. Charter schools are lining up at the federal trough for Title I funding that will follow the child in the choice legislation. By stopping HR 5 and SB 1094, we can stop the funding that follows the student linked to choice at any private, public or charter school. This legislation will diminish representative government and feed the charter school socialist take-over of education. Common Core was needed first to identify the student.

This is Obama’s Dream Come True: public funded- private charter schools with unelected school boards. This is a complete erosion of representative government; Control of K through 12 education; Obama expanding federal money for daycare starting at birth; the international connection, the Bologna Model, calling colleges in the United States to be “tuned” into this agenda of global convergence. Socialism is knocking on our front door and on all sides. We must act, now.

Overview of Propaganda.
The educrats want the debate to be off track away from the power that will be able to mandate to the individual student, just like the individual mandate in Obamacare. Do not agree to this power-play. The debate about which academics in the Common Core should be taught, is a side issue. It’s like debating which flavor of poison should be given to everyone, when poison is the issue. The word is CONTROL. The national standards, the national curriculum, and national testing, are being put in place. Your child is called human capital that will be molded to fit the global child for the new world order. True academics are being replaced by dumbed down, subjective standards.

Choice and Charter School Take-Over of All Education

Obama’s ‘Race to the Top’ model schools call for individual education or career plans (school to work) to be created for the Common Core based system. Did you get that parents? Common Core Standards will target your individual student for change, not just the school curriculum. Good teachers will be forced to teach to the standards. HR 5 and SB 1094 will complete the vicious circle by controlling the purse strings.

Common Core College and Career Standards were needed to identify Johnny in the classroom. Place Johnny in the choice legislation, the model for abolishing representative government (where students, teachers, and schools must comply to federal accountability when the federal money follows the child in an IEP, individualized education plans or career pathway), we have set up the failure of public and private schools and opened the door for unelected charter school take-over. Government will now have COMPLETE control over molding the personality and values of every child in the United States and parents will have no authority to change the system. Chilling. Not a future for our Republic as we know it.

ACTION- These are the Weaknesses in the System
Access

The Common Core Standards are not federal law. This is the weakest link. Stop Common Core in your state and the federal government will not have the legal authority to access your child for tracking an IEP, or an individual career workforce plan and funding, identified for your child.

Funding
By stopping the combination of HR 5 and SB 1094, the federal government cannot fund the individual student without Common Core which is linked to choice at any private, public or charter school. This legislation will diminish representative government and feed the charter school socialist take-over of education.

States Rights– Title I funding ‘following the child” bypasses the state legislature.
Local Control– Common Core Standards control the workforce curriculum bypassing local school boards and teachers in the classroom. Choice diminishes control over local taxing authority when funding goes directly to the student.

(See these other articles for documentation, ‘Obama’s Dream Come True-Nationalizing Education,’ ‘States Under Republican Leadership Fall for Obama’s Carrot,’ ‘Common Core Molds Cookie Cutter Kids In Obama’s “Race To The Top” Schools’ by this author)

20130730-223110.jpg

Womb to Tomb

Womb to Tomb-The New Managed Economy

ANITA HOGE DOCUMENTS…
THE SCHOOL OF TOMORROW
“Womb to Tomb”
A New Managed Economy written in 1995.
A “PRESCRIPTION FOR AMERICA”
LINKING EDUCATION AND NATIONAL HEALTH CARE REFORM TO THE NEW WORKFORCE OF THE FUTURE .

A Question and Answer Format / Presenting Documents as Evidence
• Gives new definition for family
• Highlights how government will use the schools to create human capital
• Focuses on why OBE was needed to identify individuals for tracking purposes
*Exposes the use of technology to monitor, track, and remediate children toward political
correctness
*Focuses on the electronic portfolio which will include entire medical histories as well as psychological dossiers
*Relates the “players” in the telecommunications business merging data between education, hospitals, employers, and emergency management systems
*Presents the link to National Health Care reform-medicaid for all not meeting OBE outcomes
*Aligns cradle to grave plans in community based health care centers that used to be neighborhood schools