Common Core Education And More About Federal Government Control

[Ross]

Common Core
Standardized Tests erase educational value;
PA Parents can opt out

Evidence of teachers teaching to the test
April 14, 2014
by Allan Spurr

Common Core – what is it and just how much educational instruction time is being lost to the standardized tests used to measure student performance?

You might want to start reading up on it in addition to checking your child's homework bag. I had heard about the move to Common Core-aligned standards here and there, including some of the theories that it was a plot to nationalize K-12 education and brainwash our children, or that it was nothing more than a grass roots effort to develop a set of standards that all schools should strive for.

Well, as usual, the truth is somewhere in between but, as they say, the devil is in the details. The mission statement from the Common Core website sounds reasonable: "The Common Core State Standards provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them."

Based on that description, how could it be anything but apple pie and cute puppies? The reality is that while the standards may be good, the standardized tests (Keystone and Pennsylvania System of School Assessment) and what common sense tells us would naturally follow, are the problem.

What do you think happens when teachers are told that a portion of their performance pay or how much funding a school gets, will be based on how their students perform on a standardized test? How could either resist the temptation or pressure not to do well by teaching to the test?

I performed a simple internal search of my school district and came up with more than 700 hits on PSSA alone. Just a quick glance was enough to demonstrate that teachers are indeed teaching to the test.

During the 2012-13 school year, when our middle son was a junior at Council Rock South High School, he was required to take and pass the Keystone Biology exam in order to satisfy new graduation requirements. He had taken honors Biology in 9th grade and passed, but as 2012 was the first year the statewide Biology test was given and since it had been two years, my wife was told at "Back to School Night" that they would take 20 minutes each week out of his AP Physics class to review biology material.

This continued all through the fall until the tests were administered in December of 2012. The testing lasted three days, so during the majority of the time when he didn't have a test he was in study hall receiving no instruction.

We heard from other parents that a number of the students planned to skip school when not taking a test since there were no homework assignments during the week of testing, and no new material was being covered. Our son had to sit in study hall for four hours waiting for the modified schedule to begin, for classes he would learn nothing new so as not to distract the kids from performing well on the exams.

This year we began seeing packets of material come home for our 6th grader that include practice tests and study guides, but in reality they are nothing but probable questions they will see on the PSSA. Each week I could look in her assignment book and find at least one entry to complete in preparation for the test.

"Complete page 17 questions." When I looked at previous pages, there is a small check mark from the teacher indicating that it was done, but there was no grade, as I would usually see on other homework assignments. She received no school credit, suggested class selection for next year or offers of assistance in areas of weakness.

The PSSA tests for 2014 were administered from the middle of March through the end of April with each grade tested for approximately a week. The testing does not last all day, but runs several hours each day. There were no homework assignments during the week of testing, which could only lead me to believe they were not receiving any new instruction and either did test prep-work or something non-value added.

What do students and parents receive from these high-stakes tests months after taking them? They will receive an evaluation summary and comparison to averages around the state long after the student has moved on, when the opportunity for remediation has been lost. Not that expediency would help since no one- not the teacher, school administrators, student or parent- will ever see which questions were missed.

Just a yard stick held up to show how your child measures up to others locally, statewide and perhaps nationally, rendering the results largely worthless, unless of course you were planning to move and wanted to base your decision on average test scores.

When you take this time and couple it with practice tests leading up to the exam, you really have to wonder what the benefit is to the child who; will not receive any academic credit for the test, is not promoted or given extra help in areas of deficiency, never receives the graded test to see where they made a mistake, whether minor oversight or complete misunderstanding of the question.

So where does all this testing get us and who benefits? The school district has an incentive to achieve certain academic goals or they may lose some funding. Teachers are being measured on how well their students perform and may have a portion of incentive pay added or subtracted. The big winner will be the companies and consultants that develop the tests and the piles of workbooks and study guides schools will inevitably purchase from them so that they can continue to get full state and federal funding.

What does your child get, besides perhaps bragging rights? Nothing, since any increase or decrease in funding or designation as a failing school will come only after they have moved on. They are merely laboratory mice used in a high stakes experiment, where the results are dubious at best when a school teaches to the test.

In Pennsylvania, parents have the right to have their children opt-out of the PSSA tests on religious grounds. You are not required to provide any further explanation or justification to anyone. In most cases, an email or written letter to the district superintendent or administrator and a copy to the school principal is all that is required.

This year we chose to have our 6th grade daughter excused from the exams, the process was simple and we were asked if we had a preference as to what she should be assigned during the test period, like reading, library or some other project.

The number of other parents choosing to opt-out this year was small, but hopefully as more and more parents become educated on the costs versus benefits of Common Core standardized tests, those numbers will grow and send a clear message to our legislators – don't mess with our children's education!

Allan Spurr

A Liberal Progressive and strict Constitutional Conservative. Actually, Classical liberal being committed to the ideal of limited government and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets. Progressive as it pertains to moving forward and understanding that the unintended consequences of public policy is usually worse than the problem it was intended to solve. In real life, just your average husband, father, engineer and computer geek.

http://watchdogwire.com/pennsylvania/2014/04/14/pa-common-core-standardized-tests-erase-educational-value/

[Ross]

DOESN'T THIS FALL UNDER CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE?
I BET SHE HAD TENURE AND THE UNION TO BACK HER, DON'T YOU?

