Resist Invasion of Privacy at Schools. Hillary Clinton Will be Proud.

Scientific experiment = Creative Dissent.  Become a STEM ready student and constitutional scholar.

Ed Morrissey at HotAir writes about the "Nanny of the Month" and the winner is Northside School District’s requirement for students to wear RFID tags to attend class.  Morrissey links Reason's TV information on the tracking chip program which is not designed so much for educational and alleged safety purposes as it is for government funding:

This month’s lineup of of busybodies includes the University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point, where administrators may ban booze in dorms–even for students of legal drinking age (guess those college kids would just stay dry!). Then there’s Chi-Town, where officials are using GPS devices to track food trucks to make sure they don’t wander within 200 feet of any fixed businesses that sell food, including convenience stores. Violators could face fines of $2,000. Compare that to the $100 fine you’d face for parking in front of a fire hydrant and you get an idea for just how seriously city officials take the threat of competition. (Good thing the Institute for Justice is on the case.)

 But this time the nanny of the month comes to us from deep in the heart of Texas, where administrators at San Antonio’s Northside school district are tracking kids with radio frequency identification chips. Dozens of electronic readers have been installed in the school’s ceiling panels to keep tabs on the kiddos while they’re at school. The official number-one reason for going RFID is to “increase student safety and security,” but–since district funding goes up when attendance goes up–it’s clearly all about the Benjamins.

 With school-based tracking going back to at least 2004, the Lone Star State has been something of an RFID trailblazer. In fact, Northside is considering expanding the program to cover all of the district’s 97,000 students.

We've written several posts about government agencies tracking children from birth and the reasons why:

• Money
• The establishment of a data system for a managed workforce

However, the most insidious result of these tracking chips and longitudinal data system informatmion is the loss of freedom and practice/ownership/inherent belief of personal responsibility.  The government is now in control of your child's future and you have given it away to a centralized bureaucracy under the guise of advertising campaigns telling you your student will not be successful without the government's knowledge/tracking of personal data.

The comments from the HotAir readers recognize the long term detrimental effects of these political/private relationships and the power afforded to the state and taken away from individuals:

If I had kids I would not want them being conditioned to believe that it is acceptable for the authorities to track their every movement.

 and

administrators at San Antonio’s Northside school district are tracking kids with radio frequency identification chips. Dozens of electronic readers have been installed in the school’s ceiling panels to keep tabs on the kiddos while they’re at school. The official number-one reason for going RFID is to “increase student safety and security,

It is a trade of liberty, for security….and they shall have neither.
This is a ruse, it’s conditioning. Once these kids are trained to give up a little bit, they’ll give a little more. Oh yes, it’s passive monitoring I’m sure.

The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made,above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live — did live, from habit that became instinct — in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.

One reader has a solution  for dissent from these governmental mandates:

Ok. Schools say you have to wear those badges. But I don’t think the regulation says anything about the badges being EFFECTIVE.

Hey, kids! Here’s a hint. Google the phrase “Faraday cage”. For about a buck’s worth of copper screen, you can create an envelope around the badge that will destroy the effectiveness of the tracking device. Resist!

Hillary Clinton should approve of creative dissent and applaud this rejection/circumvention of tracking as she was quoted in 2003: 

"I'm sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration, somehow you're not patriotic.  We need to stand up and say we're Americans, and we have the right to debate and disagree with any administration."

Try the Faraday cage science experiment.  Doesn't the government tell us it wants STEM ready students?  Explain to your school administration it's your scientific creativity at work to protect your individual liberties.

 

 

Education Reform: The Federal Government just "Can't Stop"

Parker Brothers Game Board or Federal Government's Involvement in Education?

The Jefferson City News Tribune published a thought provoking editorial questioning the federal involvement in education and it elicited a spirited discussion in the comment section:

******************************************************************

Why are people in public life so reluctant to admit a mistake?

The question resurfaces with the federal government’s insistence on reauthorizing a sweeping education law that 26 states, so far, have abandoned.

The question also is largely rhetorical. Elected officials fear admitting errors will scuttle re-election. So, instead, they strive to appear perfect, a pretense not consistent with being human.

With regard to the “No Child Left Behind” federal education law — championed by former President George W. Bush — the Obama administration’s reauthoritization effort appears inconsistent.

It is inconsistent with granting waivers to states and with Obama’s across-the-board insistence on blaming Bush.

No Child Left Behind poses two important issues: Is education a federal responsibility and are federal standards the best way to improve academic performance?

The answer to the first question — from a constitutional standpoint — clearly is no. The U.S. Constitution largely is silent on education, in contrast to the Missouri Constitution’s emphasis on providing and funding public education.

As a practical matter, however, Americans have raised concerns about statistics indicating U.S. students are academically inferior to their peers in other countries.

Public concerns attract candidates’ platforms and promises. And — for good or ill — education has been characterized as a national problem in need of federal mandates.

But Obama’s waiver option has been sought by and granted to more than half of the states, with another 10 applications pending.

Now, we get this confusing, convoluted statement from Education Secretary Arne Duncan: “A strong, bipartisan reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act remains the best path forward in education reform, but as 26 states have now demonstrated, our kids can’t wait any longer for Congress to act.”

