Update: "Who REALLY Writes Legislation"? The Civics Lesson for the Day Evolves into a Mystery?

Please reread this previous blogpost which asked the question, "Who Writes Legislation?" We were asking specifically about the legislation being drafted by the Missouri Association of School Administrators (MASA) and Missouri School Boards' Association (MABA) entitled Vision for Missouri Public Education, questioning why DESE was not writing state legislation and instead, leaving such a proposal to be written by lobbying groups.

In researching this legislative writing practice, we linked to experts who were concerned the Department of Education's agenda was exactly the same as Bill Gates. They raised the question of who really was driving federal legislation. Lobbying groups and millionaires influencing and/or writing public policy is troubling and deserves scrutiny.

After reviewing "Educated Citizenry 2020", we began wondering if our state legislators crafted this language or if they received help from any outside groups. We wondered if one non-profit group, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which promotes charter schools, school choice, utilizing tests reflecting national standards, and pre and full kindergarten programs could have influenced the current educational legislative plan. Many of these same goals are listed in the Educated Citizenry 2020. This is a fair inquiry as ALEC has written "model" bills for state legislators to take back to their states in different areas such as education and health care.

Here is a story and transcript on ALEC from NPR aired in October 2010. Note this information from the story:

Much about ALEC is private. It does not disclose how it spends it money or who gives it to them. ALEC rarely grants interviews. Bowman won't even say which legislators are members.

Is it lobbying when private corporations pay money to sit in a room with state lawmakers to draft legislation that they then introduce back home? Bowman, a former lobbyist, says, "No, because we're not advocating any positions. We don't tell members to take these bills. We just expose best practices. All we're really doing is developing policies that are in model bill form."

At least one Missouri legislator involved in drafting the current education policy is a member of ALEC. The question we asked about the Vision for Missouri Public Education should also be asked about Educated Citizenry 2020: "Who Writes Legislation?" Has this legislation been crafted by our Missouri legislators or was it already modeled for the legislators? The goals of ALEC sound quite similar to those listed in Race to the Top and adhere to the use of common core standards, and these are the goals listed in our current state plan.

We don't know who authored this legislative educational plan. It might be prudent to ask those legislators listed as sponsors if they crafted this legislation and why. None of these goals create more local/state control or decreases spending. Parental choice is not expanded as the charter schools will be held under the same standards as public schools. Autonomy in curriculum and testing will not exist in the charter system.

Do you want to read about ALEC? The following information was taken from a pdf file as the website has disappeared and was still inoperable as of 10:50 PM EST. Perhaps this site will be back online soon:

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is the nation's largest nonpartisan,
individual membership organization of state legislators, with over 2,000 legislator members
from all fifty states, and 85 former members serving in the U.S. Congress. www.alec.org

Civics Lesson for the Day: Who Writes Legislation? (Hint: It's not the Legislators)

Who writes legislation? That would be a great civics lesson, wouldn't it? Do public schools even teach civics today? I searched the Internet for the answer to that question...who writes legislation?

The first answer that appeared was from govtrackinsider.com and came from ultra-liberal Pete Stark's office. (This is the official who stated the Federal Government could do most anything in this country. Congressman Stark seems to have little regard for the powers granted to the states via the Constitution). The office did a good job of going through the steps of how a bill is crafted, but the "short" answer from the Congressman's office is a bit obtuse for me:

If you want to know who ac­tu­al­ly puts pen to paper, it’s non­par­ti­san staff lawyers who work for Congress who know the ex­it­ing law they are af­fect­ing in­side out. They do that under the di­rec­tion of of­fice staff for Mem­bers of Congress and con­gres­sion­al com­mit­tees, who vet the bill with out­side ex­perts and ad­vo­cates. Some­times those ad­vo­cates (i.e. lob­by­ists) pro­pose changes in the form of leg­isla­tive lan­guage. But did they write the bill? Prob­a­bly not.

Consider the Health Care Bill. How did a new administration roll out a bill more than 2000 pages long in a span of a few months? This blog (Romanticpoet's Weblog) does a thorough job showing the connection of the Apollo Alliance's influence and/or authorship of the bill. The Muckety maps linked in the blog are especially interesting showing how many interests were involved in the passage of the bill. It is common knowledge today and has been admitted by the Apollo Alliance that they did indeed write the Health Care bill AND the Cap and Trade bill. Pete Stark's office got this one wrong. Lobbyists' hands created this bill.

Children are not sacred in this grab for control and we have witnessed the staggering takeover of the educational industry by foundations interested in "helping the children". Bill and Melinda Gates' names keep surfacing while researching the forces behind the sweeping changes awaiting public education. This article in Inside Higher Ed questions why foundations such as Gates' are involved so closely with the Department of Education:

Michael S. McPherson, president of the Spencer Foundation, approached the same set of developments, but from the perspective of what he called a "professional skeptic," the natural outgrowth of an organization that takes as its mission the fostering of research about what works, and what doesn't, in education.

