Reporting on Current Obama Education Policies

Anita Hoge Interview with Charlotte Iserbyt About Common Core Standards and Total Quality Management

Click Here For Entire Interview

Obama unlocks data, FERPA is unleashed, and opens Pandoras Box of privacy invasion, psychological manipulation, giving data for free to organizations to make a profit, and falsely using children in research unknowingly to parents, school boards, & legislators. The ” learning genome,” which means testing and teaching the whole child, is not just about academics

This is top news yesterday out of New York: Experts, Parents, Lawmakers Blast Database Providing Personal Student Information To Vendors March 14, 2013 1:45
NEW YORK (CBSNewYork/AP) –” A new national database that compiles personal student information for educational companies that contract with public schools is being blasted by privacy experts:
.
“In turn, inBloom reportedly plans to put this private information on a data cloud and share it with for-profit vendors. The information will include personally identifiable information, including student names, test scores, grades, home addresses, email addresses, linked to grades, test scores, disciplinary and arrest records, special education status, race, economic status and health conditions, according to Class Size Matters, a non-profit organization that advocates for class size reduction in NYC’s public schools.”
This is only the beginning.

Obama “unlocks” data by issuing FERPA’s new regulations that were promulgated without congressional authority, now allowing written agreements with outside vendors to access personal data from the US Department of Education so that a plan can be developed. Each child will be evaluated as to their learning style and personality, strengths and weaknesses, not for the child to do the best of their ability, but do their best to meet government standards. This is for EACH and every child….no child left behind has new meaning. No child will escape the threat of big brother forced on them through computer compliance programming. In January, 2012, in an Office of Science and Technology Assessment meeting, Obama names private corporate businesses that he has contracted with to make this government agenda become a reality. These corporations and businesses are developing systems, assessments, software, and curriculum that will be sold back to the schools and states when in effect, they get the data for free. Some of those corporations are ETS, Pearson & Microsoft to name a few. (I have requested a FOIA request for all written agreements that FERPA has entered into, to specifically attain a list of all organizations, foundations, and businesses that are receiving PII for free to do research, testing, & curriculum development. I have not received a reply as of today.)

This next graph at the end of this page explains how the system will work. Its not about academics, its about control. The Next Generation indicators and diagnostics are: equity based, higher order/deeper learning, authentic affective engagement, leading to narrow accountability and system redesign. The indicators and diagnostics are important toward creating a profile that will force human capital to mold to a prescribed agenda. What is higher order and deep thinking? Most higher order questions on a test will measure ” beyond text”. Beyond text means you cannot get the answer from information provided in the story. You have to give your opinion or value judgment. Affective testing is measuring attitudes and values. This is critical thinking which sounds good to the parents or legislators. These value questions are scored to a criterion or standard set by the state. Higher order and deeper thinking & learning will be psychological intervention toward prescribed government attitudes and beliefs. Authentic affective engagement will be the psychological techniques used & needed to force the student to change their attitudes and behavior toward workforce objectives. This is the re-design of your neighborhood school.

The Next Generation School agenda will use personally identifiable information, PII, to create this ” learning genome” or the IEP for the individual child. Data has been UNLOCKED by Obama, so that, any foundation, business, corporation, non-profit, etc, can access data for free from personal micro-records collected by the government through testing and record keeping, to align software and curriculum for children to meet these government Common Core Standards. A customized, individual education plan, or IEP will be developed for every child & technology will help the system accomplish their goals.

Families will be drawn into this agenda by stroking them into believing this IEP is for the good of their child. They will use words like learning styles, citizenship, character, career paths, civic learning and engagement. Here is the point, these attributes sound good, but they cannot be tested and scored in a pluralistic society. Do you want your child to be taught to the best of their abilities, or do you want them to be stymied toward only attaining government standards? One is a ceiling, the other is a floor. Remember the design down approach. You will design down from a ceiling, the only content that will be taught are Common Core Standards: you design up from the floor where the sky is the limit. The United States never had a ceiling on knowledge & we can confirm & document that there is a “Deliberate Dumbing Down of America” (author, Charlotte Iserbyt). We are talking about functional literacy, but with the right attitudes & values.

Ask yourself this question? How do you measure character, or honesty, and integrity? What is measured in Citizenship? How will these standards be scored? The answer is psychological testing and probing, writing about argumentation and challenging the students point of view or fixed beliefs. The National Assessment of Educational Progress, NAEP, researched the testing of attitudes & values in Pennsylvania. Documents show that the Department of Education said it depended on the sophistication of your school district as whether you told parents about the testing. Citizenship tested thresholds, self esteem tested locus of control. They came under the umbrella of Quality Goals of Education, all scored to a minimum positive attitude according to reward and punishment, all according to the government group goals & group efforts…collectivism. Pennsylvania had to withdraw this controversial test. Is it appearing again in computerized IEP’s?