But our kids haven’t been waiting; the federal law has been in effect for 10 years. And many states want out.

Failure to push for reauthorization, however, might be construed as an admission that the federal government is imperfect.

And we mustn’t have that. 

*************************************************************

Following the editorial are comments questioning the Federal government's involvement in education and the amount of control it wields in directing state/local educational policy and state/local school district budgets. One of the last  comments caught my attention and I  believe demonstrates a lack of understanding of the egregious effects of this current education "reform":

Clayton 19 hours, 16 minutes ago

Now, we get this confusing, convoluted opinion from the News Trib. Has every federal responsibility been listed in the constitution? The answer to this question clearly is no.

The only valuable idea in this piece is the second issue mentioned: "are federal standards the best way to improve academic performance?" Then the author proceeds to ignore his/her own question. So what's the point of this opinion peace? A. To complain that politicians don't admit mistakes? (really?) B. To all but claim that NCLB was unconstitutional? (seriously?) C. To add a few sparks to the tinderbox and get readers debating tired issues in the comments thread? (bingo)

A more well written piece would push us to think about solving the core issue, rather than arguing about the constitution.

And we mustn't have that. 

************************************************

My thoughts?

Clayton writes:  

So what's the point of this opinion peace? .......C. To add a few sparks to the tinderbox and get readers debating tired issues in the comments thread? (bingo)   

If "tired issues" mean:

• the privatization of public education with no taxpayer accountability, 
• the lack of power of states to now set their own educational directives, 
• federal mandates create an establishment of a national longitudinal data base to track children from birth so they can be assessed for workforce needs.....

...then it's not "Bingo".  It's the Parker Brother's federal government version game of Can't Stop.  More onerous mandates coming at states and school districts won't "reform" education in the least. It just feeds the power hungry federal agencies, creates a huge crony capitalist "edreform" market that will bankrupt states and local school districts, violates citizens' right to privacy, keeps federal bureaucrats employed and doesn't educate students.

Clayton continues: 

A more well written piece would push us to think about solving the core issue, rather than arguing about the constitution.

Clayton may have missed the point the editorial was making: the core issue DOES stem from Constitutional discussions.  The states were to educate their citizens, not the Federal government.  When education became a federal entitlement program (one size fits all)  instead of a state's responsibility to its unique citizenry, what you see is the deterioration of serving students.  The autonomy of the state and local districts has been reduced to becoming facilitators of federal policy. 

The core issue is taxpayers can't make decisions for their schools or their children because of  federal mandates that should have never been foisted on states and school districts.  When personal, local, and state decisions are taken away, what do you think is going to happen?  When "educational opportunity" becomes "educational equity" and the goal is "equal outcome", the solution is obvious: have serious discussions on why the DOEd is involved in education in the first place and reduce the federal involvement in education.

From Understanding Gender Difference to Promote Gender Equity:

Freeman(1990) defines gender equity as the set of behaviors and knowledge that permits educators to recognize inequality in educational opportunities, to carry out specific interventions that constitute equal treatment, and to ensure equal educational outcomes.

 

Is this the "Bingo" moment?  Is this the core issue?  Shouldn't we be debating the Federal Government's insistence  and continued spending on a mandate (equal outcome) that can never be realized?  Shouldn't we be questioning, as does the News Tribune: Is education a federal responsibility and are federal standards the best way to improve academic performance?

Arne Duncan is Wrong. The Pressing Issue in Civil Rights is not Education, it's the Right to Protect Your Information from Arne Duncan.

Missouri received $890,000 from the Federal government in 2010 to expand its data capturing and reporting ability for school children in public education.  Everything's coming up data...teacher evaluations are to be made on data and the future of your child will be made on data.  Creativity, ingenuity and individualism, qualities for entrepreneurship, will be difficult to assess via standardized testing and based on what the data will be used for, these qualities may be quashed in the quest for the perfect worker.  Your human capital needs to craft a good data set to be acceptable and employable in the work sector.  Think of it as human capital selection in the workforce without the personal interview.

It's from 2010, but it's important to understand the intent of information use of these  educational longitudinal data bases.  From the Department of Labor's news release:

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Labor today announced $12.2 million to 13 states through the Workforce Data Quality Initiative. These funds will enable states to build or expand longitudinal databases of workforce data that also link to education data. States will use these longitudinal databases to conduct research and analysis aimed at pinpointing the effectiveness of employment and training programs to better inform workforce system customers. 

"These grants are an important part of the administration's efforts to increase the availability and use of high-quality data," said Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. "By developing and improving databases, states will help those seeking training make better informed decisions, all while more clearly demonstrating the link between employment and education in the long-term success of workers." 

Funding will be used by 11 states to expand and improve linkages between education and employment in existing longitudinal databases. These include Florida, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia. Two additional states, Louisiana and Minnesota, will develop and implement new systems. 
 
Education is designed to train your human capital to become a better worker.  States need money to attain the Department of Labor's goal of data base expansion and usage.  These grants are just a drip in the ocean of cost of these data bases.  It's difficult to determine the total cost to states for this federal mandate, but here is one example regarding Florida's expense from The Office of Program Policy Analysis & Government Accountability (OPPAGA):

Exhibit 1 The Department Has Spent $20.9 Million for the Development and Operation of the Education Data Warehouse Since 2000.