Settlement reached
over Florida teacher's
'gross immorality'
with students

Teacher simulated orgasm, gave massages
April 15, 2014
by Dr. Richard Swier

Christine Jane Kirchner

Ms. Christine Jane Kirchner is a language arts teacher at Coral Reef Senior High School, Miami-Dade public schools. Ms. Kirchner in 2008 was appointed by the Miami-Dade School Board to the Lesson Plan Development Task Group. Kirchner was elected Vice President At-Large and sits on the Executive Board of the United Teachers of Dade (UTD).

So what's so special about Christine Jane Kirchner?

According to the April 4th Education Practices Commission of the State of Florida report:

    During the 2012-2013 school year, Respondent [Kirchner] discussed inappropriate topics, such as sex, virginity and masturbation, with her language arts class. The conversations made several students feel uncomfortable or embarrassed.
    During the 2012-2013 school year, during a lesson with her language arts class, Respondent [Kirchner] simulated having an orgasm. The simulation made several students feel uncomfortable or embarrassed.
    During the 2012-2013 school year, Respondent [Kirchner] gave massages to students of her language arts class. The massages made several students feel uncomfortable or embarrassed.

Kirchner was found guilty of "gross immorality or an act involving moral turpitude" and that she violated "the Principles of Professional Conduct for the Education Profession". Kirchner was found to have violated Florida State Statute 1012.795 (1)(d) and (1)(j), respectively.

What is the punishment given Kirchner?

The Florida Department of Education accepted a "Settlement Agreement". The settlement agreement consists of a letter of reprimand and placing Kirchner on two years probation. Kirchner accepted the Settlement Agreement.

Kirchner will return to her classroom at Coral Reef High School and retain her position on the Executive Board of the UTD.

Does the punishment fit the crime? We report, you decide.

Dr. Richard Swier

Dr. Rich Swier is Publisher of www.DrRichSwier e-Magazine. He holds a Doctorate of Education from the University of Southern California in Los Angeles, CA, a Master's Degree in Management Information Systems from the George Washington University, Washington, D.C., and a Bachelor's Degree in Fine Arts from Washington University, St. Louis, MO. Richard is a 23-year Army veteran who retired as a Lieutenant Colonel in 1990. He was awarded the Legion of Merit for his years of service.

http://watchdogwire.com/florida/2014/04/15/settlement-reached-over-florida-teachers-gross-immorality-with-students/

[Ross]

Care to buy
"A Pig In A Poke"
Sukka ?

Common Core Developers
Fail To Warranty Product

Although many would like Americans to believe that the Common Core standards were developed by states, were state led, and belong to the states, that is simply false. The standards belong solely to the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). The NGA and CCSSO license of the standards only "grants" a limited license of the Common Core Standards to the states that supposedly developed them. The NGA and CCSSO Common Core Public License can be seen in its entirety here: http://www.corestandards.org/public-license

The license agreement states that: "NGA/CCSSO shall be acknowledged as the sole owners and developers of the Common Core State Standards, and no claims to the contrary shall be made." So does Oregon own the standards? No. Does Wisconsin own the standards? No. Does Massachusetts own the standards? No. No state owns the standards.

The license agreement makes it clear that although the NGA and the CCSSO own the standards, they do not stand behind them or make any claim to their efficacy or effectiveness. In fact, they want nothing to do with accountability, outcomes, or any damage the standards may cause.

Reading the policy, one is reminded of the "Sold As-Is" sticker on the window of a used car. This part of the license is written by the NGA and CCSSO lawyers in all capital letters, presumably so states don't miss it and fail to understand the implications:

THE COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS ARE PROVIDED AS-IS AND WITH ALL FAULTS, AND NGA CENTER/CCSSO MAKE NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS, IMPLIED, STATUTORY OR OTHERWISE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, WARRANTIES OF TITLE, MERCHANTIBILITY [sic], FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NONINFRINGEMENT, ACCURACY, OR THE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF ERRORS, WHETHER OR NOT DISCOVERABLE.

The standards have no guarantee of "fitness for a particular purpose." The purpose of the standards is college- and career-readiness for K-12 students in all states where they were adopted. But the NGA and the CCSSO clearly do not warranty or guarantee their fitness, accuracy, or absence of errors.

If anything is found lacking in the standards, or if in fact our education system circles the drain in the coming years, the NGA and the CCSSO want nothing to do with any liability for the standards. Children, parents, teachers, school districts, and states are on their own. This section is presented in all capital letters, as well, lest anyone become confused and believe the developers can be held responsible in any way for what was developed:

UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES SHALL NGA CENTER OR CCSSO, INDIVIDUALLY OR JOINTLY, BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY LEGAL THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER FOR CONTRACT, TORT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR A COMBINATION THEREOF (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THE COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH RISK AND POTENTIAL DAMAGE. WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, LICENSEE WAIVES THE RIGHT TO SEEK LEGAL REDRESS AGAINST, AND RELEASES FROM ALL LIABILITY AND COVENANTS NOT TO SUE, NGA CENTER AND CCSSO.

Some are left wondering why there is such emphasis on not being held responsible for the results of something that is supposedly well-researched, benchmarked, and developed by experts. In fact, Common Core is not benchmarked or based on any scientific or education studies. It's simply based on what the NGA, CCSSO, and their agent, Achieve, Inc., wanted to produce. And they are not education "experts."

It seems that if the giant, national experiment that is Common Core fails, those opponents who are sending up warnings that this is a bad idea will have to be satisfied with saying, "We told you so."

