Common Core: UNESCO and Bill Gates timeline to federalized education reform in US

Common Core: UNESCO and Bill Gates timeline to federalized education reform in US

4/29/14
0626 am

In most every state,community, every small town, big city or tiny rural town the education landscape is changing rapidly.

This newest form of change has been evolving for over a decade and has finally found a lucrative vehicle to carry it through to it’s completion.

The United Nations via its educational division, UNESCO is the main force that is pushing major education reform across the globe. Microsoft  billionaire entrepeneurs Bill and Melinda Gates are working closely with UNESCO to make sure
that reform is in place as the United Nations desires.

For a while many have stood and watched the changes and have been puzzled at the break neck speed in which education was transforming right before our eyes and have wondered who could be behind this and why.

Common Core, Education for All, Race to the Top, Teachers for America, International Benchmarking, School Vouchers, Teacher pay for performance, ICT, Goals 2000 Act, the School-to-Work Act Opportunities Act, Connect All Schools and the reauthorized Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) called “Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994″, etc, are all the products of the United Nations, particularly the Millennium Development Goals or MDGs.

Since 1992 there has been a steady drum beat of radical change. This change combined with the right environment and billions of dollars now has a synergist, a vehicle to carry educational change to fruition. Bill Gates and UNESCO, the educational division of the United Nations is carrying the banner for the United Nations that has it’s sights solely on our children with this foray into nationalizing or should I say Internationalizing our educational system.

What started as a benign donation ended up being the catalyst that has finally arrived at Common Core. 

Bill Gates donates many grants to UNESCO and Common Core, this got the ball rolling pretty quickly but for more than a decade the leftist were working behind the scenes to make sure that education reform would be for all, the whole world, not just in the good ole USA. 

Behind the scenes and in conjunction with UNESCO, the Gates and an international body are the main minions carrying the ball for the UN.

http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/05/12/gates-gives-150-million-in-grants-for-common-core-standards/

http://www.unesco-ihe.org/About/News/Bill-Melinda-Gates-Foundation-grant-awarded-to-UNESCO-IHE-and-partners

I love timelines. Timelines organize many actions and events into an organized structure that is easy to read and refer to. So here is my latest timeline that if read carefully and with an open mind you can easily see this is far from initiated by the states. This was and is a deliberate top down internationalization of our school systems. From the very top of the education reform food chain, all the way down to our local school boards.

-Good ole Marc Tucker, Linda Darla Hammonds and a host of others are pressing forward to make Common Core and education for all a reality.

• 1988: Marc Tucker became the president of the National Center for Education and the Economy (NCEE) where he joined up with Hillary Clinton, Mario Cuomo, and Ira Magaziner to get states to move away from local control of their schools and migrate to national standards.

• 1990: George H. W. Bush signed an international agreement entitled, “World Education for All (EFA), the result of a United Nations “World Conference on Education for All” summit. 
http://www.restoreokpubliceducation.com/node/687

• 1991: Tucker and Lauren Resnick created New Standards that pushed standards-based reform.
http://mississippipep.wordpress.com/2011/09/03/controversial-author-marc-tucker-to-speak-at-ms-dept-of-education-statewide-forum-sept-14/

• 1992: Tucker writes “Dear Hillary Letter.” This letter, written to Hillary Clinton, addressed Tucker’s ideas for radical education reform after Bill Clinton’s presidential win. 

The goal is “to remold the entire American system” into “a seamless web that literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same systems for everyone,” coordinated by “a system of labor market boards at the local, state and federal levels” where curriculum and “job matching” will be handled by counselors “accessing the integrated computer-based program.” 

• 1994: Tucker’s ambitious plan was implemented in three laws passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton: the Goals 2000 Act, the School-to-Work Act Opportunities Act, and the reauthorized Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) called “Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994.”

• 1996: An organization called ACHIEVE, Inc. was formed by the nation’s governors and corporate leaders. (Many of them tied to Marc Tucker and the NCEE). The goals from an Education Summit in Palisades, NY were to ACHIEVE the goals of the 1994 school reform bills. (link)

• 1998: Tucker and Judy Codding created America’s Choice, a comprehensive school reform program, that made sure the national standards were further implemented into schools.

• 2001: George W. Bush renames ESEA “The No Child Left Behind Act” and signed it into law.

• 2004: Microsoft (Bill Gates) contracts with UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) to fulfill part of UNESCO’S Millennium Campaign Goals—universal education and educating for a global economy. A “master curriculum” for teacher training in information technologies based standards, guidelines, benchmarks, and assessment techniques is to be developed. (link)
(UNESCO / Gates Foundation Agreement)

• 2005: Bill Gates funds the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce—created by Tucker. States begin adopting its education reform initiative, “Tough Choices or Tough Times.” In 2008, Utah’s Governor Huntsman touts it and joins with 5 others states (Massachusetts, Delaware, Arizona, New Mexico, and New Hampshire) who adopt it in order to “reinvent their educational systems.” 

2005- Bill Gates signs 26 page agreement with UNESCO:
http://www.edwatch.org/updates05/120205-gatesw.htm

2005- Bill Clinton: “We have to do away with our love of local control of our schools”
http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/ed-watch/12-2-unesco-gates.htm

• 2008: Gates Foundation, along with two other foundations, created Strong American Schools (a successor to the STAND UP campaign launched in 2006, which was an outgrowth of UNESCO’s Millennium Campaign Goals for Universal Education). It calls for American education standards.