In a commentary that was polite yet pointed, McPherson expressed reservations about the change in philanthropic approach that Gates and Lumina have so eagerly embraced. "When we look at this movement" that the "outcomes-based" foundations have joined, "it's not just any old outcome -- it involves changes at the national level in ... government institutions' behavior," he said, referring to public schools and state-supported colleges.

Foundations are "not supposed to be involved in politics," McPherson said, and while he said specifically that he did not think that the charities' advocacy and efforts to "change federal policy" break the law, "it is in tension with the original spirit of what foundations are designed to do: go off and do their own thing," he said.

"This represents a shift from working at the edges to a concerted effort to change the core, working through political avenues," McPherson said. "These are people nobody has voted for.... They hold everybody else accountable but haven't been elected themselves."

Embedded in this article is a link from Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR). The reporter details the connections between Gates and The Department of Education:

“The Gates program and the Arne Duncan program are pretty much the same program,” Nancy C. Detert, chair of the Education Committee in the Florida Senate, told the New York Times (10/28/09). Mike Petrilli, vice president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, agrees, telling the Puget Sound Business Journal (5/15/09), “It is not unfair to say that the Gates Foundation’s agenda has become the country’s agenda in education.” The Business Journal noted that as of that date, the Fordham Institute itself had received nearly $3 million in Gates Foundation grants.

Technically, the lobbyists may not have written the bill, but the lobbyists certainly crafted what they wanted in the bill. We've informed readers on this blog who is setting educational policy in Missouri, known as "Vision for Missouri Public Education". It's not the State Board of Education, it's being driven by two educational lobbying groups, Missouri Association of School Administrators (MASA) and Missouri School Boards' Association (MSBA). Heck, these groups don't even try to hide the fact they are the main groups writing the policy. This is from the "Vision" website:

The Missouri Association of School Administrators and the Missouri School Boards’ Association are undertaking a joint effort to develop a “Vision for Missouri Public Education.” This joint effort will involve school board members and school administrators across the state in developing a comprehensive vision for Missouri’s public schools.

MSBA and MASA represent those charged with legal responsibility for governance and executive leadership of Missouri public schools. The two groups each have developed positions for which we advocate each year, but the groups have not developed a comprehensive vision for public education. The shortfall of state and federal dollars has legislators and state leaders looking to our organizations for leadership and the financial support for public education likely will get worse before it gets better. In the absence of any vision and/or plan, proposals such as vouchers, open enrollment, tuition tax credits, etc. will be seen as alternatives.

While these two groups have been charged with the legal responsibility for governance and executive leadership of MO public schools, I question whether this also gives them the right to write legislation for our students. The goals of their policy is clear: to deny parents the use of vouchers, open enrollment, tuition tax credits or any other plans which would compete with the traditional public school model.

Read the vision plan for Missouri and research into Bill Gates' involvement with the Department of Education. The parallels between groups who dictated health care and cap and trade policies, and the groups who are attempting the takeover of the educational system are striking. They all require complete federal control, punitive measures to the states, individuals, and businesses.

Who writes the legislation in our country today? Groups with special interests with hidden agendas and deep pockets. Remember the quotation linking Gates to the Department of Education:

"This represents a shift from working at the edges to a concerted effort to change the core, working through political avenues," McPherson said."These are people nobody has voted for.... They hold everybody else accountable but haven't been elected themselves."

These are the people currently writing educational policy and legislation to make money off our children and the taxpayers. It's the educational version of the Health Care bill. And that's the sad civics lesson for today.

The New Meaning of Diversity: Honor Class Cancelled if Minorities Don't Meet the Testing Entrance Requirements

Evanston Township High School may drop an Honors English class because it doesn't meet diversity goals. There are too many white students and not enough minority students in incoming freshman English honors class, so the school is planning not to offer the class according to the Chicago-Tribune:

Across the Chicago region, high school officials say they are making inroads in diversifying their advanced classes, but Evanston is considering the boldest step of all: eliminating an elite honors English course that has traditionally been offered to the highest-achieving incoming freshmen — usually white. The superachievers — freshmen who outscore about 95 percent of their peers nationally on eighth-grade achievement tests — would no longer have their own class, beginning next fall. A year later, the same approach would be taken with freshman biology classes, if the school board approves the proposal.

The superintendent is ..." excited about moving away from racially segregated classes," he said at a packed school board meeting earlier this week, adding that all freshmen should be taking challenging courses that will propel them to even more rigorous classes as upperclassmen.

According to the article, the reason this segregation occurs is not because of ability, but because of decades of grouping and tracking. The school believes being placed year after year in certain learning groups impedes a student's ability to learn at a challenging level. The answer? Penalize those super achievers who score very high, can learn at an accelerated rate, and make those achievers attend more of a diverse class that is not "racially segregated".

Do you think the school would have taken such a radical step if the classes had been diverse? No, it wouldn't. Read the article. This step has been taken to make sure there is equal distribution of education regardless of student ability. This is the core mission Race to the Top and Vision for Missouri Public Education: equal distribution of teachers/administrators and educational opportunity, no matter the ability or desire of the student.