It will come as no surprise to those who have studied Common Core to learn that should some entity be foolish enough to be undeterred by all the legal protections with which the developers have shielded themselves, a lawsuit could not be filed in any state where the "state-led" standards were supposedly developed. The NGA and the CCSSO are private lobbying organizations headquartered in Washington, D.C., and as such: "A court of competent jurisdiction in Washington, D.C. shall be the exclusive forum for the resolution of any disputes regarding this License, and consent to the personal and subject matter jurisdiction, and venue, of such court is irrevocably given."

The Common Core license agreement demonstrates a lack of confidence in the product. If it were a used car, no one would buy it.

http://www.eagleforum.org/publications/educate/mar14/common-core-developers-fail-to-warranty-product.html

[Diane Amberg]

Your post about the misbehaving teacher has nothing to do with Common Core, now does it? Or are we supposed to believe it's part of the standards and controlled by the Gov't . Tsk,tsk.    It's terrible, but has unfortunately gone back thousands of years. People in positions of trust should never take advantage of it, but a few do. That is no reason to stick labels on whole categories of people.

[Ross]

Your post about the misbehaving teacher has nothing to do with Common Core, now does it? Or are we supposed to believe it's part of the standards and controlled by the Gov't . Tsk,tsk.    It's terrible, but has unfortunately gone back thousands of years. People in positions of trust should never take advantage of it, but a few do. That is no reason to stick labels on whole categories of people.

Yes, Diane it has everything to do with Government Control.
Perhaps I should have left Federal out of the title of this thread,
but I just didn't foresee this level of control being out of control.
Local and State School Boards are Governing Bodies, which equals Government Control.
Our local School Board consists of Elected Officials.
Florida basically excused her behavior.
Which in my opinion is just wrong, thank you tenure.

Thank you Diane and Happy Easter to you,

[Ross]

Here is the proof that just because
you have money and may be considered
the elite
doesn't mean you are smart.
Are we to be so easily bought?
Are we to be someones whore just because they have money?
Are we to be their play toy?
We each need to evaluate ourselves, IMHO!

One Man's Money: Bill Gates,
Education, and Common Core

Bill Gates wrote in USA Today on February 12, 2014: "we're in the grip of mythology." He claims that the "myths" surrounding Common Core standards are "harmful, because they can lead people to fight against the best solutions to our biggest problems." Bill Gates is the chief funder — besides the federal government — and one of the most adamant proponents of Common Core standards. Questions to be asked are: "Best solutions according to whom?" and "Where is the proof?"

Bill & Melinda Gates FoundationGates's USA Today article glosses over controversial aspects of Common Core and gives simplistic responses to troubling parts of the standards. Common Core was developed at the behest of two private Washington, D.C. lobbying organizations, the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). Gates doesn't address concerns that Achieve, Inc., the group that the NGA and the CCSSO assigned to develop the standards, did not include educators or child development specialists; that development was done behind closed doors; that the standards adopted in most states of the nation were never piloted, anywhere, by anyone; and that the federal government requires personally identifiable student information from schools as an integral part of Common Core.

Life in a Wealthy, Progressive Family

Bill Gates is a successful man, if success is measured by computer genius and the ability to amass a fortune. But Gates is not an expert on and has no formal training in child development or education. Born William H. Gates III into a wealthy and prominent Seattle family, "Bill" attended an exclusive private school and enrolled at Harvard in the fall of 1973. He took a leave of absence during his junior year and never completed his college education.

Gates comes from a progressive, liberal family background. He told Bill Moyers in a 2003 interview:

When I was growing up, my parents were always involved in various volunteer things. My dad was head of Planned Parenthood. And it was very controversial to be involved with that. And so it's fascinating. At the dinner table my parents [were] very good at sharing the things that they were doing. And almost treating us like adults. . . .

Speaking about "philanthropic things," Gates told Moyers, "I have to say I got off the track when I started Microsoft." (PBS.org, 5-9-2003) Largely due to family influence, Gates got back on track with philanthropy once his fortune was established.

Why $2.3 Billion, Bill?

Experts commonly agree that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has granted over $2 billion to Common Core development and implementation. Recent research by Jack Hassard, Professor Emeritus at Georgia State University, indicates that the Gateses have to date spent $2.3 billion on Common Core. (TruthInAmericanEducation.com, 3-18-14) The Gates Foundation is the nation's richest charity. In 2011, the Wall Street Journal reported that in the previous ten years the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation had "poured some $5 billion into education grants and scholarships." (7-23-11)

Why did Bill Gates turn his attention to education? Why has he spent so much cash to force Common Core upon the nation? Questions and theories abound but answers do not. $2.3 billion is a large commitment and Gates is certainly not turning his back on Common Core now. He will continue to spend until his goals are achieved.

"Guided by the belief that every life has equal value, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation works to help all people lead healthy, productive lives," according to the foundation's website. They "take on some tough challenges: extreme poverty and poor health in developing countries, and the failures of America's education system." They admit, "Some of the projects we fund will fail. We not only accept that, we expect it. . . ." (GatesFoundation.org)

Some say Gates is "a promoter of global sameness of education as defined by UNESCO and the United Nations." (WhatIsCommonCore.wordpress.com, 3-28-13) Gates is certainly active within the United Nations and has expressed agreement with UN policies that many Americans oppose. Agenda 21 is a UN-sponsored action plan that promotes "sustainable development" and global governance at the expense of private properties, individual liberty, and national sovereignty. Some Common Core concepts align with Agenda 21's education goals.