This $20.9 Million expenditure is just through 2009 for one state. 



K-12 money to be made is quite lucrative for those vendors anxious to jump on the data train, so it is no wonder those private vendors are elbowing their way onto the train.  Ed Week reports:


The flow of venture capital into the K-12 education market has exploded over the past year, reaching its highest transaction values in a decade in 2011, industry observers say.

Venture capital transaction values in the K-12 field, which include both public and private schools, increased from roughly $130 million in 2010 to $334 million last year, according to data from the Chicago-based GSV Advisors.

Precollegiate education historically has not been an easy market for venture capitalists to break into, analysts say, but certain factors are contributing to a higher awareness of this market for investors.

Venture capitalists generally look for "high-growth opportunities" and rely on the ability to scale up new enterprises quickly, said Mr. Newman. So the common standards in English/language arts and math, for instance, which have been adopted by all but four states, are contributing to companies' perception of a potential for fast growth in standards-related ventures across a larger market, he said.

As you read about the motivation for venture capitalists to jump on this data train, do you detect "but..but..it's for the KIDS"?  No, it's for the money.  It's for the ability to track.  It's for the data.  And the taxpayers are paying for the opportunity for the private sector to take your child's data, manipulate it , sell it, provide it to private organizations and federal organizations so your child can become a productive worker in society.

The rescinding of the common core standards may be one of the most important civil rights issues of our time.  The data bases will collapse on themselves without the common core assessments to track the common human capital.  Apologies to Arne Duncan for stealing his line:

President Obama and I believe that education is the civil rights issue of our time....

Education is not the civil rights issue of our time.  The civil rights issue of our time has to do with protecting personal liberty and right to privacy.  The pressing civil rights issue is to ensure students, parents and taxpayers are not forced to provide data to the Federal government or private companies.  You and your children are more than data sets and your personal liberties are being stripped away.  Where is Arne Duncan's concern about personal privacy and the right to opt out? 

Has Individual Choice Been Banned in Boston?

Boston can't run away from its history on banning behavior it finds abhorrent. Here is a definition of the phrase "Banned in Boston":

"Banned in Boston" was a phrase employed from the late 19th century through the mid-20th century to describe a literary work, motion picture, or play prohibited from distribution or exhibition in Boston, Massachusetts. During this period, Boston officials had wide authority to ban works featuring "objectionable" content, and often banned works with sexual or foul language.

Here we are in 2011 and apparently certain beverages are grouped together with those items from the late 19th century deemed "objectionable" by the government. Boston Mayor Menino is banning sugary drinks on government-owned property. The basic gist of this order per Mayor Menino:

“I want to create a civic environment that makes the healthier choice the easier choice in people’s lives, whether it’s schools, worksites, or other places in the community,” Menino said in a statement after the ban was announced.

Is this the purpose of government? Why should a mayor be making decisions on what people can drink on government property? Should government be making our choices for us in what we care to drink? It seems as if Cass Sunstein's version of "Nudge" has arrived in Boston to take over drink machines and fountains. Is "Nudge" the blueprint for governmental decisions these days vs the Constitution?

Well, if you are on jury duty in Boston, you might just want to pack a Coca-Cola if that's your pleasure. Just hope the court system doesn't know about The Little Village School's policy on bringing your own food from home and confiscates your property and denies you your right to consume what you choose to drink.

(There is a bit of irony in this story. Link onto the story and check out the first two advertisements listed. Priceless!)

Teaching Socialism to Grade School via the Constitution

News of this bit of indoctrination made the rounds of the internet today...

The Promise Of America Is. . . Socialism? That’s exactly what is being taught in many American public schools.

Under the guise of teaching children to read, the seeds of Socialism are being planted within the minds of young children. Do you believe that the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States mandates the following?

The People’s basic needs must be met in a country. Needs for housing, education, transportation, and health care overseen by our government system.

Those are the words being chanted over and over and over by school children around the country. They are part of an educational program called Building Fluency Through Practice and Performance. This section is called ‘The Promise of America’ and it breaks down the fifty-two word single sentence that is the Preamble. Here is the original:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Disguised as a reading exercise, the Preamble has been turned into a five page choral project with commentary planted inside this very simple sentence. Here is an example. Make note of what the children (R5, R6, & R7) are being asked to read after the words ‘promote the general welfare’:

People’s basic needs must be met in a country. Needs for housing, education, transportation and health care, overseen by our government system.

When did the Preamble or the Constitution include the government meeting the people’s needs for housing, transportation and health care?

Instead of teaching the Preamble and Constitution as it is written, schools from coast to coast are indoctrinating children to Socialism thanks to a company called Teacher Created Materials. TCM sells ‘The Promise of America’ to thousands of school districts all across the country as well as over 100 countries around the world. Several phone calls to TCM, its‘ printing company Shell Education and New York City sales outlet Sussman Sales provided little specific data on just how many schools are currently using the ’Promise of America, ‘ but one company rep told The Blaze the “Fluency program is really really popular.”

