Reporting on Current Obama Education Policies

Demand an Investigation into FERPA and the Illegal Access to Your Child’s Personally Identifiable Information

Why your support is needed and why I’m asking for your action today.

We must immediately request a federal investigation into the amended regulations of FERPA, Family Education Rights in Privacy Act.

Education has been used to set up data trafficking of personally identifiable information in the United States. Our rights are being trampled on. Your children and grandchildren will be at an incredible risk in the future as federal legislation is being prepared that changes how we teach our children. These are the changes: There will be no more grades like A,B,C,D or F; Curriculum will not be based on academics; Dispositions and values will be tested and remediated; Competition will be eliminated; Grade levels will be eliminated; The school year will no longer be based on 180 days; Your locally elected school board will become obsolete.

Your child must meet government standards which includes changing your child toward socialistic values. Data is given to large foundations and corporations for free so they can develop testing, curriculum, and software to change your child toward government approved attitudes and values which is a violation of your individual freedom.

Most people, including our legislators, do not know that FERPA, Family Education Rights in Privacy Act, has changed. Your family privacy is NOT protected. Your child’s personally identifiable information is being given out for FREE to large corporations to research how to “change your child into global citizens.”

Our plan is to open a privacy investigation and expose the release of this personal information to foundations, organizations, non-profits, and businesses that will profit from your children’s data. The amended FERPA regulations were issued without Congressional oversight. Obama has issued an Executive Order to change how the government and what the government collects on families. This would be a huge shakeup in the Department of Education IF we can have hundreds, thousands of people make requests to initiate an investigation into the expanded FERPA regulations that exceeded their statutory authority and are contrary to law. We could STOP the illegal rampant research on individual children in proposed legislation of the reauthorization of federal legislation, ESEA, Title I, and Special Education funds, IDEA, that will be used to fund remediation of your child’s attitudes, values, and dispositions. Your action could put a huge wrench in the cogs of our unruly Department of Education.

Please help. Your urgent action is needed. There are 2 steps. Step 1 is a letter to your Congressman and Senator for a federal investigation. Step 2 is a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request through your Congressman and Senator for contracts and agreements that will expose who has access to your child’s personally identifiable information unknown to you or our legislators. Questions are added at the end of this article that must be answered.
Please contact ALL of your legislators TODAY!

STEP 1

Dear Honorable_________

I am requesting a federal investigation into the Family Education Rights in Privacy Act, (FERPA) amended regulations that went into effect January, 2012. It is my understanding that there was no Congressional authorization to expand the FERPA regulations. It is also my understanding that there are certain sections of these FERPA regulations that ALLOW for redisclosed personally identifiable information to be released because of a new definition for “school officials.” The new definition now allows outside vendors, contractors, non-profits, corporations, and businesses to access our children’s personally identifiable information without informed written parental permission and they may also receive it without any monetary expenditure.

Redisclosure is also allowed to organizations conducting studies for, or on behalf of, educational agencies or institutions to develop, validate, or administer predictive tests and/or to improve instruction.

The extraordinary circumstances of this redisclosure of private information with the “unlocking” of this data will ultimately benefit these corporations and businesses when the information used to research and develop assessments, curriculum, digital software, and teacher training is sold back to our states and local districts. This is appalling. The invasion of privacy of our children and our families is without recourse. This must be stopped.

The trafficking of this information is an invasion of privacy and is unknown to most parents and legislators. But more important, this data is being proposed to be used to develop personalized software career modules and assessments for measuring specific behavioral changes on individual students proposed in the Common Core College and Career Ready Standards that recently included the measurement of values and dispositions. This invasion of privacy becomes an invasion of freedom. Collecting the information is one breach of law. But, the development of techniques and software to change my individual child’s attitudes, values, and beliefs is a breach of monumental concern in these United States and violates personal freedom.

I have attached a list of documents that must be requested under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), so that you may validate who the vendors, non-profits, and businesses are that currently have access to our children’s personally identifiable information in written agreements with the U.S. Department of Education and states involved in testing consortiums.

I will anxiously await your reply to these serious concerns and request that a federal investigation into FERPA is done immediately. Please take steps to ensure that our children are protected. All data transfer must be frozen until the investigation is closed.
I look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,
Your Name

STEP 2

Request a Freedom of Information Act, (FOIA) from your US Congressman and Senator for the names of all foundations, contractors, organizations, non-profits, businesses, etc, who have access to and use Personally Identifiable Information, PII. The FOIA list is as follows:

Freedom of Information Act Requests

RE: Redisclosure of Personally Identifiable Information on Students According to 99.31 of the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act, FERPA (Unknown to Parents and Legislators)

Request the Cooperative Agreements, Memorandums of Understanding, and/or any Written Agreements to be able to access PII, personally identifiable information, between the US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, or Office of Science and Technology and the following:

Partnership for Assessment of Readiness of College and Careers, PARCC, and
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium

Florida acting as the fiscal agent for each of the states in the PARCC consortium and Achieve, Inc as project management partner

Washington state acting as the negotiating partner for each state in the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and WestEd, the project management partner

States using the American College Testing, ACT (Aspire, Explore, or Plan,) and/or Pearson, Inc. to measure Common Core Standards

Contractors who have been given redisclosed PII on students to develop curriculum, computer adaptive digital software, and/or any testing development. These “school officials” may be identified as private sector contractors, consultants, volunteers, or other parties to whom an agency or institution has outsourced services or functions, including, non-profit organizations, corporations, or businesses to do experimental research, develop curriculum and/ or computer adaptive resources for individual students. These contractors may include Microsoft, Pearson, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Educational Testing Service, ACT and The Center for Disease Control.