Whether Bill Gates is a globalist aligned with United Nations Agenda 21, a liberal do-gooder, or something in between, most agree that one unelected philanthropist wielding so much power is not the American way.

Gates's First Education Failure

Gates has a poor education track record. Analysts say his first foray into influencing education was a failure. In 2003, the Gates Foundation decided that small high schools were the ticket. He funded programs to create and improve small and personalized high schools, each having around 400 students. The Gates Foundation gave "grants to more than 2,000 high schools — of which about 800 were existing schools attempting to create smaller schools within schools." (Seattle Times, 11-5-2006)

Gates himself admitted in his 2009 Annual Letter that the Small Schools Project was unsuccessful. Gates wrote, "Many of the small schools that we invested in did not improve students' achievement in any significant way." He said that while some schools had higher attendance and graduation rates than peer schools, "we are trying to raise college-ready graduation rates, and in most cases, we fell short." (GatesFoundation.org)

Melinda Gates told Business Week in 2006 that Small Schools Project "setbacks" didn't mean they had "squandered the $1 billion the foundation has spent so far." She continued, "If you want to equate being naïve with being inexperienced, then we were definitely naïve when we first started." (Business Week, 6-25-2006)

Education blogger Mercedes Schneider states:

[T]he extraordinary [eventual] $2 billion initiative — which created 2,600 new small schools in 45 states and the District of Columbia — has been ditched by Gates and his foundation. School districts across the nation were left disrupted, with some charging that Gates had abandoned the successful good schools he created and Gates citing statistics showing the project failed. Gates has now moved on to funding a completely different approach. . . .

Schneider continues, "Gates is a businessman. If one business venture is failing, move on to the next. So what if it hurts people?" (Deutsch29.wordpress.com, 3-15-13)

In the case of Common Core, Gates's possibly naïve, possibly devious experiment stands to harm an entire generation of schoolchildren.

Bill Gates Demands Common Core

Undaunted by his first false start, Gates has nonetheless undertaken the funding of a sweeping change in American education. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation now promotes an untested, top-down, national standards scheme with aligned testing that has children, parents, and teachers reeling from the fallout. Individual states and local school boards are not helpless to stop the juggernaut but little has actually been achieved. The grassroots movement to stop Common Core has gained traction but no state has effectively halted Common Core implementation. Indiana has pulled out of Common Core but drafts of the standards they are developing are, so far, about a 90% match to Common Core. Alaska, Nebraska, Texas, and Virginia are the only states that have never adopted Common Core standards.

One reason Common Core is difficult to slow down and examine is Gates Foundation money. Gates has handed out money to organizations, think tanks, and newspapers, providing organizations and the people behind them with enormous amounts of cash. This may have influenced opinions and tainted reports about Common Core standards. Ethics breaches may be occurring because of Gates Foundation dollars. Besides the $2.3 billion in direct Gates cash, many businesses and other entities are making unprecedented amounts of money from Common Core implementation.

Common Core is a perfect example of a few people making something happen, many more just going along with what happened, and the rest left wondering what just happened. The Obama administration, Bill Gates, and a small circle of others circumvented the voting public and pushed Common Core into schools.

Gates has control of the opinion machine; he's given grants to hundreds of education "reform" groups who now support Common Core. The Gates Foundation is a primary funder of Education Week, which calls itself "American Education's Newspaper of Record." Articles tend to paint opponents of Common Core as Tea Party fanatics. In each edition, the newspaper features ads for Common Core-related companies and curriculum; many of them are glossy full-page color ads that garner hefty revenue for the publication.

Even the PTA has been subverted by Gates's money. The National Parent Teacher Association failed to take a stand for students and parents. Gates Foundation dollars have flowed to the PTA for years; they received $2 million in 2009 and in 2013 they received almost $500,000 "to educate parents and communities on the Common Core Standards and empower leaders to create the changes needed in their school systems." In other words, to persuade parents to accept Common Core.

http://www.eagleforum.org/publications/educate/apr14/one-mans-money-bill-gates-education-and-common-core.html

[Ross]

This sounds a bit like Common Core with it's biases and prejudices, to me.
What has education become?
Does anyone know the truth about anything these days?
Sounds to me like the neutering of the male species by college acceptance.
Actually this explains a lot of what I see these days.

What College Tuition Is Paying For?
Confronting Campus Radicals

David Horowitz thinks that anybody who cares about the future of America should confront the fact that U.S. colleges and universities are the fountainhead of financing for the radical movement in America. He has personally taken up the challenge to do something about this.

Horowitz was a leftwing campus activist in the 1960s, but he says that men who were too radical even for him in the 60s now hold tenure at major universities. During the 1970s, these hardcore leftists achieved critical mass on university faculties, took control of the hiring committees, and then saw to it that only leftists were hired. Now there are literally tens of thousands of "hard-line Marxists" in academic sinecures. They have made universities "a subsidiary of the political left and the Democratic Party."

These hard-core leftists have no shame about using the classroom podium for political speechmaking. They may be teaching a course in biology or Shakespeare, but that doesn't inhibit them from launching into tirades against American policies or in favor of the Communists, or assigning students to write a paper on why George W. Bush is a war criminal.