Blaze Exclusive: Socialist Mantra Hidden in Grade School Chants | The Blaze

Find out if this is being taught in your school.

From the Taxpayers to the Legislators: Common Concerns Regarding Common Core Standards.

We have been encouraging Missouri citizens and other taxpayers to contact your state legislators regarding common core standards, wanting to know their stance on states relinquishing educational sovereignty and signing onto to unfunded debt.

I have been corresponding with a friend from another state who has contacted her state legislator and here is a chronicle of events:

******************************

Friend Writing Day 1:

Today I got my 1st email response from a state legislator re: the Common Core. He said he wasn't aware of any strings and if there were any, they were federal strings. Talk about demoralizing.

My response:

And did you ask him, why in the world would he accept ANY money and/or strings from the federal government as educating children is a sovereign right afforded to the state?

Friend’s response, Day 2:

That will be my next missive. Here's what my last note said as an example of an unproductive way to contact a state legislator:

Dear Representative ******,

I am again writing to you regarding the sale of local control of education to the federal government. Today I received an email from the *** Parent Council which included the following:

"For fiscal year 2011, the year we are in, the Governor proposes holding K-12 education harmless from new cuts by using one-time available federal funds of $150 million. In other words, the Governor is proposing that there be no mid-year cuts for our public schools; that is good news! We will be encouraging the Legislature to follow the Governor's lead."

Some of us don't agree that relinquishing local control of curriculum is a nifty way to raise cash. What are the strings attached to these dollars? Most of the public is in the dark. PLEASE represent our students, teachers and parents by raising the issue that most are not brave enough to acknowledge: Our state’s adoption of the Common Core Standards removes parents from the process of curriculum choices in our state. Some things should not be for sale. At least the public needs to know what Arne Duncan is getting for the money. Does a possibility exist for public comment on this issue at the State Capitol?

Sincerely,

*******

Follow up note from the friend:

I've asked the governor's office where the federal $150 million came from. Surely that info will be in my inbox momentarily. Some unfortunate bonuses of the common core were the gratis spine-ectomies performed on state leaders.

The more I discover about CCSSI, the more I realize I have much to learn. Just wish I could communicate to my fellow citizens:

· what it involves,

· how control of our own students' education and privacy matters more than dollars,

· the federal dollars are woefully inadequate to pay for implementation and

· the whole program will be counterproductive as parents, the very individuals with immediate, sincere and irrefutable interests in student outcomes, are removed from the equation. In my opinion, the state does not want the public to know, as evidenced in part by the summertime adoption of CCSSI when it first reared its ugly head in the state. As a conservative I am dismayed by the lack of leadership and seeming hypocrisy of state officials.

****************************************

This was not written by a Missourian, but the issues are the same, even as it relates to the State Board adopting common core standards in the summertime when there was no legislative oversight, and our overwhelmingly conservative state legislature which refuses to address the issue.

Apparently common core standards create common questions about state sovereignty, privacy issues, unfunded mandates and the lack of state officials apparently not being concerned about those issues. My friend and I suggest to these otherwise conservative legislators to read the Constitution for their "spine-ectomie" condition and grow a spine when it comes to protecting and asserting states' rights.

We’ll keep you apprised if the taxpayer receives an answer to her questions. Will she receive similar information (which we refuted) DESE sent out (not to the taxpayers but to the legislators) in response to these same type of questions?

The American People are Filing for Divorce

We don't think too highly of choice architects on this site. They are divorced from the real people and issues of the day. They think they are doing what is best for those who can't make decisions for their own lives, but what they have actually brought about is noted in American Thinker:

The ungrateful masses look at what Obama hath wrought and see a federal government taking over their lives, debt biblically extending to "our children's children," and a ruling class that lives large while taxpayers now spend a quarter of their lives working to pay for its excesses.

P.J. O'Rourke sees an Obama States of America as Detroit-writ-large, with the president extending the life previously reserved by Democrats for their core constituencies to the average American. The humorist says the president is creating a nation of "vile schools, lawless slums, economic stagnation, and social immobility." Thomas Lifson described this as "progressive feudalism," condemning the average American to a grim subsistence with "more and more of our lives ... regulated by government bureaucrats setting rules and regulations and licensing people."

I tend to agree with PJ O'Rourke and his description of vile schools. What makes a school vile? A school that has no control over its own curriculum and being able to innovate. Stagnation. "More and more of our lives are regulated by government bureaucrats setting rules and regulations". That's what Race to the top and the rush to adopt common core standards is really all about. Centralization of power and loss of individualized education.

Stuart Schwartz explains the five truths this administration has helped everyday Americans discover. Pay particular attention to the fifth truth:

Speaking of education: the rot is deep. It will take decades to turn this around. If the U.S. Department of Education were to vanish tomorrow, the immediate effect would be a major hit to the profits of trendy Beltway bars. But the education establishment would remain, the same one putting our money behind programs to train students for "global citizenship" rather than reading, writing, and math. And the same one that has come to Washington to create the programs which two-thirds of the country say have put us on the "wrong track," according to Rasmussen.