NOTE- This point in the timeline above and below is probably the most important transition from UNESCO, Bill Gates, the IBAG to passing the Common Core Standards to the NGA. Many think that the NGA just popped out this idea, when in fact it was handed to the NGA on behalf of Bill Gates and UNESCO.

This is the claim where the CCS were state led, “because they came from NGA, a group of state Governors, doing what is best for their states.”

• 2008: Gates Foundation funds the International Benchmarking Advisory Group report for Common Core Standards on behalf of the National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, and ACHIEVE, Inc. titled, “Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education.” This report shows the United Nations is a member of the International Benchmarking Advisory Group for Common Core Standards. 

The member of mention is the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) which developed UNESCO’s Millennium Declaration—partnering with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. (link)

The report states: While states must take the lead, the federal government can help. And the federal government can do that best by playing an enabling role grounded in a new vision for the historic state-federal partnership in education.

• 2009:  Marc Tucker writes a chapter in the book “Change Wars: The Inspiring Future for Educational Change.” One chapter is called International Benchmarking as a Lever for Policy Reform. The book says the UN’s OECD launched Programme for International Student Assessment in 2000 to monitor the outcomes of education. Linda Darling-Hammond also contributes a chapter. Darling-Hammond heads the SBAC.

• April, 2009: Gates Foundation members, along with a few dozen others, participate in a Washington conference and produce “Smart Options: Investing the Recovery Funds for Student Success.” These ideas were funded by the 2008 Stimulus (ARRA-American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) and supported Race to the Top. Priority 1: Develop Common American Standards—also called Career-Ready Standards—in most states by January 2012.

• 2009 (summer): Council of Chief State School Officers, National Governors Association, and ACHIEVE, Inc. agree to partner on a common core standards project.

• 2009 (fall): The U.S. Dept. of Ed signals it will fund $360M for summative assessments aligned to Common Core Standards and begins planning meetings. Two consortia begin competing for this funding: Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers. States begin adopting Common Core Standards and join one of the consortia in order to receive No Child Left Behind waivers from the U.S. Department of Education Secretary, Arne Duncan.

• 2009 (December): Utah becomes a governing member state of Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and is obligated to use the online assessments created by the SBAC which is led by Bill Ayers’ friend, Linda Darling-Hammond. Judy Park, Associate Superintendent, Utah State Office of Ed, eventually co-chairs the Consortia.

• 2009 (December): Gates Foundation gives the National PTA a $1 million grant to mobilize parents for Common Core Standards.

• June, 2010: National Governors Association and State Education Chiefs launch Common State Academic Standards.

• April 2011: The SBAC Overview Curriculum and Assessment Conference issues a report stating that CCSS member states must adopt their assessments by Dec. 31, 2011. Further, they must develop tests to be administered in 2014-2015.

• 2011: The American Legislative Exchange Council’s (ALEC) education task force calls for the demise of the Common Core Standards, but puts it on hold after receiving a $376,635 grant from the Gates Foundation. (link)
http://www.missourieducationwatchdog.com/2011/12/bill-gates-gift-to-alec-376635-reasons.html?m=1

• 2011: Bill Gates speaks at the November G20 Summit in Cannes and issues his report, “Innovation With Impact: Financing 21st Century Development” stating, “My report will address the financing needed to achieve maximum progress on the Millennium Development Goals, and to make faster progress on development over the next decade.”

• 2011: Obama Education Secretary Arne Duncan announces “Today, I promise you that [the Department of Education] will be a committed partner in the national effort to build a more environmentally literate and responsible society… We must advance the sustainability movement through education… Education and sustainability are the keys to our economic future-and our ecological future.”

• 2012: States begin to recognize the loss of local control and enormous cost of implementation of the Common Core Standards. Many states begin pushing back. The Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute call the standards unconstitutional per federal education law.

• 2012: States not on Common Core and not meeting the Annual Yearly Progress requirements of NCLB petition congress for relief. Lawmakers working on options are undercut when the Obama White House circumvents congress to grant waivers from NCLB if states adopt Common Core.

-Texas Education Commissioner Robert Scott stated that the common standards movement amounted to a “desire for a federal takeover of public education.” Now, additional states (who originally signed on), including Massachusetts, Iowa, Kansas, and Virginia, are expressing concerns about the common standards initiative.

-Gov. Nikki Haley just signed a letter supporting legislation in South Carolina to block CCSS implementation stating, “South Carolina shouldn’t relinquish control to a consensus of states any more than the federal government.”

2011-Larry Shumway, Utah state superintendent, a member of the CCSSO Board of Directors, a member of the Board of Directors at West Ed which is the project management partner for SBAC assessments, recommends Utah retain its relationship as a governing member of the SBAC (thus forcing Utah to use their tests).

“I am personally opposed to any changes in Utah’s public education governance, either by constitutional amendment or by statutory revision, that would have the effect of centralizing power and decreasing representation.  I oppose changes that would decrease the ability of local boards of education, elected by the citizens of that district, to guide their own schools to meet the needs of their communities as they see it, or that would diminish the ability of 104 elected legislators and 15 elected State Board members to fulfill their responsibilities to lead Utah public education as they represent their constituencies.” -Larry Shumway–State of Education Address October 11, 2011

This seems to me a clear conflict of interest for Mr. Shumway to testify to the Utah legislature on anything related to Common Core or the SBAC.

Gates’ Foundation other contributions during the time frame of consideration and development of the Common Core initiative.