The amount of money universities have to carry out their leftwing mission is mind-boggling. Whereas conservative and pro-American intellectual foundations and journals may have budgets of a few million dollars, universities have billions of dollars. A great portion is taxpayers' money (through research grants and taxpayer-financed tuition), and in addition the leftists control most student activity assessments.

Horowitz's new organization, Students for Academic Freedom, has attracted students on many campuses with the goal of demanding a more balanced point of view among faculty and in campus lecture series. They are promoting an Academic Bill of Rights as a policy statement for colleges to adopt, so that students can enjoy intellectual diversity with fairness for conservative viewpoints.
Feminist Propaganda in Textbooks

A woman walked into my office recently and handed me the textbook her daughter was assigned for her "Women and Gender Studies" Course at the University of Missouri/St. Louis. The title is Women's Voices, Feminist Visions by Susan M. Shaw and Janet Lee. This textbook is a collection of propaganda essays to sell students on radical feminism.

One article pretends to describe a typical woman's life in the 1970s, which supposedly included unacceptable horrors of inequality. The student is supposed to learn that feminism saved women from oppression by the patriarchy. Other articles teach that being male is a privileged status, just like being white or heterosexual.

The authors teach that the roles of male and female are merely learned behaviors and you can change to the other gender if you want to. Bisexuality and trans-sexuality are presented as normal. The textbook includes personal stories of adults who changed their gender. The book explains that heterosexuality exists only because of socially imposed stereotypes and homophobia, and has nothing to do with nature or morality. Students are encouraged to organize a National Coming Out Day on their campus.

A couple of articles in this textbook discuss that it is common for women to be bisexual. Of course, the book endorses abortion. The traditional model of the family is presented as only one of many forms of family. The book teaches that married women should be liberated from marriage and turn their children over to the state to be raised. This college textbook has a radical feminist political agenda: anti-marriage, anti-homemaker, pro-abortion, and pro-lesbian. College students should not waste their tuition dollars taking women's studies courses.
Definition of 'Politically Correct'

The prevailing environment on most college campuses is what is called Political Correctness — in faculty bias, course content, visiting speakers, and organizations and events funded by student fees. Here are the principal tenets of the campus dogma known as Political Correctness:

    Everything is political. All academic subjects must be seen through the prism of gender and race oppression, including history, literature, social relationships, and even private conversation. Most students encounter this immediately in their freshman English class. The writings of the DWEMs (Dead White European Males) have been censored out and replaced with Oppression Studies: writings by third-rate authors who whine about America's oppressive society.

    Victimology. Every group is entitled to claim minority status as victims except white males and Christians.

    Multiculturalism. That's a code word for the false notion that Western Civilization is bad and every other group, whether civilized or not, is superior.

    Radical feminism. The entire world must be seen as one big conspiracy against women, and all men are guilty, both individually and as a group. Joking about this doctrine is not permitted; several colleges have even banned jokes. At Arizona State University, drama professor Jared Sakren was fired for producing Shakespeare's Taming of the Shrew; Shakespeare is not Politically Correct.

    Affirmative action. Reverse discrimination in admissions, grading, and employment for groups that proclaim their status as "victims" is not only mandatory, it is non-debatable.

    Having sex with anybody, anytime, is OK and may not be criticized. Dating is out; "hooking up" is in. The social acceptance of pre-marital and homosexual sex and activism is non-debatable.

    Tolerance. That's a code word meaning tolerance for Politically Correct views, but not for the Politically Incorrect. Tolerance requires conformity to P.C. views, and hundreds of colleges have speech codes.

    Christianity is Politically Incorrect. In some colleges, students are not permitted to turn in papers that identify historic dates as B.C. (Before Christ) or A.D. (Anno Domini), but must use B.C.E. (Before the Common Era) and C.E. (Common Era).

Christianity Under Attack

If you don't yet realize that Christianity is under attack in America, here is evidence that might wake you up. Rollins College in central Florida has ruled that Christian student clubs that require their officers to be Christian are in violation of the college's "non-discrimination policy." Rollins College further ruled, as part of its non-discriminiation policy, that all Christian student groups that refuse to allow their leaders and officers to be non-Christian cannot receive any university funds normally given to student groups. The organization that was the victim of this ruling was the InterVarsity Christian Fellowship. It's hard to believe, but the Rollins College board of trustees voted unanimously not to exempt this student organization from its ruling. This ruling means that the InterVarsity Chistian Fellowship can no longer receive funding and will no longer be recognized as an official campus organization.

Rollins College was not the first college to make such an offensive decision. Vanderbilt University in Tennessee adopted the same rule. Colleges that were founded as Christian institutions are now forbidden to have Christian leaders of student groups!

Carol Swain, professor of law and political science at Vanderbilt whom you may have seen sometime on TV interviews, publicly criticized these rulings. She said "This hastily conceived policy has the potential to destroy every religious organization on campus by secularizing religion and allowing intolerant conflict. Carried to its logical extension, it means that no organization can maintain integrity of beliefs."

What Colleges Are Teaching

Dennis Prager wrote an interesting column asking parents to meditate on what colleges are teaching their kids for the $20,000 to $50,000 tuition they are paying. Here is part of Dennis Prager's depressing list of what colleges are teaching.

