Does the Key To Correcting Common Core Lie in the Proposed Student Success Act

Representative John Kline of Minnesota, chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee, has provided his solution to the overreach of the US Department of Education that has given us Common Core and a host of other education accountability programs that have robbed our states of their sovereignty over education. The Student Success Act, if passed, would empower local control of education, returning choices for what is best for our children to the closest possible authority: parents, teachers, districts, and state government.

From an Ed Week article on SSA,

There are currently more than 80 distinct federal programs that are supposed to promote student achievement. The Student Success Act would eliminate more than 70 of those programs and replace them with grant funding that states and school districts would have the flexibility to use to tailor programs to their local needs.

Instead of Washington bureaucrats making decisions, the legislation would allow superintendents, school leaders, and local officials to make funding decisions based on what they know will help improve student learning. In addition, the Student Success Act would require the U.S. secretary of education to identify and eliminate positions associated with those programs.

The Student Success Act would repeal the onerous No Child Left Behind requirement that districts employ teachers deemed “highly qualified.” This mandate has valued a teacher’s credentials over his or her effectiveness in the classroom. Instead, the Student Success Act would support state- and locally driven teacher-evaluation systems that provide states and school districts with the tools necessary to measure an educator’s influence on student achievement

These changes are consistent with the message being delivered by the Missouri Coalition Against Common Core. Accountability is all well and good, but it is important to be accountable to the right source for the things that are most important to the people actually paying the dollars. Our current system, and the one we will have going forward, moves that accountability further and further away from the local district and the local taxpayers.  We send our money to Washington and then have to do the dance they want to get a portion of it back (through IDEA, Title I and the other 75 programs.) Lesson plans and curriculums are designed around the goals of people far removed from the state. Even the goals of "college and career ready" laid out by CCSSI are not necessarily the goals of all school districts for all children. Yet 100% of the school's focus will now be those goals. With the average district getting on 7% of its funding from the feds (some as low as 2% and the high only being around 15%), it is absurd how much control the US Department of Education has over local school districts.

MCACC has pointed out repeatedly the existing federal laws that limit the authority of the USDoEd that are not being followed.

--> Department of Education Organization Act (1979) Sec. 103 (a) “It is the intention of the Congress . . . to protect the rights of State and local governments and public and private educational institutions in the areas of educational policies and administration of programs and to strengthen and improve the control of such governments and institutions over their own educational programs and policies . . . (b) no provision of a program administered by the Secretary [of Education] or any such officer to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, over any accrediting agency or association, or over the selection or content of library resources, textbooks, or other instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, except to the extent authorized by law.”

--> No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) (reauthorization of ESEA) Section 9529 “PROHIBITION ON FEDERALLY SPONSORED TESTING.(a) GENERAL PROHIBITION.-Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal law and except as provided in subsection (b), no funds provided under this Act to the Secretary or to the recipient of any award may be used to develop, pilot test, field test, implement, administer, or distribute any federally sponsored national test in reading, mathematics, or any other subject, unless specifically and explicitly authorized by law.” 

If it takes yet another congressional act to to force the USDoEd to adhere to the restrictions placed on it, then so be it. In the end it does not seem likely that DC will voluntarily back off. It will be up to the states and the local districts to stand up and assert the rights they already have, to say "We do not see the benefit to us in supplying you with all the reporting your program requires," "The seed money you want to dangle in front of us is pitiful compared to the lifetime cost of running this program.  Regardless of the benefits you claim the program will have, we will not establish and then accustom our taxpayers to a program we cannot afford to keep running." To the extent that Congress can cut off the funding of the people who would threaten to cut off the return of our money to us to keep us dancing their dance, we applaud the efforts of the House Education Committee. SSA will not completely stop that process. The department will still be doling out funds in the form of grants. SSA will only remove DoEd's ability to dictate the exact conditions to be met to receive the money. Beyond that, the solution lies in reclaiming our legal and rightful local control.

Can Teachers Really Be Creative and Innovative when Teaching to the Test? Do They Really Have that Much Magic?

The video of Ellie Rubenstein, a Highland Park School District (Lincoln Elementary School)  teacher who resigned because of the increased time taken on standardized testing, has created new debate on the role of teachers.  Rubenstein offers her statement on what it's like to teach today in the classroom.  From the Daily Mail:

The former teacher says: 'Raising students' test scores on standardized tests is now the only goal, and in order to achieve it the creativity, flexibility and spontaneity that create authentic learning environments have been eliminated.

'Everything I love about teaching is extinct,' she continued.

'...over the past 15 years, I've experienced the depressing, gradual downfall and misdirection of communication that has slowly eaten away at my love of teaching.'