It would seem if two-thirds of the country believes these programs have put us "on the wrong track", and it is time to get rid of the choice architects and start listening to the people who are paying for the education of its youngest citizens. Think about that. Two-thirds of the country believe we are on the wrong track. We know in education the rot is deep. It's time to take back the curriculum from this elite group and protect the future for our children.

We can start by voting on November 2...vote for candidates who reject choice architects and understand Schwartz' fourth truth:

The founders were smart. Educators tell us our colonial founders were a bunch of privileged white guys who oppressed natives, savaged the earth, and then parked their yachts in Rhode Island. Think 56 John Kerrrys in drag, all white wigs and ruffled sleeves and tights. But we have now rediscovered that the U.S. Constitution is the best guarantee we have for freedom and prosperity and, combined with the Declaration of Independence, a vital blueprint for individual and corporate success. Send legislators to Washington who "think the Constitution is wrong" -- as one Democrat opined -- and liberty and prosperity suffer.

Let's Make a Deal. Let's launch a Divorce American Style from Choice Architects and politicians who don't uphold the Constitution. Then maybe, just maybe, we can start getting rid of the rot in our educational system.

The General Welfare Clause..."Don't Worry, Be Happy"...According to Clayton & Parkway School Districts

I received an email from a concerned parent about the teaching of the Constitution in the Clayton and Parkway school districts. If you are not familiar with these districts, they are considered to be high achieving with good MAP and ACT scores. Any parent would want their child to attend in one of the districts' schools based on reputation, right?

Based on what this parent sent me via email, parents in these districts might want to take a closer look at the syllabus for the teaching of the Constitution. Just keep in mind, the teaching of the Constitution doesn't seem to be a huge concern to MO DESE, so perhaps it may not be top priority for these schools either. As we contended in our previous posting:

I accessed DESE's site for special day and week celebrations and while it is listed, there is no accompanying information what the Constitution is, what is represents, and how it outlines our important liberties. Perhaps this is because this administration believes the Constitution is a "living document" and as it is currently in flux, students shouldn't be concerned about it much. That's just a guess on my part.

Read the following email from this parent. I think we were right in our guess about the Constitution's importance and meaning not only on the national and state levels, but also on the local level:

As we talked about briefly last week, I am gravely concerned with the course our public education system is putting us on. And to be more accurate, I am concerned with the way social and political issues are framed by certain teachers, because - as we and they know - children are impressionable. The "values" and "principles" they learn early on shape the way they process information and make decisions in future.

My child has attended schools in the Clayton and Parkway School Districts. Two lessons in particular stand out in my mind as the most egregious subversions of the principles of our republic.

While in Clayton School District, she learned that the General Welfare clause of the Constitution is synonymous with "being happy" - i.e. that Congress being able to provide for the general welfare means that Congress should provide for everyone being happy and living a comfortable life. This is neither accurate, nor sustainable as a principle of Constitutional law. It is antithetical to the principles held by those who built what we have today; not because helping others to live a happy life is a bad principle, but because Congress can act only through coercion by force of law and coercion is antithetical to freedom.

Second, while attending a Parkway school, she learned that the Necessary and Proper clause of the Constitution is also known as the "Elastic Clause" because it allows Congress to stretch its powers to pass laws that help people (or something equally as expansive). This fundamentally eviscerates the notion that the Constitution is an enabling document that specifically grants only limited powers to the federal government. It's related to the concept of an "evolving Constitution," which is of course nonsense. As has always been the case with the law in the U.S. the law exists and the courts apply the law to facts, which of course change and differ, over time and from case to case. That the factual circumstances of cases change over time causes evolution in case law, but it is not because our statutes and Constitution "evolve." It is because the facts - to which we apply legal principles to arrive at a legal conclusion - "evolve."

It doesn't take years of education or even deep thought to learn that Constitution does not evolve or that the general welfare is a term used to describe a small set of projects that make everyone better off, not just some at the expense of others.

But that's what they're learning, whether through the ignorance or insidiousness of some teachers and the teacher's union.

I recommend that you read Allan Bloom's critique of John Dewey. Mr. Dewey was instrumental in setting up the teacher's union, was a socialist, and directly stated that they would change America through education. Whatever victory conservatives may score this election, the trajectory of these United States is set by the angle of our youth, who carry our principles forward.

If you are a parent in these districts (or any district for that matter), it might be a good idea to meet with the history/civics teacher and ask his/her understanding and teaching of the Constitution. It might be a good idea to ask DESE as well. We know their understanding and emphasis on "International Education Week"...the US Constitution, not so much.

Classes will be forming within the next few months to teach the Constitution to children and adults. We'll alert you to the time and place of these classes; search your communities for similar classes if you are not in the St. Louis area. If what is being taught in Clayton and Parkway is indicative of teachings throughout Missouri and other states, it is imperative you educate yourself so YOU can teach the Constitution correctly to your child. Otherwise, he/she might believe in the Bobby McFerrin version of the document: "Don't Worry, Be Happy".

Part 3: International Week, IB Curriculum & Social Justice vs The US Constitution

We've been posting the last several days about the not so subtle encroachment of international goals and international curriculum in Missouri schools. The Missouri DESE website showcases international goals over the rights guaranteed to US citizens in the Constitution and the IB curriculum is being debated in Ozark, MO. IB curriculum highlights world history over national history in its quest for globalism.