The United States is no better than any other country, and in many ways it's worse. Big government is the only humane way to govern a country. Christianity is largely a history of oppression, inquisitions, and anti-intellectualism. On the other hand, Islam is a religion of peace. Therefore, criticism of Christianity is OK, while criticism of Islam is Islamophobia. There is no better and no worse in literature and the arts. The reason universities in the past taught about Shakespeare, Michelangelo, and Bach rather than Guatemalan poets, Asian musicians, and Indian storytellers was Western fascination with dead white European men.

Continuing with Dennis Prager's list of what colleges are teaching: Mothers and fathers are interchangeable; traditional claims that married mothers and fathers are the ideal way to raise children are heterosexist and homophobic. White people can be racist, but nonwhites cannot be racist. The great world battles are not between good and evil, but between rich and poor, between the powerful and the powerless. We live in a patriarchy, which makes women victims of men. Big corporations are bad; big unions are good. The American Founders were sexist, racist slaveholders whose primary goal was preserving their wealthy status.

Dennis Prager concludes by saying, if you think he has exaggerated the anti-American propaganda taught at major universities, you can check it out by visiting any college bookstore and seeing what books are assigned by instructors for their students to read.

A One-Party Classroom

It should come as no surprise that American universities are dominated by leftwing professors. But the extent to which many teachers seek to indoctrinate their students and draw them into radical activism will amaze you. This is documented in the book called One-Party Classroom: How Radical Professors at America's Top Colleges Indoctrinate Students and Undermine Our Democracy by David Horowitz and Jacob Laksin. The authors painstakingly researched the course offerings and teaching methods at 12 major universities and described a dozen courses at each one, quoting from course catalogues, syllabi, and the professors' own writings.

Course after course is dedicated to the thesis that Marxism never failed, that differences between men and women have no basis in reality but are socially constructed by society, and that America is an oppressive and racist society. Professors do not advance these opinions as mere theories to be discussed, but assert them as though they are facts that all must accept. They use their classroom time to inculcate these and other radical ideas in their students. Courses devoted to race present a terribly skewed vision of the world, but this sort of teaching is in nearly all courses, regardless of subject.

At Columbia Teachers College, students learn that non-Socialist societies are the root cause of all violence. A course description at the University of California/Santa Cruz declares, "The goal of this seminar is to learn how to organize a revolution." A University of Arizona course description announces proudly, "Here it is, activism for credit! Give four hours to a social activism organization and I'll give you 200 points!" The instructor lists a number of very left-wing social movements that students are encouraged to join. Another course takes identity politics to a whole new level with the assertion that race, class, gender, and religion all "constitute significant forms of oppression."

At Temple University, the mandatory two-year "Intellectual Heritage" course devotes much time and energy to Karl Marx, while excusing the devastation that Marxism brought to the world. These courses indoctrinate students with leftist ideologies and lower academic standards. Professors believe their political convictions excuse them from rigorous standards of academic inquiry.

The National Association of Scholars (NAS) spent two years examining graduation requirements, reading lists, and course descriptions, and interviewing students and faculty at the University of California. The conclusion is that radical leftist politics have robbed California students of a good education. The quality of teaching has been badly reduced.

The report also told about the universities' lack of political balance. In 2004, UC Berkeley had 8 Democratic professors to 1 Republican. Then the ratio got much, much worse. Within a few years, UC Berkeley had 17 Democrats to 1 Republican in the humanities departments, and 21 Democrats to 1 Republican in the social sciences. The report said that this ratio cannot be accidental. It had to be the result of discrimination in the hiring process.

The NAS concluded that university administrators have failed to ensure that students get a quality education and instead have used the university to promote a left-wing political agenda. The California universities have all sorts of rules that sound good on paper and are supposed to prevent this kind of bias. For example, the Regents' Policy on Course Content states that the regents "are responsible to see that the university . . . never functions as an instrument for the advance of partisan interest." Obviously the professors pay no attention to those rules.
Colleges Are Big on Diversity

Universities are crying that their appropriations of state funds have been "cut to the bone," but here is how one college department at the University of California at San Diego is not only not cutting expenses, but is significantly increasing faculty costs and raising tuition rates. It created a new Department of Diversity, with a new full-time "vice chancellor for equity, diversity, and inclusion." This position will augment that university's already massive diversity apparatus, which includes the Chancellor's Diversity Office, the associate vice chancellor for faculty equity, the assistant vice chancellor for diversity, the faculty equity advisors, the graduate diversity coordinators, the staff diversity liaison, the undergraduate student diversity liaison, the graduate student diversity liaison, the chief diversity officer, the director of development for diversity initiatives, the Office of Academic Diversity and Equal Opportunity, the Committee on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Issues, the Committee on the Status of Women, the Campus Council on Climate, Culture and Inclusion, the Diversity Council, and the directors of the Cross-Cultural Center, the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Resource Center, and the Women's Center.

The main purpose of spending taxpayers' money for all this diversity nonsense is probably to make respectable some of the worthless college courses such as gender studies, queer studies, and ethnics studies. I hope the students attending the California universities will have the smarts to NOT waste their tuition dollars on such worthless courses.

It's important for students to know before they go to college that diversity doesn't mean allowing conservatives to speak on campus, either as visiting lecturers or professors, except for occasional tokenism. Diversity on college campuses doesn't mean giving fair coverage to the ideas and achievements of Western civilization, but it does mean featuring a lot of offbeat concepts. It's important for students to know that multiculturalism doesn't mean tolerance and respect for all cultures. It's just another college fad to put down Western civilization.