She adds that she now feels like she is now 'not being allowed to do anything meaningful' but is 'instead forced to act as as cog in a wheel that is turning in the wrong direction.'

What happened in the last 15 years?  Could it include the adoption/implementation of the Bush/Kennedy No Child Left Behind act, the mandates focusing on increased standardized testing and the withholding of federal funding if benchmarks aren't reached?  Did you know Common Core standards have been described as "NCLB on steroids"?  If this teacher feels like a "cog in a wheel", imagine how the students feel in these mandated education scripts.

 

Be sure to read comments on the video from other teachers.

 What is the school's response?  From chicagotribune.com:

District administrators blamed the moves on a negative work environment at Lincoln Elementary School, but parents weren't convinced.

"If that's the case, I can't believe I learned about it just now," said David Seidman, parent of two Lincoln School students, before evoking a famous speech by the building's namesake to say administrators had created a environment of mistrust in the larger school community.

"This house is very much divided, and I don't know how it's going to stand again," Seidman said.

The parents' anger was stoked when Lincoln School fourth-grade teacher Ellie Rubenstein posted a video Tuesday on YouTube to air her grievances and publicly resign. She and three other Lincoln School educators were recently told they would be transferred to other schools next year. One of the transfers was voluntary, and three were involuntary, according to officials.

North Shore School District 112 Superintendent David Behlow said Lincoln School's working environment needed improvement, noting the building has had three principals in the last four years.

 Behlow said many of Rubenstein's comments in the video "were inaccurate, misleading and, in many cases, factually wrong."

"Our teachers are encouraged to be creative and innovative and to exercise their own craft and magic in classrooms every day," Behlow said.

Read more here.

What is the truth?  We aren't privy to know confidential work/performance information to determine who is being most truthful.  However, the last comment by Behlow makes me believe the teacher has more credibility.  Teachers can't possibly "be creative and innovative and to exercise their own craft and magic in classrooms every day" in the current NCLB requirements and upcoming Common Core mandates.   Mandates are inflexible and opposed to creativity and innovation and it would take a lot of magic to work around them.  No teacher has that amount of magic to accomplish that craft.

Can You Find the Statute Mandating Student Compliance?

A parent in the Cape Girardeau School District asked if she could opt her child out of MAP testing. According to DESE, the answer was students may not be excused from the collective testing. Here is the story from KFVS:

According to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, the test is a must.

"Based on No Child Left Behind, opting out of the MAP test is not an option," said Pat Fanger, assistant superintendent for Cape Girardeau Public Schools.

Accessing the DESE website under "MAP Test Information for Parents", here is the only information I could find about the testing mandates:

What is the Outstanding Schools Act?

The MAP assessments are required under Senate Bill 380, often referred to as the "Outstanding Schools Act," the state school-reform law enacted in legislature in 1993. This bill required the State Board of Education to adopt no more than 75 academic performance standards, which established the knowledge, skills and competencies necessary for students to "successfully advance through the public elementary and secondary education system of this state; lead to or qualify a student for high school graduation; and prepare students for postsecondary education or the workplace or both." These "Show-Me Standards" are guides to what students should be able to know and to do. There are 40 knowledge standards and 33 performance standards.

Linking onto the "Outstanding Schools Act", I can't find any language mandating Missouri students to take the MAP test. The legislation directs DESE in ITS legal requirements but I can't find legislation directing parents to make their child accountable to the school for this test.

Check out the No Child Left Behind website also listed on the DESE site and try to find the language which mandates students take the MAP test. I can't find that mandate or legislation in there either.

Do you think Debbie Jaco of Cape Girardeau will be put in jail if her daughter is not available for the MAP testing? Can DESE produce the specific legislation that states a taxpayer is legally mandated as a public school parent to force his/her child to take a test that doesn't determine whether he/she passes or fails a subject or a school year?

If you have the specific legislation either from the state or federal government with this mandate as it relates to individual students, please let us know. Reread this sentence again:

"Based on No Child Left Behind, opting out of the MAP test is not an option," said Pat Fanger, assistant superintendent for Cape Girardeau Public Schools.

Opting out of the MAP test may not be an option for schools, but as of now, I cannot find language which is directed to individual students.

A Teacher and Cato Institute Hit the Bullseye Dissecting the Department of Education

I came across this article from Cato, originally published in October 2009. We are witnessing the largest power grab attempt by the Federal Government in state education through RTTT, common core standards, and federal teacher bailouts. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Let's look at what Neal McCluskey, Cato education writer has to say about the Federal Government's foray into education in 2009 and where we are today:





http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/federal-education-results-prove-the-framers-right/





The basic question McCluskey asks is "what is the proper Federal in education"? His answer: "The proper federal role is no role, because the Constitution gives the feds no authority over American education". This gives constitutionalists a thrill up their legs. It should. He's right.