We now will share with you a story from American Thinker on what may very well be taught (or not taught) in your public school.

Nearly half of American history teachers believe it is less important that their students understand the common history, ideas, rights, and responsibilities that tie the country together as Americans than that they learn to celebrate the unique identities and experiences of its different ethnic, religious, and immigrant groups.


Advocates of radical "social-justice" multiculturalism in many university schools of education -- the places where most K-12 teachers are trained -- continue to oppose assimilation with a common culture while instead seeking to radically transform an "oppressive" America.

It's time to understand what's occurring in public school curriculum. American history is quickly becoming irrelevant according to the Department of Education and the State Department (I still don't understand why the State Department is involved in education). While it is now becoming increasingly unimportant for their students to (1) understand such concepts as federalism, separation of powers, and checks and balances, and (2) know about the American Founding, the Civil War, and the Cold War, a whopping 76 percent (of teachers) deemed it critical for students "to be tolerant of people and groups who are different from themselves.

If you think about it, though, this is the philosophy of the progressive left. Isn't this how they approach the Constitution itself? Obama and his allies pontificate on how the Constitution is a "living, breathing document". According to Yale University, Supreme Court justices should be appointed if they can exhibit empathy in deciding interpretation of the law. When and why did this become a benchmark by which to nominate a Supreme Court Justice appointee?

The curriculum in terms of globalism and social justice is eroding American exceptionalism. If you have a student in public school today, you might just want to study the Constitution with your child yourself. Isn't it ironic the study and importance of American history has been reduced to this sentence in the last paragraph from the Yale Law School piece mentioned above:

As President Obama searches for Justice Stevens' replacement, he should bear in mind Justice Holmes's prescient observation that the life of the law is experience, not logic.

Substitute the word "history" for the phrase "the law", and you have discovered the stance of this administration, the Department of Education and State Department. The Constitution can be reinterpreted to rely on "experience" instead of "logic" at the Supreme Court level. Why should the study of history be any different? Revisionist history is acceptable in many schools today. This is the trio strangling the sovereign right of states to educate their children. After all, as American Thinker states:

Not surprisingly, only a little more than one-third of the teachers deemed it "absolutely essential" for their students to "know facts" (such as the location of the fifty states) or dates (such as the attack on Pearl Harbor). After all, why let facts get in the way of advocacy?

International Education and IB Curriculum vs The Constitution of the United States

There is a theme emerging in public education from the Obama administration. Curriculum increasingly focuses on becoming globally competitive and pursuing international goals vs US constitutional teachings. We wrote about this issue previously and raised the question on exactly what type of international doctrine is being taught in Missouri schools. Based on the information on the DESE website, it appears our state is emphasizing international goals and ignoring our own nation's Constitution.

I received information about new curriculum being proposed for Missouri schools in the Ozark region. Have you heard about "International Baccalaureate" Curriculum? Here is a concise statement about IB from its website:

Our three programmes for students aged 3 to 19 help develop the intellectual, personal, emotional and social skills to live, learn and work in a rapidly globalizing world. There are more than 872,000 IB students at 3,070 schools in 139 countries.

The history link in the website stresses the international education students receive. Hmm. I'm thinking this is the type of education DESE in Missouri is promoting. Currently there are 13 schools in Missouri with IB Curriculum. Why should we be concerned about IB Curriculum?

I received a letter from Ronnie White, Retired Military, who is fighting IB's attempt to enter into the Ozark area. He asked me to share some information with the readers. He is attempting to alert parents and taxpayers in his area about this curriculum and why he feels it is dangerous and circumvents the teaching of US constitutional principles.

Take time to read Mr. White's letter and research into IB philosophy and curriculum. Why would we want curriculum in our schools that promotes world history over national history? What is the agenda? Is "International Week" a precursor of curriculum to come not only in an attempted IB entrance in the Ozarks, but in all Missouri schools?

The information from Mr. White follows:
*******************************************************

All Ozark Voters,

Many if not most people just don’t want to hear it. They get a smidgen of information here or there, mostly colored by the liberal mainstream way of spinning nearly every blurb. Those of us blessed to live, work, and raise families in Ozark, Missouri have a hard time diverting attention from our day to day cares and responsibilities long enough to process and digest the overwhelming barrage of information, and would just as soon ignore it.

There may be as few as thirty percent of the population that makes a concerted effort to be accurately informed about issues which will have a direct bearing on recently passed laws, administrative policies, judicial decisions, and their children’s education.

I want to bring to your attention an effort by our school district to initiate a so, called higher-level education program at the high school. The program is known as the International Baccalaureate (IB) program. Below is a letter from Lisa McLoughlin, founder of truthaboutib.com that explains what IB is all about. Please take time to read it.