Is this the plan to make public education students globally competitive? Placing all students on the same level and teaching them in the same manner? This is absurd. Students who are goal oriented and high achievers might as well stay home and take online courses. They'll certainly be challenged more in a virtual setting than sitting in classes learning information they already know.

What happened to Martin Luther King's statement, "judge a man not by the color of his skin but by the contents of his character"? Perhaps we can expand it to Evanston Township High School honors class...for appropriate classroom placement, judge a student by test scores, ability and desire to learn, not the color of his/her skin. It seems as if these high school students are judged solely by their color, not their ability.

What exactly are we paying for in public schools today? True learning or political correctness?

"Action expresses priorities" -- Mohandas Gandhi

Ghandi wrote, "Action expresses priorities". What priorities do you think are in the "Vision for Missouri Public Education"? We've written on the transformational plan put forth by the Missouri Association of School Administrators (MASA) and the Missouri School Boards' Association (MSBA). The goals of this ambitious plan are to make every student ready for college and with the new curriculum, our students will become globally competitive. This is from the "Teaching, Learning and Assessment" group vision:

Schools must prepare all children for many choices through providing them the tools and attitudes to contribute meaningfully to our democratic society and to enable them to live successfully in a rapidly changing world. Students must be prepared to think critically, to solve problems, to collaborate, to foster relationships, to be flexible, to adapt to change, and to communicate effectively. Schools must be places where all children succeed, feel safe, and have their curiosity cultivated. Experiences must be customized to meet the individual needs of every student. Standards must be clear, attainable, and high enough to ensure that all students are intellectually challenged. Learning must be at the profound level.

These educational priorities are laudable goals and sound reasonable. How they are to be attained (the action) causes concern. There is an emphasis on attaining these goals via the "new digital learning environment". Translated that means we must spend billions on longitudinal data systems to track students' physical, mental and academic progress. We've questioned if the intrusion of government into documenting the personal lives of students is constitutional. These goals are also to be met through common core standards, which violate state sovereignty and are financially unsustainable.

I was somewhat surprised to read this sentence in the plan:

Experiences must be customized to meet the individual needs of every student.

I am curious to understand how this can occur as the standards are mandated and addition and/or subtraction to common core curricula is prohibited. "Individualized mandates" is an oxymoronic phrase. You can't factor in the individual in an equation when the formula is mandated and unchangeable. If you were truly interested in the individual needs of a student, you would throw mandates out the window, and allow curriculum that was truly tailored to a student.

As we've previously written, common core standards and "Vision for Missouri Public Education" are failures in terms of empowering local school districts and the state board of education. This plan takes control from the state and we are thrown into a grouping of other states to set curriculum. It can't possibly accomplish its goal of providing individualized instruction with the plan as written.

What can we learn from Gandhi that can be applied to the authentic goals of public education? Ed Kaitz in American Thinker writes:

On his recent trip to India, President Obama was lavish in his praise for Mahatma Gandhi. Obama maintained that Gandhi's message of being "the change we seek in the world" was instrumental in inspiring his own journey from community organizer to President of the United States. "I might not be standing here today," said the president, had it not been for the Great Soul's influence.

Knowing, however, that Gandhi's political philosophy included highly persuasive polemics against big government, the welfare state, foreign aid, affirmative action, identity politics, divisive rhetoric, and malice toward one's opponents, it's hard to imagine the president devoting much time as a student in quiet and humble contemplation with the great guru's writings.


Kaitz argues Obama has a profound misunderstanding on Gandhi's true guiding principles; one is freedom, and what drives that freedom. This administration is intent on controlling more and more aspects of our lives-even our educational system-but Gandhi feared increase of the state's power:

I look upon an increase of the power of the state with the greatest fear, because although while apparently doing good by minimizing exploitation, it does the greatest harm to mankind by destroying individuality, which lies at the root of all progress.

Review the "Vision for Missouri Public Education" and determine for yourself if it creates more power for the state and if so, then how can the state can truly offer "individualized needs of every student"? In a situation of increased governmental control, the individual's needs are not protected; protecting the system's structure is paramount. The proposed educational structure will tremendously expand in terms of size and power. Do you believe the individual will have a louder voice in a larger system?

Do you agree with Gandhi's wisdom and vision or do you trust the policies of MASA and MSBA? If a powerful state does indeed destroy individuality which allows progress, what does the Missouri Vision provide to students?

What is the most "transformational" sentence in the "Vision for MO Public Education" plan? (hint: it's not new taxes)

Cato Institute writes about school choice and true innovation:

Douglas County School District officials say an unexpected level of interest in a retreat exploring school choice today and Saturday is forcing them to add an overflow room and a video feed to allow the public to watch the discussion. The school board is investigating a voucher program that would allow students to use public money to help with tuition at approved religious schools and other private ones. The two-day retreat will discuss the findings of a school-choice task force that has been mulling several issues, including vouchers.