Counsel of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO): 
2009–$9,961,842
2009–$3,185,750
2010–$743,331
2011–$9,388,911

National Governor’s Association (NGA): 
2008–$2,259,780,Mark Tucker’s NCEE: 
2009–$1,500,000

Total: $27,000,000

Bill Gates, via UNESCO and the United Nations and many willing participants taking bribes at all levels has successfully not only nationalized but Internationalized our educational system. 

To any who still harbor the illusion that Common Core State Standards were the product of the states simply coming together, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you.
Special thanks to the many people involved in digging this information up. Much work has been done by people all around the country to put this information together and help follow the money trail.

 Please do your part now in passing this information on to everyone you know so they can be educated about what the Common Core Initiative is really all about.

Links to above article:
Bill Gates timeline: best source
http://commoncorefacts.blogspot.com/2012/03/not-federally-led.html?m=1 

Ed for all 2015

Click to access class%20of%202009.pdf

http://whatiscommoncore.wordpress.com/tag/unesco/

IBAG
http://www.achieve.org/benchmarkingforsuccess

Click to access BenchmarkingforSuccess.pdf

http://whatiscommoncore.wordpress.com/2012/09/14/does-u-n-s-education-mandate-push-common-core-in-usa/

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/55091

2004- UNESCO “Cooperation Agreement” with Bill Gates.

Click to access strategy_microsoft_agreement.pdf

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/partners-donors/the-actions/education/microsoft-and-unesco-together-to-promote-education-through-information-and-communication-technologies-ict/

Common Core goes green: Next Generation Science Standards on the way

Common Core goes green: Next Generation Science Standards on the way

Ever since the appointment of Arne Duncan as the Secretary of Education, Governor Bill Haslam elected as our “radical education reformer,” Kevin Huffman,  Secretary of Education in Tennessee, ex husband of Michelle Rhee appointed by Haslam  and our State Representative Kevin Brooks, the recipient of 6,000 dollars of Rhees money our state and our kids have seen this day coming for a while. The perfect storm was formulated.

Common Core is rolling out the green carpet. A liberals dream come true. A radical reformist politicians bucket list has come to fruition.

In a world created by the highest bidder, the next progressive step in common core is to indoctrinate our children using the “green movement” as their platform. 

The big political arm of the green movement is now surfacing in our schools. Science, the EPA and the UNs next big step to further liberalize, globalize our school system in exchange for the minds of our children.

Common Core is teaming up with the “greenies” to provide a multi-pronged effort to promote “fun” contests and activities for students while promoting the new Common Core “state standards” in Science.
 
As reported by Mary Grabar in Front Page Magazine (See link below), she states  “For example, the Department’s latest Green Strides newsletter (February 28) announced three contests for K-12 students who display their agreement with the government’s position on climate change.”

“In that newsletter, the Department of Education announced that another federal agency, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and its National Environmental Education Foundation, have “launched an exciting video challenge for middle school students called Climate Change in Focus.”  

“In this contest, middle school students are asked to make a video that “expresses why they care about climate change and what they are doing to reduce emissions or to prepare for its impacts.”  

“To win loyalty to the EPA, it is announced that winning videos will be highlighted on the EPA website.”

 “The effort sounds like the kids’ cereal box promotions of yore: the top three entries will receive “cool prizes like a solar charging backpack,” winning class projects will receive special recognition for their school, and the first 100 entrants will receive a year’s subscription to National Geographic Kids Magazine.”

“Another contest, National Wildlife Federation’s Young Reporters for the Environment, invites students “between the ages of 13-21 to report on an environmental issue in their community in an article, photo or photo essay, or short video.”  Entries should “reflect firsthand investigation of topics related to the environment and sustainability in the students’ own communities, draw connections between local and global perspectives, and propose solutions.”

“Students are also encouraged to make nominations for “Champions of the Earth,” a “UN-sponsored award for environment, Green Economy, and sustainability.”  

“Students already get exposed to climate change and sustainability in textbooks which are bought with taxpayer funds, as well as in videos and online materials produced by taxpayer-supported Public Broadcasting.  Many students, of course, have had to sit through Al Gore’s documentary, An Inconvenient Truth.”

The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)—the next phase of Common Core—will make the situation worse, however,” Grabar continues.  

“Students will be even less capable of distinguishing science from propaganda.  These standards, like those for math and English Language Arts, were produced by Achieve, a nonprofit education group started by corporate leaders and some governors. 

 As in the standards for English Language Arts and math, the NGSS are intended to be transformative, or as Appendix A states, “to reflect a new vision for American science education.”  They call for new “performance expectations” that “focus on understanding and applications as opposed to memorization of facts devoid of context.”

“It is precisely such short shrift to knowledge (dismissively referred to as “memorization”) to which science professors Lawrence S. Lerner and Paul Gross object.  The standards bypass essential math skills in favor of “process,” they asserted last fall at the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation blog.”

“Common Core standards, in all disciplines, are written with a lot of fluff to conceal their emptiness.”

“The Common Core math standards themselves have garnered much criticism among teachers, parents, and students; focusing so much on “process,” they make simple problems bizarrely confusing, as a collection of examples illustrates.”

“With some sarcasm, they write, “It is charming to say ‘. . . students learn science effectively when they actively engage in the practices of science.’”  However, Students will not learn best if they practice science exactly as do real scientists. A firm conclusion in cognitive science contradicts that claim.  Beginners don’t and can’t ‘practice’ as do experts.”  

“Not only do the Next Generation Science Standards shirk the necessary foundations in math and science knowledge, but they explicitly call for including ideological lessons, such as “Human impacts on Earth systems.” 

“For grades K-2, students are to understand. Things people do can affect the environment but they can make choices to reduce their impact.” 