Read and think about what he is saying...study the graph he provides and just let it soak into your brain...the TREMENDOUS amount of spending the Federal Government has poured into schools for FLAT learning results.





So, what does a teacher in the classroom have to do with Neal McCluskey and his theories?





Below is an excerpt from a teacher in a public school setting responding to questions on what was not working at the public schools. I won't tell you where this teacher is located, he/she could be anywhere in the United States. This scenario is what the Department of Education wants for the teachers and students? These mandates will not help our students excel in the "global environment" or increase test scores. Neal McCluskey believes it; the teacher lives it.

This teacher has been operating under "No Child Left Behind" standards. Teachers generally don't like these standards, as you will read below. NCLB is about to be replaced with even more mandates from the Obama administration which will cost more millions, create new testing protocol, and will throw the educational system into even more chaos.


Words from a teacher in the trenches:
*********************************************************************************************************************************



Let me first say I am for abolishing the federal Department of Education. According to the 10th Amendment, education is a state issue. Nearly every single federal program handed down to me by politicians who know extremely little of education not only harms teachers, but more importantly harms kids.


Bush's No Child Left Behind is a perfect example. According to this law, every child has to read on-grade level. This mandate points out the fact politicians know nothing of education. I am an extremely optimistic person, but it is simply a fact that you cannot possibly get every child to read on grade level. Some kids simply cannot do it. Some kids are not intellectually ready for it. Some kids have an extremely difficult home life and are more worried about their daily survival than learning how to read. However, it sounds so good coming from the president and our heroic legislators, doesn't it? They're requiring teachers to get every child on grade-level.


This is my single biggest frustration as a teacher. Here's why: Two and a half hours are taken out of my instruction time a week so that I can teach 5 to 6 elementary students out of a total of about 60 how to read. All other students are given low-quality instruction. This is not completely the fault of the teachers. We are given NO time during contract hours to prepare lessons for the low achieving students OR the other 55 students. I work with our low students and because I accept nothing less than my best, I spend additional non-contracts hours making lessons for the low achieving students. However, most teachers will not do that. As a result, the rest of the 55 kids receive substandard instruction that oftentimes includes a worksheet.



So, does Bush's NCLB plan work? After working with my 5 students last year, they did improve; baby steps I would say. But, they will never read on grade level. So, their baby steps were at the expense of the 55 other students. Sounds like liberalism, eh? Nobody is allowed to achieve and we have to devote all energies to our low kids. Don't get me wrong, we SHOULD help ALL of our students, but, if I was given that 2 and a half hours back, I could MUCH more effectively help every SINGLE student in my classroom.

Common Core Standards --- I oppose these mostly because they are federally mandated. (Yes, states can choose to adopt them, but the fed are dangling money in front of the states who are cash strapped. Unfortunately the dollar signs win out over values (except in states like Texas and Alaska). We already have standards in my state. They're called Grade-Level Expectations and Course Level Expectations. Our standards in my state are among the very best. Many states model their standards after ours….so we adopted the standards and here's what going to happen. Our standards will be thrown out, we spends MILLIONS of dollars re-writing standardized tests, re-educating teachers on new standards that are not needed. Districts have to spend MILLIONS Of dollars re-writing curriculum and districts tests that were based on the old standards…ETC…the list goes on and on. Common Core Standards have absolutely nothing to do with accountability. We are already held accountable at the state level where, constitutionally speaking, it should be. Common Core Standards are, in my opinion, unconstitutional and a colossal waste of tax-payer money.



***********************************************************************************
You've heard from Neal McCluskey and a teacher. This teacher is living the reality McCluskey writes about. They have the same message.

What do you think? Do you have faith in more mandates and more programming from the Department of Education? If "No Child Left Behind" did not succeed, why should this new plan be any different? Who is benefiting financially from the rewritten tests, curriculum, and the need for synchronized data systems? Do you believe this is for the benefit of the students or could it be for other interests?



If you study the FACTS of the Department of Education's directing of curriculum, you have to come to the conclusion this intrusion into states' rights has been an abject failure. Again, study the graph. That graph provides stark answers to the questions above. Come ask Neal McCluskey on September 10, 2010 YOUR education questions in St. Louis:

http://guest.cvent.com/EVENTS/Info/Agenda.aspx?e=f86d0fb0-351c-4bb5-a23a-100ad569f2d9

Missouri Education Watchdog will be there. We hope Neal can give us some advice on how to stem this disaster known as the Department of Education.