The board will officially discuss the school-choice recommendations at a meeting Tuesday night, during which the public will be allowed to comment. No Colorado school district has a voucher program.

This might actually be a school board interested in transformation in the truest sense. Close your eyes, take a deep breath, and revel in the thought: Taxpayer money (translation: YOUR money) can be used for non-public schools. Tax money is in the control of the taxpayer, and the taxpayer is free to use it at schools the taxpayer chooses to send his/her child. What a novel idea! The taxpayer has control over the way his/her money is spent to educate his/her child! The parent is the authority in choosing an educational placement for the child and can use the money he/she has paid into the educational system. This is the ultimate empowerment of parents/taxpayers and the true transformation of education.

I have a suggestion for the school board personnel and superintendents assembled in the seven task groups for "Vision for Missouri Public Education": ditch the platform of Missouri Association of School Administrators (MASA) and Missouri School Boards' Association (MSBA) and do something that will truly empower children and taxpayers, NOT the lobbying groups. As Cato writes:

Keep your fingers crossed that Douglas County officials resist special-interest groups that are seeking to thwart this reform. The teacher unions have been vicious in their efforts to stop this kind of development. If Douglas County succeeds in putting kids first, this could break the logjam and lead to better education policy across the nation.

Why don't the taxpayers in Missouri have the "vision" of putting kids first instead of unions and lobbyists? Why isn't DESE resisting special-interest groups instead of having them draft educational policy? Why aren't the legislators reviewing a conflict of interest in lobbying groups setting policy for a state agency? As the home page in "Vision for Missouri Public" Education states:

"In the absence of any vision and/or plan, proposals such as vouchers, open enrollment, tuition tax credits, etc. will be seen as alternatives."


This sentence is the most transformational sentence in the entire plan in the Missouri vision. Let's take that sentence on face value. Cancel the workshops and stop trying to figure out way to raise revenues for mandates and more control over curriculum. Give parents and students a real choice....the alternatives. THAT'S the "vision" DESE needs to adopt.

Question to DESE and State Legislators: Is there an Ethical Issue with Educational Lobbying Organizations Setting Educational Policies?**Updated!

Check out this copy of the Columbia Tribune's article announcement of DESE's "Vision for Public Education". According to the reporter, this was an important day for DESE, the Missouri Association of School Administrators (MASA) and Missouri School Boards' Association (MSBA). "Transformational change" is to come to Missouri schools according to one spokesperson:

“One thing we will not tolerate is business as usual,” MSBA President Dave Wright said. “We are dedicated to developing ideas that will literally transform public education in our state.”

What has happened to all that excitement and pride for the program? DESE had a pdf file on its website dated August 30, 2010 entitled "Missouri Education 2020 entailing the vision for Missouri schools". This is what currently appears when you search "Vision for Missouri public schools"; a link labeled Missouri Education 2020 appears:

File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML Aug 30, 2010 ... Our Vision. Missouri public schools: the best choice . . . the best results! Our Mission. To guarantee the superior preparation and ... dese.mo.gov/news/2010/documents/Nicastro_2020.pdf

DESE loved the plan in August...it was labeled "the best choice...the best results!" This vision was to "guarantee superior preparation". Try to view it as HTML. It's been pulled by DESE. It is no longer listed on their website. Why would DESE pull the link? What's happened to those promises to the public?

Here is a press release from MASA and MSBA about the intent of these two groups to craft a plan for public education from the MSBA site (we have a copy in case it gets pulled as well). Note the first paragraph:

More than 100 school board members and superintendents gathered in Jefferson City on August 30 to begin a project designed to define the vision for public education in Missouri for the coming years. The "Vision for Missouri Public Education" project is a joint effort of the Missouri School Boards' Association and the Missouri Association of School Administrators. Its goal is to develop a plan outlining a vision for the state's public schools by October 2011.

The MSBA and MASA are defining the vision for public education for the coming years. These two groups are lobbying groups. Here is information on MASA (we'll focus on MSBA in subsequent posts):

The Missouri School Administrators Political Action Committee (MSAPAC) was originally formed in 1991 and now includes the:

• MAESP (Missouri Association of Elementary School Principals)
• MASA (Missouri Association of School Administrators)
• MASSP (Missouri Association of Secondary School Principals)
• MCCTA (Missouri Council of Career and Technical Administrators)

Here are MASA's legislative priorities for 2010-11:

http://www.masaonline.org/pages/uploaded_files/LegislativePriorities2010-11.pdf

The platform states we are in a revenue shortfall, but Missouri needs to not cut any money from public education during a recession, rather, it needs to address shortfalls via these venues:

MASA is committed to working in collaboration with other educational groups, the Governor, the General Assembly, and DESE, to seek revenue solutions for long-term sustainable funding for public education in Missouri. We believe the state should consider revenue enhancements such as a sales tax on Internet sales, tobacco taxes, alcohol taxes or a general sales tax to provide long-term funding for Missouri public schools. We also firmly believe that policy makers much do everything possible to eliminate any further erosion of local property taxes which are vital to preservation of basic educational services.