“In grades 3 through 5, students will learn “Societal activities have had major effects on the land, ocean, atmosphere, and even outer space.”  “Societal activities can also help protect Earth’s resources and environments.”  

This is from part ESS3.C of the NGSS standards. “Human impacts on Earth systems” are huge topics, when approached legitimately.  They present quandaries to scientists at the top levels.  Yet NGSS imposes them on kindergartners. The objective, of course, is not teaching legitimate science, but indoctrination.”

Amazingly, ten states have already voluntarily adopted the Standards.
Such efforts, coordinated by the Department of Education, threaten the future of science itself.

BCN Summary:
Common Core is clearly not doing what it was hyped to do. It is clearly time for us to abandon these standards and the curriculum that follows.

Our children are not available for the transformative thinking of liberals and the assault on their minds.

The ABCs and the 3 Rs need to be our focus, not the accumulation of liberal global indoctrination.

Let’s get back to teaching and let’s see less propaganda in our schools.

Please subscribe to her newsletter and read her info frequently. I have met Mary Grabar and heard her speak. She is an expert on this subject and was a big contributor to this blog entry. Please view the link below.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/mary-grabar/common-cores-little-green-soldiers/

Common Core: Arne Duncan speaks to “white moms” opposing reform, “your child, not as bright as you thought they were”

Common Core: Arne Duncan speaks to “white  moms” opposing reform, “your child, not as bright as you thought they were”

On Friday, November 15th, 2013, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, in a meeting with state education chiefs and Superintendents spoke regarding opposition to the Common Core State Standards. 

Speaking to parents, “white moms” upset with test results and weaknesses within the educational system Duncan had this to say:

“I  find it fascinating that opponents include “white suburban moms” who — all of a sudden discovered that their child isn’t as bright as they thought they were, and their school isn’t quite as good as they thought they were.”

Duncan apologized on Monday afternoon for the remark.

According to CNN, Duncan said: “My wording, my phrasing, was a little clumsy and I apologize for that.”

Soccer moms, those “white moms”, dads, parents, teachers and basically anyone concerned about how Common Core will affect their children have been completely dismissed by Duncan and with one comment has shown his insensitivity for parents concerned or opposed to Common Core.

The failure of the elite left swept up
in their own personal bubble of self righteousness have once again failed to listen to the populace that speaks against their so called weak reform measures.

Duncan is talking to concerned parents, who happen to be white, injecting race unnecessarily into a bitter fight over common core, deliberately talking down to parents as if to shame them into shutting up? Where is his shame?

Duncan fails to recognize that these “white moms,” these suburban moms, are mothers that care deeply about their children and what they are exposed to on a daily basis. Did he directly infer that “black moms” or other minorities don’t care about the education of their children? 

The disconnect of the education elite to not be sensitive to parents and teachers concerns is mind boggling to me. 

It seems in a perfect world the steam roller approach to education reform would not be necessary to apply. It seems a collective approach encompassing all would be the preferred, less controversial approach to reform.

One could argue that this block of mothers are driving the successes we have today and why are you trying to shame them into submission? 

To somehow minimize this concern and underhand a mothers efforts to assure her child receives a top notch education is beyond conceptual thought.

This recent “verbal blunder” by Duncan shows a willful intent to nationalize our educational system and concerned parents are not gonna stop him. 

It is evident that they will leave no one standing that dares to stand in their way of it’s implementation, fully revealing it’s purpose.

Duncan by his actions and speech confirms that the US Department of Education is not concerned with parents concerns about common core, its going forward regardless, instead focusing only on the standards and raising test scores, not well intended opposition.

We have seen this locally also where many “private meetings” are being held without parent input or allowed attendance. Parents! You are not a necessary ingredient in this recipe of reform!

Duncan revealed  his true feelings when he said “their child isn’t as bright as they thought they were, and their school isn’t quite as good as they thought they were.” 

This seems to echo Michelle Rhees type reform measures passed down to Tennessee Education Czar, her ex husband, Huffman and his little lap dog TN Governor Bill Haslam, where the impetus is that teachers and parents are why education in the US is so bad.

The top down bashing by the Secretary of Education speaks volumes of his agenda. 

There is a bigger picture and we got a glimpse of it Friday and it is bigger than you and I. 

We are in the way and the education plow is going to get you out of the way so their agenda can be fulfilled, regardless of how you think. 

My immediate questions are this and I would like for you to ponder these thoughts.  How are education reformist going to explain Common Core failures to a group of angry moms that tried to tell them it wouldn’t work in the first place?” How can raising standards assure academic success? Doesn’t  it take a village to educate a child? Doesnt it take an engaged white mom, or any mom or dad to raise the level of their childs education by being deeply involved in their education?  I would love to be a fly on the wall when that day arrives as poor results trickle in and parents realize that indeed, our kids are not as smart as we thought they were.

White moms and dads, everyone regardless of race, everywhere, stay engaged. Continue to attend school board meetings and demand your voice be heard on this issue. Write blogs, contact your elected officials and post info on social websites and make more people aware. This is our only defense. Get more active, stay active.

For Duncan to make such an insensitive racial comment shows me we are over the target, where the flak is heaviest and we are being heard!

We are where we need to be!

Sources of info:

CNN reports on “White Mom” comment.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/18/politics/duncan-comment-controversy/index.html

(Video) Fox News Megan Kelley reports on Duncan white mom comment.