Notice that the assessments, which are most important to collecting data on the individual, are linked to a new kind of credentialing. This new diploma will determine who is college bound or career bound in workforce training. The 20-80 percent agenda applies, those selected for college, those selected for workforce training. The agenda for teaching careers, starting in Kindergarten, or before in pre-school, will direct the child’s learning path. ACT reported this past summer that testing will begin in Kindergarten to test the whole child to direct them toward a career. Work Keys, also an ACT credentialing program for the workforce also tests students in the affective domain, the testing of attitudes. These workforce standards were all spelled out in SCANS, Secretaries Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills from the Department of Labor. School to Work accomplishes the goal through direct intervention and guidance toward a new caste system of work that is being designed for Americans. At the State of the Union address the President also talked about a Race to the Top for high schools: “The President will call on Congress to consider value, affordability, and student outcomes in making determinations about which colleges and universities receive access to federal student aid, either by incorporating measures of value and affordability into the existing accreditation system; or by establishing a new, alternative system of accreditation that would provide pathways for higher education models and colleges to receive federal student aid based on performance and results.” A Degree Qualification Profile is also being developed for college students by the Lumina Foundation documented in The Crucible Moment, Civic Learning & Engagement for global citizenship. Same standards, same objectives, testing college students in the affective domain, no one escapes having the ‘right attitudes.

Teacher training must also change to the new agenda. Differentiated roles, new career pathways, modular use of people & resources, redefined preparation, selection, licensing, & development.

In summary, this is a synopsis of current developments with questions that should be answered.

Data is ” unlocked” by President Obama. He awards specific private partnerships to develop systems, technology, software, and curriculum toward individual students meeting common core standards. These partnerships have been experimenting in Race to the Top school districts.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/ed_data_commitments_1-19-12.pdf

FERPA is expanded January, 2012, without Congressional oversight. New regulations permits any organization, business, non profit, foundation, etc to be a “school official” that can access individual records of individual students for research. This expansion will include the private partnerships who will gain to make huge profits alluded to in unlocking the data.

The individualized packages become ” learning genomes” that test & teach to the whole child. The whole child includes a psychological component of attitudes, emotions, values, and beliefs. What values will be taught? Who controls the standards? Can a computerized model teach attitudes and values? Will social justice and economic democracy be taught? Will the subject matter have a conservative or liberal bent? Who decides what the standards will be?

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 & are very expensive. Who are the contractors? Are these businesses just vendors out to make a profit?

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 its business interests. Is this a violation of the federal tax code? How many other non-profit organizations are using this data for profit?

Once data was unlocked by Obama, FERPA was relaxed, the issue of longitudinal data collection that follows an individual from birth to career has a huge new privacy concern. 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. FERPA rescinds the Hanson Memorandum which open the flood gates of data flowing to outside contractors now called school officials. The issue becomes, who has direct access?

The new direction in education is that the money funded through Title I will ” follow the child”. This in effect will have curriculum & software that would directly “affect” the individual child in a customized, or personalized education plan to meet government standards. In other words, particular organizations will have direct access to each students’ profile to test and prepare instructional programs toward government goals on the computer. Nothing will come between the child and the computer.
Is the datum on individuals, which will assuredly be used for the personalized education modules in the new ESEA Title I regulations & new 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”, are there not federal protections?

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. Is the DOE taking chances that security will not be breached on data that is so personal and private? Is it legal to allow outside contractors access to children’s records? Is this safe? Where are the federal protections for children?

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” ? This is a quote directly from the testing contractor, “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.” Are these tests legally allowed to use psychological tests without informed parental consent? Is this a revisiting from the old EQA/NAEP from Pennsylvania?

Demand an investigation into the illegal dissemination of personally identifiable information from the Department of Education regarding these possible violations of privacy. Carbon copy everyone. Newspapers, privacy organizations, everyone.

These questions MUST be answered by your Congressman & Senator once they understand the violations of privacy, freedom, and other violations of law. Investigate FERPA. Stop Choice and the ESEA Title I stipends for individual students with federal strings attached. Stop psychological testing without informed written consent. Stop unConsitutional Charter Schools. Dismantle the Department of Education.

20130730-153348.jpg
Notes

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

For information about testing attitudes & values, see “Getting Inside the EQA Inventory,” Pennsylvania Department of Education.

Stupski workshop presentation: Stupski PowerPoint Presentation

OECD Workshop

Forbes Article-beyond academic testing.

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/college_bound/2012/07/act_plans_to_roll_out_career_and_college_readiness_tests_for_3rd-10th_grades.html

New York selling student information

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

20130801-085204.jpg
Cookie Cutter Common Core Kids

20130801-085456.jpg
West Virginia Values Standards