MASA, a lobbying group which protects its own special interests, is developing the educational blueprint for Missouri children. It wants to raise taxes to pay for this vision. It is important to remember through this discussion and subsequent discussions on "Vision for Missouri Public Education", MASA and MSBA are lobbying groups. Why should lobbyists be crafting legislation and why has DESE acquiesced its duties to lobbyists?

Let's look further into these legislative priorities and note what MASA opposes. We'll list those items in terms of what it opposes and then what it supports:

• Opposes: Diverting state funds from the public schools by any means including tax credits/vouchers; translation: no school choice for parents and taxpayers via tax credits/vouchers, even though more and more taxpayers and parents are demanding school choices for their children;
• Opposes: Mandating open enrollment of students; translation: students must stay in a failing school system if it is within their district boundaries;
• Opposes: Eroding public school funding by expanding Charter schools; translation: no support for Charters even as public schools are continuing to produce flat achievement scores;
• Opposes: Mandating programs without appropriating the necessary funds to implement and sustain the programs; translation: mandates must be funded with additional new taxes (see above);
• Opposes: Imposing property tax reductions, freezes or limits; translation: even if your house falls dramatically in price, your taxes owed on that devalued house would stay level or not go below a preset amount;
• Opposes: Transforming the early childhood special education program from a required program to a voluntary program; translation: early childhood special education programming should remain as a requirement.

MASA is a lobbying group and has no legislative power. Remember however, this is one of the two groups presenting the plan to DESE, the Governor, and the legislators for adoption. Who is paying MASA and MSBA for the work necessary to draft such a far reaching plan?

Note the last sentence of this press release:

Information on the progress of the "Vision for Missouri Public Education" project will be posted on www.visionforMOpublicschools.org.

Don't bother to try to access that site. It's been pulled from several sites on the Internet the last several days. But many of us have complete copies of information from the site. We'll be posting excerpts from this plan and the seven areas of transformation during the next few weeks and months. Here is a description of the planning groups:

The board members and administrators involved in the project are divided into seven groups: Teaching, Learning and Assessment; Supports for Early Learning and Student Success; Human and Organizational Capital; Governance, Leadership and Accountability; Climate, Culture and Organizational Efficacy; Financial Resources; and Physical Resources.

We'll write more in the next few weeks and months about MSBA, MASA, the participants in the plan, and the disappearance of the documents DESE was so proud of in August 2010. Perhaps one of your superintendents is on one of the seven planning committees and you can contact him/her on exactly what this transformation will entail for children and taxpayers since we can't access it on the internet any longer.

If these groups are so proud of the transformation they are planning for your children, why is this information being pulled from public scrutiny? It started out with such celebration and has now disappeared. What is happening in Columbia and Jefferson City between DESE, MASA and MSBA? Do the legislators know that policies are being drafted by lobbyists to be presented to DESE, the governor and the Legislature for adoption? Are there conflicts of interest in this plan by the groups crafting this "transformational vision"?

We don't know the answer to these questions, but we'll let you in on their vision for Missouri public education. Follow along with us the next few weeks and months as we examine MASA's and MSBA's plans. We'll publish the policies of these groups and you can make the decision if you think it is in the best interest of children and taxpayers; or the lobbyists themselves.

**Update as of 11:05 PM. I found the vision plan posted on the DESE website. It has apparently been put back up after being taken down from the Internet on Friday and Monday. It had been previously password protected or the URL had disappeared. Check out this site from DESE and I hope you can access it:

http://www.visionformopublicschools.org/

You can now read for yourself the vision.

Taxpayers Need Superman's X-Ray Vision (and a Password) to Access this Public Education Project information.

Yesterday we blogged about the disappearance of information about "Vision for Missouri Public Education". We had previously read the plan and it contained language reminiscent of what is contained in Race to the Top.

We wondered how the plan was coming along so we searched the website where this information was contained. Accessing the site, we discovered it had been taken off the internet. When you access the link, you are taken to this. The logo appears as well as a login box for your username and password, with no instructions on how you can access any further information about the program. We questioned why it was now password protected as it had a glowing report in a newspaper article.

Searching further today, I was able to find a cached copy of the original document from the Missouri Association School Boards' (MASB) and Missouri Association of School Administrators (MASA). Now you, dear taxpayer, can see what these organizations and DESE have in mind for your students and schools. Here are some excerpts:

• To build trust and support for public education.
• To create a unifying vision and transformational principles around which coalitions will form to change the education culture in the state.
• To provide guidance to local school districts as they develop strategic improvement plans for improving educational opportunities in their communities.
• To provide a world-class educational experience for all of Missouri’s students.
• To ensure our students are competitive in a global economy.

Let's compare that to the main goals of Race to the Top:

• Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to succeed in college and the workplace and to compete in the global economy;

• Building data systems that measure student growth and success, and inform teachers and principals about how they can improve instruction;

• Recruiting, developing, rewarding, and retaining effective teachers and principals, especially where they are needed most; and

• Turning around our lowest-achieving schools.