Politico reports on “white mom” comment.
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=9F5C9690-85F5-4951-897F-8C7215D66382

Secretary of Education Arne Duncan apologizes for “White Mom” comment.
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/us/2013/11/19/dnt-marsh-arne-duncan-white-moms-remarks.cnn.html

Common Core: “State Led?”, think again

Common Core: “State Led?”, think again

Think the Common Core State Standards are State led? 

Many have led you to believe that the Common Core standards were born from the states. 

The states had very little choice but to implement them, not create them.

They were left with no choice but to accept hundreds of millions of dollars to reform education.

The push from the top down forced the states to adopt the standards that were created using many layers of influence around the world.

From Marc Tucker, ALEC, UNESCO, to BIll Gates and the United Nations, etc, this has never been nothing but a huge plan put into motion many years ago to radically reform our educational system thus controlling the future generations minds and shaping the future. Thus birthing the next generation of little Socialists and Marxist hell bent on morphing our world into a one government, one world scenario.

Don’t just take my word for it. Read the info below, do your own additional  research and you will quickly see that Common Core is a federally funded and forced reality complete with the assistance of the UN and funded with the wallet of Bill Gates and his foundation.

The link below contains the timeline posted below and can be easily printed for your use to help spread the word about this nationalization of our public schools.

Click to access CCSS-timeline-bulletpoints.pdf

• 1988: Marc Tucker became the president of the National Center for Education and the Economy (NCEE) where he joined up with Hillary Clinton, Mario Cuomo, and Ira Magaziner to get states to move away from local control of their schools and migrate to national standards. (link)
http://mississippipep.wordpress.com/2011/09/03/controversial-author-marc-tucker-to-speak-at-ms-dept-of-education-statewide-forum-sept-14/

• 1990: George H. W. Bush signed an international agreement entitled, “World Education for All (EFA), the result of a United Nations “World Conference on Education for All” summit. (link)
http://www.restoreokpubliceducation.com/node/687

• 1991: Tucker and Lauren Resnick created New Standards that pushed standards-based reform. 

• 1992: Tucker writes “Dear Hillary Letter.” This letter, written to Hillary Clinton, addressed Tucker’s ideas for radical education reform after Bill Clinton’s presidential win. The goal is “to remold the entire American system” into “a seamless web that literally extends from cradle to grave and is the same systems for everyone,” coordinated by “a system of labor market boards at the local, state and federal levels” where curriculum and “job matching” will be handled by counselors “accessing the integrated computer-based program.” (link)

• 1994: Tucker’s ambitious plan was implemented in three laws passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton: the Goals 2000 Act, the School-to-Work Act Opportunities Act, and the reauthorized Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) called “Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994.” (link)

• 1996: An organization called ACHIEVE, Inc. was formed by the nation’s governors and corporate leaders. (Many of them tied to Marc Tucker and the NCEE). The goals from an Education Summit in Palisades, NY were to ACHIEVE the goals of the 1994 school reform bills. 

• 1998: Tucker and Judy Codding created America’s Choice, a comprehensive school reform program, that made sure the national standards were further implemented into schools.
http://www.timeandlearning.org/marc-tucker

• 2001: George W. Bush renames ESEA “The No Child Left Behind Act” and signed it into law.

• 2004: Microsoft (Bill Gates) contracts with UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) to fulfill part of UNESCO’S Millennium Campaign Goals—universal education and educating for a global economy. A “master curriculum” for teacher training in information technologies based standards, guidelines, benchmarks, and assessment techniques is to be developed.
http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/05/ed-watch/12-2-unesco-gates.htm

Below is Bill Gates agreement with the UN to make the push for radical reform in the United States as part of the Millenium Development Goals that many of our churches have joined to bring in a One World Religion.

(UNESCO / Gates Foundation Agreement)

Click to access CCSS_UNESCO_MICROSOFT_AGREEMENT.pdf

• 2005: Bill Gates funds the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce—created by Tucker. States begin adopting its education reform initiative, “Tough Choices or Tough Times.” In 2008, Utah’s Governor Huntsman touts it and joins with 5 others states (Massachusetts, Delaware, Arizona, New Mexico, and New Hampshire) who adopt it in order to “reinvent their educational systems.” 
http://www.skillscommission.org/?page_id=135

• 2008: Gates Foundation, along with two other foundations, created Strong American Schools (a successor to the STAND UP campaign launched in 2006, which was an outgrowth of UNESCO’s Millennium Campaign Goals for Universal Education). It calls for American education standards.
http://www.nms.org/Blog.aspx

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_Up_and_Take_Action

• 2008: Gates Foundation funds the International Benchmarking Advisory Group report for Common Core Standards on behalf of the National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, and ACHIEVE, Inc. titled, “Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education.” This report shows the United Nations is a member of the International Benchmarking Advisory Group for Common Core Standards. The member of mention is the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) which developed UNESCO’s Millennium Declaration—partnering with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

Click to access BenchmarkingforSuccess.pdf

The report states: While states must take the lead, the federal government can help. And the federal government can do that best by playing an enabling role grounded in a new vision for the historic state-federal partnership in education.
http://www.achieve.org/BenchmarkingforSuccess

• 2009:  Marc Tucker writes a chapter in the book “Change Wars: The Inspiring Future for Educational Change.” One chapter is called International Benchmarking as a Lever for Policy Reform. The book says the UN’s OECD launched Programme for International Student Assessment in 2000 to monitor the outcomes of education. Linda Darling-Hammond (Weather Underground with Bill Ayers) also contributes a chapter. Darling-Hammond heads the SBAC (see 2009, December below)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1934009318/ref=redir_mdp_mobile/185-5018575-2937229?qid=1330537718&ref_=sr_1_1&s=books&sr=1-1