Request the purchase agreement and amount for each written agreement between any “school official” and the US Department of Education, PARCC, and/or Smarter Balanced Assessment, for the purchase of obtained redisclosed data on personally identifiable information, PII, on individual students to develop curricula or computer digital programming or experimental testing materials.

Request any Requests for Proposal, RFP, or Written Agreements between any private sector working group, defined as a “school official” in FERPA, 99.31, including PARCC, Smarter Balanced Assessment, Wested, or Achieve, ACT or ETS, who are developing and expanding Common Core Standards to new individualized criteria to ” improve instruction”, called, CCCR, College Career Citizenship Readiness, in which Citizenship measures dispositions and attitudes.

Request any memorandums of understanding or cooperative agreements to test and measure disposition test items that are ” difficult to measure” according to Race to the Top grants that may infringe on personal privacy rights and violate federal law for redisclosing psychological information without informed written parental consent.

Research using data on individuals as identifiers for interventions for changing dispositions or “improving instruction,” without the informed written consent of the parent violating privacy laws, personal liberty, and illegal access to mental health criteria.

Request sample test items or test blueprints with scoring criteria that will measure dispositions, values, and non-cognitive areas in the new College Career Citizenship Ready Standards, CCCR, that are being introduced to the Common Core Standards by the CCSSO, ETS, and the Gordon Commission.

Questions that your Senator and Congressman must find answers to:

1. Do these contractors pay for the data on our children? Are they using the data to make a profit? Example, are contractors developing testing, software, or curriculum that must be paid for by the taxpayer when they get our children’s data for free? Most businesses PAY for lists of people and are very expensive.

2. Experts in tax law say that non-profit organizations like ACT, a testing contractor, the Pearson Foundation, as well as, their partnership with the Gates Foundation who are creating “a full series of digital instruction resources,” appear to be using their tax exempt foundations to push their business interests. Is this a violation of the federal tax code? How many other non-profit organizations are using this data for profit?

“The program ACT is rolling out, in partnership with leading global education company Pearson, also emphasizes improving the way educators use data from assessments in teaching. Erickson says many teachers now administer tests and evaluations without knowing how to interpret and use the results to students’ benefits.”
Source:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/alisongriswold/2012/07/24/college-and-career-prep-to-start-in-the-third-grade/

3. Is the datum on individuals, which will assuredly be used for the personalized education modules in the new proposed ESEA (Title I) regulations and new special education (IDEA) regulations being proposed, paid for as Intellectual Property to that individual, since a profit will be made on their information that is collected without their consent or the consent of the parent? Is your child a commodity for their personal data to be sold without your permission and without reasonable compensation? These proposed regulations will have federal dollars ” follow the child”.

4. Data trafficking between the Department of Education and other outside contractors may contribute to violations of Cyber Security Laws when redisclosure of personally identifiable data is shared and does NOT request informed written parental permission of uses.

5. It’s NOT about academics. What type of data is being collected by the testing contractors? ACT, a testing contractor, states that it is testing the “whole child”. Is psychological information being collected to produce curriculum for ” behavior change” ? The CCSSO has added dispositions to the Common Core Standards. Is it illegal to transfer “mental health” information without the informed written permission of the parent?

“The assessment would look beyond academics to get a complete picture of the whole student,” stated Jon Erickson of ACT. “There would be interest inventories for students, as well as assessment of behavioral skills for students and teachers to evaluate.”
Source:
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/college_bound/2012/07
act_plans_to_roll_out_career_and_college_readiness_tests_for_3rd-10th_grades.html
Source
http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/ILN%20Knowledge%20Skills%20and%20Dispositions%20CCR%20Framework%20February%202013.pdf

6. Freeze all data transfer. Demand an investigation into the FERPA illegal dissemination of personally identifiable information from the Department of Education regarding these possible violations of privacy. Carbon copy everyone. Legislators, newspapers, privacy organizations, internet outlets.

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.

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.

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?

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
(albertellis.org/kristene-doyle-phd/ 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.

NOTES

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

Dossiers on Americans
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324478304578171623040640006.html
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/12/gov-dossiers-on-us-citizens/?cid=4939864

http://rt.com/usa/school-scan-iris-students-023/

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18319

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/04/02/obama-calls-on-congress-to-spend-100m-next-year-to-map-brain

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2253797/DNA-Sandy-Hook-killer-Adam-Lanza-examined-evil-gene-study-kind-conducted-mass-murderer.html?ito=feeds

http://fora.tv/2010/03/09 Hardwired_for_Life, Kristene Doyle: Can’t Control Genes, But Can Control Behavior