The IB was officially formed in 1968 to serve the children of UN diplomats who traveled around the globe and were in need of a recognizable standard for admission into Universities. According to former IBO Director General George Walker, the intellectual process which would culminate in the IB Diploma Program was begun by Marie-Therese Maurette in 1948 when she wrote a paper for United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) called “Ways for Educating for Peace: do they exist?” Maurette had outlined a program and pedagogy (the art of teaching), which included the following elements:

Ÿ Geography should be taught starting not with the student’s country of origin but with the whole world

Ÿ History should not be taught before the age of 12 to avoid it becoming a catalogue of national heroes and patriotic celebrations. When introduced, it must be world history

Ÿ Each week there should be an hour’s lesson of “national culture” taught to classes divided into small national groups, but this will be deliberately subordinated to international geography and history.

Ÿ Promotion of bilinguals

Ÿ Regular debates should encourage students to think about world affairs

Ÿ Students should take part in sports, community service and in the life of the school.

According to Ian Hill, Deputy Director General of IBO, “The primary goal of IBO is the promotion of world citizenship.” Currently, IBO is a signatory to a Peace Education agreement with UNESCO through the year 2010 whereby IBO agrees to integrate the UNESCO educational goals into every aspect of its curriculum: http://www3.unesco.org/iycp/Report/IBO.pdf. IBO and its representatives often publicly deny a relationship with the UN, but it is there in black and white in addition to annual funding of IBO by the UN which can be viewed in any of its annual reports.

Many dismiss the IBO/UN relationship and for the rest of this letter, I shall do the same as I feel there are enough deficiencies in the program’s design to discourage any American general public school from implementing the program without getting into the politics of it. However, the history of the organization should be known and its ongoing attempts to sugar coat its true agenda and philosophy should be kept in mind every time one asks a legitimate question about IB and is unable to get a legitimate answer.

IBO claims a “rigorous” approval process, which takes approximately two years. Actually, there is nothing terribly rigorous about the process except the strain it puts on a district’s budget. There is absolutely no evidence of a school EVER being denied IBO authorization. In fact, IBO has approved several schools in Florida, which had received a grade of ‘F’ from the State. http://www.duvalschools.org/reseval/SchlImpPlans/2008/092_SIP_2007-2008.pdf

According to IBO representative Ralph Cline, the IB Diploma Program was designed to be implemented in magnet schools or to be run as a “school within a school”. (Upper St. Clair, PA Minority Report, 2006). Of the current 714 IB DP schools in the U.S., approximately 10% are private schools and 60% are magnet or charter schools. From U.S. News & World Reports http://www.usnews.com/blogs/college-rankings-blog/index2.html -

In addition, Elizabeth Brock, head of research, development, and communications for IB North America, says:

The IB is committed to providing rigorous, international education to students from around the world. In the United States, the IB has received much support from governments and policymakers, including the U.S. Department of Education and local school districts, to increase student achievement and to turn around low-performing schools.

IB is not for everyone. Only some universities recognize the full diploma program (DP) as a “gold standard”. In the general public schools where the DP has been implemented, the number of actual full diploma candidates hovers in the 5-8% range of graduating seniors. For example, in Locust Valley HS, NY, Class of 2007, there were 160 seniors. Of those, 20 were full DP. Of those, only 14 earned the IB diploma, (4 were earned on appeal). What people need to know about the IB Diploma is that just earning it is no guarantee of scholarships or sophomore status. An IB Diploma can be awarded with a point range of 24-45. Schools like Towson University will award sophomore status to a student who scores 30 or higher and schools like Harvard or Oxford are looking for scores upwards of 38 for admission.

Unlike AP, a school may not simply pick and choose IB courses to offer, it must buy the complete package. A school does not have the choice of not offering the Theory of Knowledge(TOK) course, as it is one of the key components of the Diploma program. A school agrees to make the DP central to its scheduling and to fully support all aspects of the DP. This includes hiring an IB Coordinator, an EE Coordinator and a CAS Coordinator in addition to running TOK; even if you only have four students’ sign up to be full DP.

So what of the students who don’t want to be full DP but want to take one or two IB courses? They can, of course, however there are two levels of IB courses, SL (Standard Level) and HL (Higher Level). The vast majority of colleges and universities in this country do not recognize SL IB courses for college credit, only HL. So what is the difference between the two levels in terms of difficulty? After four years of research, no one has been unable to obtain a definitive explanation from IBO. All IBO will say is SL are supposed to be 150 hours and HL is 240 hours. This begs the question, if such is the case, why don’t universities give IB SL courses credit in the same manner as one-year AP credit?

One of the only reports in existence, which actually compares IB and AP, is the Fordham Report. It should be noted that the Math Professor who participated in the study asked to have his name removed from the report because his results were changed to favor IB. http://www.csun.edu/~vcmth00m/wp2.pdf IB Math and Science are relatively non-controversial, however it is the History of the Americas course which has caused many great concern from day one. In the Fordham Report, they state: “this option is neither detailed nor rich enough to serve as the sole course in U.S. History for American high school students.”

http://www.edexcellence.net/doc/APIB.pdf (pg. 51)

Any general public high school considering implementing IB should take into account the impact it will have on an existing AP program. While IBO representatives will tell schools they can probably run both or combine classes, what traditionally happens is due to the limited number of advanced students in any but the largest of high schools, students are “recommended” for and pushed towards IB by teachers and guidance counselors at the directive of the administration, instead of AP, so that districts can justify the tremendous expense of the program and show better numbers. A subsequent low sign-up for an AP course forces the Board to examine its minimum class size policy and often forces those classes to be cut. IBO even has a document on how to implement IB in an AP school. It should be noted that neither of the schools mentioned in this document presently offers AP.