• April, 2009: Gates Foundation members, along with a few dozen others, participate in a Washington conference and produce “Smart Options: Investing the Recovery Funds for Student Success.” These ideas were funded by the 2008 Stimulus (ARRA-American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) and supported Race to the Top. Priority 1: Develop Common American Standards—also called Career-Ready Standards—in most states by January 2012. (link)

Click to access 429-arrasmartoptions.pdf

• 2009 (summer): Council of Chief State School Officers, National Governors Association, and ACHIEVE, Inc. agree to partner on a common core standards project.
This site has since been evidently taken down by those protecting the information.
http://www.wera-web.org/?s=2.2+SBAC+Overview.pdf&search_404=1

• 2009 (fall): The U.S. Dept. of Ed signals it will fund $360M for summative assessments aligned to Common Core Standards and begins planning meetings. Two consortia begin competing for this funding: Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and Partnership for the Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers. States begin adopting Common Core Standards and join one of the consortia in order to receive No Child Left Behind waivers from the U.S. Department of Education Secretary, Arne Duncan.
This info has also been taken down by those trying to control the information, but it was there and the link is provided but states it no longer exists.
http://www.wera-web.org/?s=2.2+SBAC+Overview.pdf&search_404=1

• 2009 (December): Utah becomes a governing member state of Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) and is obligated to use the assessments created by the SBAC which is led by Bill Ayers’ friend, Linda Darling-Hammond. Judy Park, Associate Superintendent, Utah State Office of Ed, eventually co-chairs the Consortia.

Click to access Smarter-Balanced-Governance.pdf

• 2009 (December): Gates Foundation gives the National PTA a $1 million grant to mobilize parents for Common Core Standards.
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Search#q/k=Common%20core%20race%20to%20the%20top

The second link has also been removed but this one exists:
http://www.pta.org/search/searchresults.cfm

• June, 2010: National Governors Association and State Education Chiefs launch Common State Academic Standards.
http://www.corestandards.org/articles/8-national-governors-association-and-state-education-chiefs-launch-common-state-academic-standards

• April 2011: The SBAC Overview Curriculum and Assessment Conference issues a report stating that governing member states “must” adopt Common Core by Dec. 31, 2011. Note this does not say the states must create the standards, it says the states must adopt! Adopt meaning here they are…..use them and get a bundle of money to do so.

Click to access sbac_overview.pdf

• 2011: The American Legislative Exchange Council’s (ALEC) education task force calls for the demise of the Common Core Standards, but puts it on hold after receiving a $376,635 grant from the Gates Foundation. Reminder: A couple of TN legislators hold key positions within this organization.
http://www.missourieducationwatchdog.com/2011/12/bill-gates-gift-to-alec-376635-reasons.html?m=1

• 2011: Bill Gates speaks at the November G20 Summit in Cannes and issues his report, “Innovation With Impact: Financing 21st Century Development” stating, “My report will address the financing needed to achieve maximum progress on the Millennium Development Goals, and to make faster progress on development over the next decade.”
This site info has also been taken away!
http://americanpolicy.org/2012/01/04/global-poverty-act-is-back-is-bill-gates-the-world%E2%80%99s-richest-useful-idiot/

• 2011: Obama Education Secretary Arne Duncan announces “Today, I promise you that [the Department of Education] will be a committed partner in the national effort to build a more environmentally literate and responsible society… We must advance the sustainability movement through education… Education and sustainability are the keys to our economic future-and our ecological future.” (link)
http://www.uspartnership.org/main/view_archive/1

• 2012: States begin to recognize the loss of local control and enormous cost of implementation of the Common Core Standards. Many states begin pushing back. The Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute call the standards unconstitutional per federal education law.

• 2012: States not on Common Core and not meeting the Annual Yearly Progress requirements of NCLB petition congress for relief. Lawmakers working on options are undercut when the Obama White House circumvents congress to grant waivers from NCLB if states adopt Common Core.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/02/09/no-child-left-behind-waivers-let-team-obama-seize-control-your-childs-education/

Texas Education Commissioner Robert Scott stated that the common standards movement amounted to a “desire for a federal takeover of public education.” Now, additional states (who originally signed on), including Massachusetts, Iowa, Kansas, and Virginia, are expressing concerns about the common standards initiative.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/02/09/no-child-left-behind-waivers-let-team-obama-seize-control-your-childs-education/

Gov. Nikki Haley just signed a letter supporting legislation in South Carolina to block CCSS implementation stating, “South Carolina shouldn’t relinquish control to a consensus of states any more than the federal government.”
This site has also been removed:
http://www.foxcarolina.com/story/16947979/bill-would-block-education-standards-in-sc

It is so obvious the standards did not begin with the states, they were picked up by a determined messenger (Gates) from a higher entity (UN) and delivered to many non governmental agencies, wrapped up nicely and delivered to the states in the form of bribes (RTTT Grants) 

Bill Gates’ Foundation contributes 10s of millions, during this time frame for consideration and development of the Common Core initiative. See below: 

Counsel of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO): 2009–$9,961,842, 2009–$3,185,750, 2010–$743,331, 2011–$9,388,911

National Governor’s Association (NGA): 2008–$2,259,780

Mark Tucker’s NCEE: 2009–$1,500,000

Total: $27,000,000

To any who still harbor the illusion that Common Core State Standards were the product of the states simply coming together, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you.

Special thanks to the many people involved in digging this information up. Much work has been done by people all around the country to put this information together and help follow the money trail. Please do your part now in passing this information on to everyone you know so they can be educated about what the Common Core Initiative is really all about.