The intolerant liberals who run most colleges have adopted campus speech codes which are outrageous violations of our free speech rights. These notorious campus speech codes punish students and even professors who say anything that someone might find offensive. The feminists are vigorous backers of campus speech codes because they don't want feminist follies to be debated and, besides, feminists have no sense of humor. Some college speech codes have even banned inappropriate jokes.
Colleges Dangerous for Men

College is a dangerous place for men. They are not only a minority but they are victimized by discriminatory and unconstitutional anti-male rules. In another striking proof that the Obama Administration is totally manipulated by feminists, the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights sent out a 19-page Dear Colleague Letter to colleges and universities that should make men fear attending college at all. The letter adopts the feminist theory that in all sexual controversies or accusations, the man is guilty unless he proves himself innocent.

This Dear Colleague Letter carries the force of law since it purports to be an additional implementation of Title IX, the 1972 federal law that bans sex discrimination in educational institutions that receive federal assistance. But it was never legislated by Congress, and it was not even launched as a regulation that requires posting for comment in the Federal Register. It is just a federal order, issued by a feminist bureaucrat, which colleges and universities must obey under threat of losing their funding.

The most unconstitutional part of this impertinent Dear Colleague Letter is that it orders colleges to reject use of the standard of proof that an accused man must be judged guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt" or even the intermediate standard of "clear and convincing" proof. Instead, the colleges must judge an accused man based on "a preponderance of the evidence" standard. That means the campus disciplinary board (which may include feminist faculty from the Women's Studies Department) only has to believe that the female accuser is 51% likely to be truthful and accurate. Furthermore, the Letter "strongly discourages" colleges from permitting an accused man "to question or cross-examine the accuser" during the hearing.

A man convicted under these rules will likely be expelled, barred from graduate or professional school and some government jobs, suffer irreparable damage to his reputation, and possibly be exposed to criminal prosecution.

(Sounds to me like the neutering of the male species by college acceptance.)

Victory for One Conservative

One college professor who has been outspoken for conservative principles is Mike Adams at the University of North Carolina. His life has had some interesting developments. When Dr. Adams began his University career in 1993, he was an outspoken atheist and liberal. During those years, he was widely praised in the university for his teaching and scholarship, and he achieved tenure in 1998 without any controversy.

Then Mike Adams had a life-changing experience in 1998. He visited a mentally handicapped prisoner on death row in a Texas prison and was struck by the fact that this prisoner had read the entire Bible, which Mike Adams had not read. Dr. Adams decided to read the Bible, and he had a religious conversion. He became a Christian, and after that became a conservative, too. Dr. Adams then began writing a column for Townhall.com that sharply criticized leftwing actions in universities. The reaction in his own university was furious. When he applied for promotion to full professorship in 2006, Dr. Adams was subjected to secret investigations and all kinds of discriminatory treatment.

Finally, Dr. Adams sued his university for violating his First Amendment right of free speech. Of course, his case dragged on and on for several years. Finally his case went to a jury which recently found in favor of Dr. Adams' free-speech rights. The jury found that the University of North Carolina's denial of First Amendment rights was a "substantial or motivating factor" in the university's decision not to promote him to full professor. Even though the university is appealing the verdict, Dr. Adams has won a historic appeals-court ruling in favor of academic freedom for a conservative professor.

[Ross]

Georgia couple
calls home schooling
a win over power-grabbing
public schools

Red tape varies from state to state
April 23, 2014
by Amelia Hamilton

"It seemed that education was something that teachers and parents cared about, but the education system itself was too gigantic and convoluted to do it well." That sentiment is what led Katie and her husband Michael to look at alternative options for education.

They both attended public schools and had great experiences, but knew that this was not always the case, having seen that it was not so rosy for their siblings. So, when they had their first child, they really began to think about education.

"I also began to understand the power-grabbing within government schools, from unions and political backing to indoctrination and textbook publishing. By the time Lucas was three months old, we decided that I would be home-schooling him and any other children we would have," Katie told Watchdog Wire.

Lucas is now 10 and has been joined by Lilia (9), Jude (6), Eva (4), and Natalia (2). Knowing that they would be having a large family, Katie and Michael saw that private Catholic schooling would not be an option. "With tuition rates for elementary school being on par with what we had just recently paid for college tuition," Katie said, "while being a one-income family, the sensible choice was to home-school."

The red tape involved in home schooling varies from state to state. In Georgia, where Michael and Katie live, the family has to submit a Letter of Intent to Home School to the Department of Education. Although they also have to complete annual progress reports and complete standardizing testing periodically, those are not submitted to the state.

Home schooling is not what many would expect. For one thing, the kids enjoy it! Lucas likes to get his work done right away so he can play with his siblings. Lilia loves crafts and experiments. Jude enjoys being with his family during the day. While Eva and Natalia are too young for formal schooling, there's no doubt they are getting benefits from this as well.

Another misconception about home schooling is that you need to be a perfect parent with endless patience or have perfect children with endless brilliance.

"In fact," said Katie, "if you're having a difficult time with your child, maybe having more time together to build a relationship is exactly what you need. Home schooling is a lifestyle, and it's centered on the family. Education is of course important and you'll spend a few hours per day doing the bookish stuff, but the entire day – every day – is spent with everyone improving in respect, diligence, responsibility, and kindness. This cannot be replicated or substituted in any school."