http://search.ibo.org/cs.html?charset=iso-8859-1&url=http%3A//www.ibo.org/ibna/actionpacks/documents/UPDATED-CSIBAPSCHOOL.pdf&qt=ap&col=ibeng&n=3&la=enas

OTHER IB FACTS:

1. Any student work submitted to IBO for assessment becomes the “absolute property” of IBO.

2. IBO requires submission of medical and psychological reports for students with disabilities for consideration of testing modifications http://search.ibo.org/cs.html?charset=iso-8859-1&url=http%3A//www.ibo.org/ibna/research/documents/Abstract_SpecialEducation_000.pdf&qt=disabilities&col=ibeng&n=8&la=en

3. An IB Certificate is nothing more than a receipt for the exam fee and a reporting of the score earned pass or fail.

4. IB has caused controversy in NY, PA, NJ, TX, CO, VA, UT, NH and MN.

5. IBO’s testing history is certainly not without its flaws: (27,000 in UK take IB History exam given two years earlier) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article1795958.ece.

Although I cannot provide you with a press release, at LVHS last year, our HL Bio students were very disappointed as a major portion of their finals went missing when a truck carrying the exams in Argentina was hijacked and IBO refused to adjust the grades for the missing portion.

6. IBO refuses to disclose the salary of its top executives.

7. Jay Mathews, the author of Newsweek’s Best High Schools List and journalist for the Washington Post, had his book Supertest: How the International Baccalaureate Can Strengthen Our Schools co-authored and published by IBO. (Ian Hill and Blouke Carus). Mathews is therefore financially biased in favor of IB and continues to be this country’s leading (and only?) media promoter of IB.

8. The U.S. News and World Reports’ first Best High Schools List (2007) was unable to include IB schools due to “lack of verifiable data”. This year’s list is due out in October and an effort to include IB schools is being “worked on”. Unlike the Newsweek List, U.S. News includes passing scores on AP exams as part of its methodology.

OTHER CONCERNS

Ÿ IB causes controversy and divisiveness in communities not fully informed and on board with the “program”

Ÿ Scheduling problems - due to the IB DP’s restrictive construct, students often have to go without lunch or are forced to drop band, chorus, orchestra or other extra-curricular activities

Ÿ Additional layer of bureaucracy, loss of local control

Ÿ Legal questions remain unanswered: IBO requires any litigation to be handled in the courts of Geneva, Switzerland. http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/2006/may06/IBSchools.html

Ÿ TOK forces students to question their faith and family values they were raised with.

Ÿ IB History only covers a 100 year period, requires extensive curriculum rewriting to meet most State standards for graduation requirements.

Ÿ IB creates an elitist atmosphere within the school and often forces the elimination of Honors and AP courses

Ÿ High teacher and administrative turnover - while no cumulative data exists on the issue, at Locust Valley HS, NY, since IB was implemented in 2004, there have been 3 IB Coordinators and the HS is now searching for its 4^th HS Principal in 4 years. The original Principal who ushered in IB was promoted to Asst. Supt in January of 2006, and has also resigned as of 7/1/08. All of these administrators in addition to many teachers, who have left the district, were trained in IB and now all new personnel must be trained in their stead. Training averages $1500 per teacher, per 3-day session. Most training takes place during the school year, requiring the hiring of untrained substitutes at additional cost to the district and loss of educational time for the students. LVHS is a general public high school with 650 students.

Ÿ IBO Executive salaries and questionable fundraising and finances: http://www.peytonwolcott.com/International_Baccalaureate_Inc.html

I hope this information is helpful as you consider whether or not to proceed with the implementation of IB. I have been accused of spreading “misinformation” and “propaganda”, yet everything I have relayed to you in this letter is verifiable. I am featured in Jay Mathews’ book Supertest, Chapter 45, and criticized in former IBO Director General George Walker’s 2005 Plenary Speech (as Mrs. Long Island) for my concern of his endorsement of loss of individual and national sovereignty: (pg. 4) http://www.ibo.org/dg/emeritus/speeches/documents/ibna_jul05.pdf. Mr. Walker urges supporters of IB to:

“…recognize that difference, to be able to describe it and to be prepared to defend it. Increasingly, there will be moments in this region when we shall all need to stand up and be counted”.

If Mr. Walker considers me enough of a philosophical threat to “stand up and be counted” against, I hope you will give due consideration to my position and research on IB. Please feel free to contact me at lisamc3@optonline.net with any further questions

Lisa McLoughlin is available as an independent consultant to American public school districts considering the implementation of IB. Phase B of the IB authorization process requires districts to hire an IB consultant. Board of Education Trustees, as representatives of the Public Trust, should avail themselves of the opportunity to hear both sides of the IB story before investing taxpayer dollars into this expensive educational program. If interested, please e-mail lisamc3@optonline.net for information on fee and availability.

“McLoughlin, in my view, has become the liveliest and most intelligent IB critic in the country.” ~Jay Mathews, The Washington Post, 10/09/07