Making the illegal, unconstitutional case against Common Core State Standards

MAKING THE CASE AGAINST (THE ILLEGAL) COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS

August 5, 2013 by Thais M. Alvarez

There is growing controversy over the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) throughout the United States.  Grassroots movements are springing up everywhere in an attempt to educate voters who have never heard of the CCSS, hoping that they will join the ranks of those fighting against the CCSS.  Political activists’ efforts have also sought to address and educate school board members and other elected officials, such as county commissioners, representatives, senators and governors of the dangers of CCSS.  The greater goal for these activists is to gain the political commitment of elected officials for the repudiation of the already (emphasis added) implemented CCSS.
At this juncture, one may ask why political activists have to educate voters, and more specially, elected officials.  The answer is simple: mainstream media, for the most part, has not reported on the CCSS.  Moreover, the federal government has conducted a stealth campaign and strong-armed the states into adopting the CCSS. 
In effect, if states do not adopt and implement the CCSS, they are ineligible for federal funding.  Federal funds, which are in essence the tax dollars of citizens, should not be used to bribe or to threaten states into taking certain action, especially when acceptance strips states of constitutionally protected rights.  Likewise, the federal government abuses its power by making the receipt of federal funding conditional on the adoption of federal policies, again, when those policies strip the states of constitutionally protected rights. 
At first glance, although uprooting the CCSS may seem like a daunting task, since it has already been implemented, it should not be challenging for the simple reason that the CCSS are illegal.  Once the states and all of their elected officials are made aware of this, they will realize that they have a duty to uphold the U.S. Constitution, as well as other federal, state and local laws.  Elected officials should be held accountable by U.S. taxpayers, if they fail to dismantle the CCSS program.  More specifically, elected officials should be held accountable for acquiescing into adopting illegal policy that will, in fact, waste billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars.  Elected officials should know better.    
This article makes the case against the Common Core State Standards. 
 
PART I.  “GOOD” LAW
The Constitution of the United States
The U.S. Constitution is also referred to as the “Supreme Law of the Land”.  Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, which speaks to the powers vested in Congress, does not enumerate education as one of the powers vested in Congress.  Likewise, Article 2, which outlines the powers of the executive branch, or the president, does not assign to the position the authority to speak to matters of education.  Article III which speaks to the powers of the judicial branch does have the answer, well, at least in part.  Article III, which creates the judicial branch of the federal government provides that if there is a conflict or a question of law arising as to the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. Supreme Court shall decide on the issue.  Since the U.S. Constitution is silent on the matter of education, the issue has been addressed and resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court, as explained below.[1]
The Supreme Court of the United States
In San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez (1973), the U.S. Supreme Court held that education “is not among the rights afforded explicit protection under our Federal Constitution.  Nor do we find any basis for saying it is implicitly so stated.”  This coupled with Article X, otherwise known as the 10th Amendment, of the Bill of Rights which provides that “powers not delegated to the U.S. by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States,” establishes that  the creation of education policies is reserved to the state and local governments.[2] 
The Constitution of the State of Florida
Consistent with the foregoing holding from the U.S. Supreme Court, Article IX of the Florida Constitution speaks to the matter of education. 
More specifically, Section 1(a) provides that education is “a paramount duty of the state to make adequate provisions for the education of all children residing within its borders.”  Section 4(b) further dictates that: “[A] school board shall operate, control and supervise all free public schools within the school district.”[3]   
Given the fact that local school board members are elected officials, it follows that the citizenry directly influences local educational policies through their power of the vote.
The Florida Statutes
The Florida Legislature is vested with the power to enact statutes to carry out the intent of the Florida Constitution.  To that end, Title 48 of the Florida Statutes provides for the Education Code which states as follows:
 
Public education is a cooperative function of the state and local educational authorities. The state retains responsibility for establishing a system of public education through laws, standards, and rules to assure efficient operation of a K-20 system of public education and adequate educational opportunities for all individuals. Local educational authorities have a duty to fully and faithfully comply with state laws, standards, and rules and to efficiently use the resources available to them to assist the state in allowing adequate educational opportunities.[4]
This should speak for itself, without the need to embellish.   
PART II.  “BAD” LAW
It happens all the time.  Judges make “bad law” from the bench when they apply or interpret the law incorrectly.  Likewise, uninformed or corrupt legislators propose bills that are enacted into laws that are either blatantly unconstitutional, or at the very least, serve as the impetus for governmental abuse.  The later is what has happened as it relates to the law of education as a result of the enactment of the three (3) federal education acts, as explained below. 
It could be argued that these laws are, in and of themselves, unconstitutional for the simple reason that they seek to control matters related to education.  And, as the foregoing legal analysis demonstrates, the state and local governments, not the federal government, should be involved in the matters related to education.  
Elementary and Secondary School Act of 1965 (ESEA)
With the stroke of a pen, in 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson, changed the extent to which the federal government would be involved in education.  At the time the law was enacted, during the Civil Rights Movement, the law was deemed necessary in that it would seek to address the issues of the time.  The law reads: 
 
Nothing in the Act shall be construed to authorize an officer or employees of the Federal Government to mandate, direct, or control a State, local educational agency, or school’s curriculum, program of instruction, or allocation of State and local resources, or mandate a State or any subdivision thereof to spend any funds or incur any costs not paid for under the Act.[5]
Department of Education Organization Act (DEOA)
This is the Act which created the Department of Education (DOE) in 1979.  At the time, many members of the U.S. Congress expressed their concerns over the creation of the DOE.  Today, many assert that the DOE should be abolished because, through the years, it has developed policies and programs that encroach on the constitutional rights that state and local governments have over matters of education.  The DOE has done this in violation of the letter of the law, as well as in disregard of its legislative history and intent.  
The DEOA provides that:
No provision of a program administered by the Secretary or by any other officer of the Department shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any such officer to exercise any discretion, 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.[6] 