I suggest many of the goals listed in our state program encompass the more specific goals of Race to the Top. Look at the second goal in the Missouri plan: "To create a unifying vision and transformational principles around which coalitions will form to change the education culture in the state".

What could that mean for your student and your school? Whose vision and transformational principles are they going to apply? The vision and transformation contained in Race to the Top? I believe this is the plan the state is intending to implement as Chris Nicastro, the Commissioner of Education stated in our state's first proposal for RTTT funding on page 40:

"Implementation of the reform plan described in this proposal will not stop if the state does not win Race to the Top funding...In the absence of Race to the Top funding, the state and its partners would continue moving forward but will do so over a longer time-period and, in some areas, will have to adopt a more incremental approach".

"Vision for Missouri Public Education" is that incremental approach. Ms. Nicastro has made her intentions perfectly clear. This is the vision she has for our state.

This vision is costing millions of dollars (funded by stimulus) consisting of teacher and superintendent training. New standards are being drafted and teachers and administrators need to be trained. Are these goals set forth by MSBA and MASA underfunded? How much are these implementations going to cost? The Race to the Top programs were underfunded to the tune of $150 Million. I don't see anywhere on this page how much the projected cost will be. This will be expensive; look at the number of groups involved in setting the vision for the students:


To accomplish this task, there will be seven groups working on various segments of public education. They will include:

• Teaching, Learning and Assessment
• Supports for Early Learning and Student Success
• Human and Organizational Capital
• Governance, Leadership and Accountability
• Climate, Culture and Organizational Efficacy
• Financial Resources
• Physical Resources

No wonder the MASA, MASB and DESE don't want you to know what they are planning and how they are spending tax payer money. We'll research if we can legally get them to start posting their updates on a site accessible to taxpayers. After all, it's our children and our money.

Missouri Education Watchdog has some ideas on how to save money and deliver quality schools to students that will accomplish the first goal in "Vision for Missouri Public Education":

To build trust and support for public education.

We'll talk about that tomorrow. And it won't cost millions and billions of dollars and it won't relinquish educational control of our children to Chris Nicastro's idea of reform:

The Race to the Top has provided an unprecedented opportunity for Missouri to bring its citizens together, to identify common goals and to develop a plan for a decade of educational reform designed to give Missouri’s children a competitive edge in tomorrow’s international competition. Our vision for reform embraces the notion advanced in the book, Nudge, where Thaler and Sunstein outline the need for “choice architects” to subtly steer choices toward positive results while leaving people, districts and schools “free to choose.” We know that if Missouri’s public schools are to be the best choice for our citizens, they must produce the best results. This Race to the Top competition has provided the “nudge” Missouri needed to pick up the pace.

We are being "nudged" to "choices" we don't want. The PARENTS are the "choice architects" for their children, NOT the Federal government, Race to the Top mandates, Vision for Missouri Public Education goals, Chris Nicastro, DESE, MASA and MASB. It's time to "nudge" back. We'll start tomorrow.

I'll give you a hint of our educational plan. The word "parent" actually appears in our vision for students. Now THAT'S transformational.

( GNJC657FWGFB )

Blink. What Happened to the Transformational Education Plan for Missouri? UPDATED!

Is there something the State Board of Education,
Missouri School Boards Association (MSBA) and Missouri Association of School Administrators (MASA) are hiding from the taxpayers and parents of Missouri?

Earlier we reported on the failure of Missouri not receiving Race to the Top funding. After accessing the MO DESE website late summer, we discovered "Vision for Missouri Public Education". We blogged about this new, transformational plan for schools and the language which mirrored Race to the Top language. We stand by our statements we previously made:

I can answer the question "Vision for Missouri Public Education" poses underneath its logo..."why are we undertaking this initiative"? Chris Nicastro has made it clear from November 2009 that she always intended to adopt Race to the Top goals, even if no funding would be made available by Arne Duncan. She has always intended to cede state sovereignty. That is why she signed common core standards. The state has received separate funding for charter schools and funding to ostensibly hire back laid off teachers. Why does Missouri need Race to the Top funding? State control is already gone.

I hadn't read much about the new plan lately so I thought I would see what the educational professionals were planning for our Missouri students. The plan had received coverage (from the MSBA's news site) when it was first unveiled late summer:

More than 100 school board members and superintendents gathered in Jefferson City on August 30 to begin a project designed to define the vision for public education in Missouri for the coming years. The "Vision for Missouri Public Education" project is a joint effort of the Missouri School Boards' Association and the Missouri Association of School Administrators. Its goal is to develop a plan outlining a vision for the state's public schools by October 2011.

MSBA President Dave Wright told the gathering, "The one thing we will not tolerate is business as usual. We are interested in developing ideas that will literally transform public education in our state."