That's not the only reason Katie and Michael are happy with the choice they made, for two major reasons. "First," said Katie, "I have the pleasure and satisfaction of seeing my children learn so many things and grow in virtue as a direct result of my time and effort. At the same time, I have been challenged to overcome my vices and imperfections to become a better mother for them, and I'm very grateful for this."

A better mom, better kids, and the government leaves them alone (well, as much as the government ever does). Non-traditional schooling can be pretty sweet.
Amelia Hamilton

Amelia is a blogger and author of children's book One Nation Under God: A Book for Little Patriots. A lifelong writer and patriot, Amelia also loves dogs, Red Wing hockey, old cars, old movies, and apple juice. She has a master's degree in both english and 18th century history from University of St Andrews in Scotland.

http://watchdogwire.com/blog/2014/04/23/georgia-couple-calls-home-schooling-win-power-grabbing-public-schools/

[Ross]

This Includes Education and School Politics

[Ross]

OKLAHOMA CITY – Opponents of the Common Core experiment are putting Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin on the hot seat.

Mary FallinToday, a collection of anti-Common Core groups and activists are releasing a public letter they've sent to Fallin, asking the Republican governor to pull the plug on the nationalized K-12 learning standards.

They're focusing on Fallin because she serves as the chairwoman of the National Governors Association, the organization that co-created the one-size-fits-all math and English standards and helped foist them unto America's K-12 schools.

The letter-writing effort was coordinated by the American Principles Project (APP), and includes signatories from the Eagle Forum, the Pioneer Institute, the Home School Legal Defense Association, Concerned Women for America and other like-minded groups and individuals, reports Breitbart.com.


Join American Principles Project, Eagle Forum, HSLDA, Pioneer Institute, Michelle Malkin and others urging Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin, Chair of the National Governors Association, to end the Common Core State Standards Initiative.  Through this initiative the NGA has enabled corporations and other private interests to drive education policy which has compromised the power of parents.  So we are asking parents, educators and concerned citizens to add their names with ours in order to stop the Common Core State Standards.

May 5, 2014
Governor Mary Fallin
Oklahoma State Capitol
2300 N. Lincoln Blvd., Room 212
Oklahoma City, OK  73105

mary-fallin

Dear Governor Fallin:

We write to you in your capacity as governor of Oklahoma and as the chair of the National Governors Association and its affiliate the NGA Center for Best Practices (together, "NGA").  In particular, we write to you about NGA's activities with regard to the national Common Core Standards system.

As set forth in the Joint Statement Regarding the National Governors Association's Common Core Standards Initiative and the Constitutional Structure, NGA's activities, including its ownership, development and propagation of the Common Core,have caused profound harm to our constitutional structure.  NGA has enabled corporations and other private interests to drive education policy and, concomitantly, compromised the power of parents.  It has enlisted the power of the federal government to bring about these changes and, in so doing, has weakened the power of states to defend the authority and rights of parents and other citizens.

More specifically, NGA has assisted the federal government in employing a strategy against the states that has divided and conquered the state checks and balances that are intended to guard against federal overreach.  It has presided over the development of math standards that lock children into a defective education, one that does not prepare children for studies in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) or for admission to competitive public and private universities.  It has presided over the development of English standards that fail to prepare children for authentic college work in the humanities and that weaken the formation of strong citizen-leaders and individuals of substance who are fully capable of exercising their liberties.

The pushback against the Common Core rests on parents' love for their children and their defense of the Constitution that protects their rights to form their children and direct their education. It is a movement based on truth, and on highly informed citizens –citizens who follow in the footsteps of the Founders.  It is a movement that continues to grow and which will be victorious.

We respectfully ask that, as chair of the NGA, you end the Common Core project.  We respectfully submit that your decisions on this matter will define your legacy.

Sincerely,

Tim Wildmon, President, American Family Association
Sandy Rios, Director of Governmental Relations, American Family Association
Emmett McGroarty, Director of Education, American Principles Project
Jane Robbins, Senior Fellow, American Principles Project
Donna Hearne, Talk Show Host, Bott Radio Network
Penny Nance, President and Chief Executive Officer, Concerned Women for America
Tamara Scott, State Director, Concerned Women for America of Iowa
Phyllis Schlafly, Founder and President, Eagle Forum
Glyn Wright, Executive Director, Eagle Forum
Kyle Olson, Founder, EAGnews.org
Paul Caprio, Director, Family PAC Federal
Joy Pullman, Research Fellow, Heartland Institute
William A. Estrada, Director of Federal Relations, Home School Legal Defense Association
J. Michael Smith, President,  Home School Legal Defense Association
Michael Farris, President,ParentalRights.org
The Honorable David M. McIntosh, Former Congressman from Indiana
Michelle Malkin, Syndicated Columnist, Author and Blogger
Jenni White, President, Restore Oklahoma Public Education
Jamie Minter, Founder, Oklahoma Parents and Educators for Public Education
Bunny Chambers, State President, Oklahoma Eagle Forum
Jim Stergois, Executive Director, Pioneer Institute
Jamie Gass, Director of the Center for School Reform, Pioneer Institute
Stacy Mott, Founder and President, Smart Girl Politics Action
Steve Deace, Nationally Syndicated Radio Host
Shane Vander Hart, Editor, CaffeinatedThoughts.com & TruthinAmericanEducation.com
Jan Mickelson, Host of Mickelson in the Morning, WHO Radio 1040 AM Des Moines, IA

Sign your name below.
http://ngaendcommoncore.com/