Among the speakers at the event was Missouri's Commissioner of Education Dr. Chris Nicastro who said Missouri ranks in the middle in most measures of student achievement and that needs to improve. She said, "A clear vision and a few very focused, high-impact goals will be critical to drive the improvement efforts necessary to bring about world-class results." She also highlighted the critical importance of early childhood education as a key component of any vision for our schools.

Note the last sentence in this article:

Information on the progress of the "Vision for Missouri Public Education" project will be posted on www.visionforMOpublicschools.org.

In fact, this the link where we received the information on the transformations ahead for our students and our schools.

I wonder if DESE, Missouri School Boards Association, and Missouri Association of School Administrators didn't appreciate our blogging on this plan of which they were so proud . I went to the website I previously visited for updates and information and the site has been taken down for updates or revisions and is password protected. Pick a username and password...try it. You'll receive this message: Username and password do not match or you do not have an account yet. Silly me. I just can't seem to find anything on the screen that directs me on how I can open an account.

Why is the information about the plans for our students and schools now hidden from the taxpayers? MSBA and MASA are funded with state and/or federal funds to transform our schools. They want to "literally transform public education in our state." Those are the exact words from MSBA President Dave Wright. These are plans for public educational facilities. If I am not mistaken, public schools are funded by the taxpayer, and as such, plans for the transformation of these schools should be transparent and available for review by the public.

Why have these plans been taken off the internet and password protected? Perhaps a Sunshine Request is in the making to access this information. The plan is to be revealed to us in 2011 and is being paid for by tax dollars for public education. I would like to know what the public servants (paid by tax dollars) have in mind for our students.

Aren't you tired and fed up of being considered an "inconsequential conduit" that channels money away from public schools? Blink. Better catch that coverage on the meeting while you can. I'll wager that's the next item to disappear. Thank goodness for screen shots.

UPDATE: I received a question on who to contact about this decision about the information disappearing. I would suggest you contact MASA. This is the contact information from the news release:

• © 2010 Missouri School Boards' Association
• 2100 I-70 Drive Southwest, Columbia, MO 65203

• 800-221-MSBA (6722)
• fax: 573-445-9981
• info@msbanet.org

Let us know at Missouri Education Watchdog what you find out!

Fw: Oprah, Obama, and SUPERMAN

Can you spot the error in the title and the supposition set forth by the Waiting for "Superman" team in the below email? I received this email today entitled "Oprah, Obama, and SUPERMAN". The email reads: "Together WE can fix education". If you think you as a taxpayer or parent is part of the "WE", you are mistaken. The "WE" are Oprah, Obama and Superman: The media/celebrity and venture capital money, the administration, and the Federal Government. This is similar to Race to the Top, Vision for Missouri Public Education, or other educational programs the government is crafting. Parents and taxpayers have no input and this newest theory creates even more federal control over local school districts and state boards of education.

Here's a sentence from the email:

Go to the Get Local page and click on your city. Then contact your campaign manager to get involved. We can't solve this crisis in education nationally without acting locally.

I may contact the campaign manager in the St. Louis area. It would be interesting to find out how I can make a difference locally when I have to operate under federal mandates and had no input as a taxpayer in the planning process. This seems like a task even Superman couldn't handle.

Subject: Oprah, Obama, and SUPERMAN

	Follow Waiting for "Superman" on Facebook" style="border-style: none; padding: 3px 3px 3px 6px;" align="ABSMIDDLE" border="0"> Hello Superheroes, Did you see Oprah last week? She dedicated two episodes to Waiting for "Superman." The movie has been getting incredible press, including coverage on NBC's Education Nation. The movie's director, Davis Guggenheim, has participated in many events, including a special town hall meeting on MSNBC. Even the President is talking about the movie. Now it's your turn to start talking: Contact your local campaign manager It's simple. Go to the Get Local page and click on your city. Then contact your campaign manager to get involved. We can't solve this crisis in education nationally without acting locally. Don't forget to tell everyone you know to see the film as it opens in nine more cities this weekend! Sincerely, The Waiting for "Superman" Team .

"Waiting for Superman"...and the REST OF THE STORY

Where is dear Paul Harvey (or his equivalent) and the "rest of the story" when we need him most? The "Waiting for Superman" movie is exploding all over the airways and Internet in terms of conversation among the media. It has been touted as providing the answer to educational "reform", but we believe it is more of educational "control".

Our previous post detailed what Molly P, our contributor who is a teacher, thought about MSNBC's recent discussion about educational problems. Talking two hours about teacher tenure and believing setting up charter schools is the answer for failing public schools does not even address the underlying issue.

What is the underlying issue? Let's go back to the pesky Constitution. Amendment X is clear:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved the States respectively, or to the people."


The Constitution does not grant Federal authority over public education. This was left up to the states to educate their citizens. This is the underlying issue that Democrats, Republicans, the media, Bill Gates, and others seem to either misunderstand or ignore. All this prattle about "Waiting for Superman" doesn't include the premise that the $4.35 Billion "reform" package thrown together by Arne Duncan is unconstitutional. This is the educational version of the health care legislation.

Arne Duncan says he believes his reforms will ensure local involvement. With all due respect, I believe this is nonsense. The Race to the Top proposal is clear: to receive money, states must sign on to common core standards and adhere to the other mandates set out by Duncan and Company. Noncompliance will not be tolerated nor funded. And even if your state isn't awarded Race to the Top funding, your local/state control will probably disappear. Missouri renamed and moved Race to the Top objectives to another program, "Vision for Missouri Public Education."

We technically didn't receive any RTTT money to achieve these goals, but if you peruse the DESE website, you will see Missouri is receiving millions and millions of dollars to achieve these goals. Here is an excerpt from the latest DESE release about the latest federal assistance given to failing school districts:

"Schools in Kansas City, St. Louis and southeast Missouri were selected by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to receive a first-year share of the competitive grant awards in order to implement one of four intensive school-reform models identified by the U.S. Department of Education: turnaround, restart, school closure or transformation".

Pay attention to those four highlighted phrases. These concepts mirror Race to the Top language. The charter schools are under the same federal mandates as the public schools. How can a clear thinking person believe charter schools can be daring and innovative when they are under the same exact mandates as public schools? Also, these millions of federal dollars bypass the state legislature for dispersal. How's THAT for local control?

If you were distressed about the Health Care takeover from this administration, you should be as equally concerned about the educational takeover. Where are the Republican state and national legislators on this issue?

Arne Duncan needs to tell the truth about the control his plans give to the Federal Government. This control strips away power from the states, taxpayers, parents, teachers and students. That is the "rest of the story" you won't hear in "Waiting for Superman".

Spelling lesson for the day via Jay Nixon: INCONGRUOUS

A spelling lesson and use of the word "incongruous" opens this posting...while looking at the Missouri DESE website, I came across this proclamation signed by Governor Jay Nixon:

http://dese.mo.gov/commissioner/mailbag/documents/proclamation_parent_involvement_week.pdf

The second week of September was designated as "Parent and Family Involvement Week" by the state legislature in 2008. The proclamation in part states:

• Whereas: "Parent and Family Involvement Week recognizes that parent and family involvement in a child's education is an important factor in determining success in school..."

I agree with that statement. How sincere that proclamation is from the governor...I have my doubts. This is from the same governor who wanted our state to receive Race to the Top funding. In the original 800 page document sent to the states, the Federal Government wanted NO input from parents on the writing of the mandates. In the 300 page DESE proposal for Missouri, parents were not even considered important stakeholders in the child's education:

http://dese.mo.gov/rt3/documents/RT3Application.pdf

Scroll to page 11. DESE is explaining what Race to the Top entails, the process, and the "actors" involved in this educational mandate. Remember the proclamation Governor Nixon signed for this week, "Parent and Family Involvement Week". Now read the language of the proposal for this Federal Mandate:

"These transformative activities, which are the heart of Missouri's reform plan, will actively involve and impart all actors in the education system:

• Individuals (most notably students, teachers and principals)


• Education organizations (unions, reform organizations)


• Educational institutions--LEAs, Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs), DESE, Department of Higher Education (DHE), early education providers.

Dear reader, did you spot who was left out of this list? This list supposedly listed ALL the actors in the education system, correct? This is exactly what was published in the original proposal for Race to the Top funds. The list does not include parents. Parents are not considered an integral part of the educational system by the individuals controlling the system.

Do you find this a bit disingenuous? Governor Nixon signed a document which states parent and family involvement is an important factor in determining a child's success in school...but parents have not been involved in the decision to sign away our local and state educational control via adopting common core standards. Parents are not involved in the planning for "Vision for Missouri Public Education", which, in reality, is Race to the Top. The title is different, but the federal control of state education remains the same:

http://www.visionformopublicschools.org/

The proclamation ends with the governor encouraging "all residents to observe this event through activities that will bring about an increased awareness of the importance of parent and family involvement in a child's education." I have a suggestion for an activity which would increase awareness of the importance of parent and family involvement in a child's education...I propose Chris Nicastro invite parents and taxpayers to help develop the comprehensive vision for Missouri public schools.

Currently our education system is being "transformed" by school board members and administrators according to their vision for our schools. Granted, some school board members are parents...but wouldn't it be a novel idea to involve parents/taxpayers who have volunteered to serve on such a board, who are not appointed, and whose motivation is not to promote an preconceived Federal educational agenda? Can you imagine or dare to dream of a comprehensive vision for Missouri public schools that focused on the children (not the "actors" in the Race to the Top language) and the sovereign right of the state to educate those children?

As a previous posting stated, parents are considered "inconsequential conduits"...we are only there to provide the students and the money to fund the program. Other than that, we are to go along with whatever the system has deemed appropriate.

The motives and actions of Jay Nixon, Chris Nicastro and the State Board of Education don't align with this proclamation. It's currently not worth the paper on which it's written. It's incongruous: it is inconsistent within itself.