When analyzing any legal primary source, one would be remiss if one only reads the letter of the law.  That is, to fully understand the spirit of the law, one also needs to read the written commentaries or the legislative history that follows.  In the instant case, as it relates to the DEOA, in Finding 4 of the DEOA, Congress underscored that:
[I]n our Federal system, the primary public responsibility for education is reserved respectively to the States and the local school systems and other instrumentalities of the States.[7]

It should also be highlighted that Congress made its intentions clear when it said:
It is the intention of the Congress in the establishment of the Department 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 control of such governments and institutions over their own educational programs and policies.  The establishment of the Department of Education shall not increase the authority of the Federal Government over education or diminish the responsibility for education which is reserved to the State and local school systems and other instrumentalities of the States.[8]

A close reading of the ESEA and the DEOA juxtaposed with the CCSS, especially the implementation of the CCSS, make it clear that the federal government is in fact mandating, directing and controlling curriculum. 
Although proponents of the CCSS argue that the CCSS only impose “standards,” rather than “curriculum,” professionals in the field of education understand that curriculum is developed from standards, and therefore, to impose a certain set of standards, as the federal government is doing through the CCSS, is tantamount to also imposing curriculum.  Moreover, assessments are based on the curriculum which assess whether students achieve demonstrated proficiency of the CCSS standards.  Standards, curriculum and assessments are all intrinsically linked, such that, the effect is that they are all one and the same. 
To make the point take into account what the educational experts say:      
Dr. Greene has stated, “To make standards meaningful they have to be integrated with changes in the curriculum, assessment and pedagogy.”[9] 
The Federal Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, has also acknowledged the nexus between standards and curriculum when he stated that “curriculum can only be as good as the academic standards to which the assessments and curriculum are pegged.”[10]    
Thus, for the federal government and the proponents of the CCSS to conclude that the CCSS do not dictate curriculum and assessments, both of which the federal government is prohibited from doing, is to lie to the American people.  
General Education Provisions Act (GEPA)
Similar to the above-mentioned laws, GEPA provides:
No provision of any applicable program, shall be construed to authorize any department, agency, office or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, or over the selection of library resources, textbooks, or other printed material by any educational institution or school system, or to require the assignment or transportation of students or teachers in order to overcome racial imbalance.[11]
In addition to the above-stated commentaries relating to curriculum, it is noteworthy to underscore that this Act goes a step further to limit the power of the federal government over the “selection of library resources, textbooks, or other printed material by any educational institution or school system.” 
This notwithstanding, the federal government has given two state consortia, Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers Consortium (PARCC) and SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC), $330 million dollars to begin the development of digital tools and libraries. 
To use their words, the two consortia have stated as follows:
PARCC has stated:
 
PARCC’s initial proposal calls for the development of a digital library of tools…the broader set of tools in the library will provide choices and supplemental materials (beyond the instructional units) for teachers to use.  The development of the library also will identify materials that can be used to inform the development of the instructional units or even become the instructional units, perhaps with minor modification.[12]
SBAC, also provides that it will:
 
[D]evelop curriculum materials…contract with professional organizations, universities and non-profit groups…to adapt their curriculum materials to SBAC specifications to upload to the digital library.[13]
The stated intentions of both consortia juxtaposed with GEPA clearly violate the letter of the law.  There is no need for further analysis.     
Case Closed:  Common Core State Standards is Illegal
In light of Part I, one questions why there was ever a need for Part II.  After all, Part I speaks for itself in that the federal government should not be involved in matters as they relate to education.  Even the federal statutes, explained in Part II, confirm that.  The Acts’ language is superfluous and their enactment arbitrary.        
As stated above, it should not come as a surprise for the reader to learn that at the time Congress set out to enact the DEOA there were numerous members of Congress who objected to its enactment.  These Congressional leaders, in their infinite wisdom, could anticipate and foresee what is happening today with the implementation of the CCSS when they stated their objections to the enactment of the DEOA andthe consequent creation of the DOE.  They accurately predicted:
 
If we create this Department, more educational [decision-making] as to course content, textbook content, and curriculum will be made in Washington at the expense of local diversity.  The tentacles will be stronger and reach further.  The Department of Education will end up being the Nation’s super [school board].[14]
Almost a quarter of a century after those words were memorialized, their prophetic nature becomes apparent.  The tentacles of the DOE are infringing on local diversity, such that it is now acting as a national school board.  To that end, not a single local school board in the nation had an opportunity nor the intention to place the issue of whether “the” local shareholders approved of the CCSS before them. 
But, fret not, we, the people, are here.  We are here to send a clear message to the local school boards across the nation objecting to this insidious, subversive and stealth campaign, otherwise known as the Common Core “State” Standards.
It should be pointed out that the title, Common Core “State” Standards, begs the question:  Why is the word “State” part of the title when the states had nothing to do with their creation or development?    
The more pressing question, however, is:  Will elected officials heed to the voices of, we the people, and uphold the sanctity of this Constitutional Republic, remembering that the source of their power was granted to them by, we, the people?
 
[1] U.S. Const.
[2] San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1 (1973)
[3] Fla. Const. art. IX, § 4(b).         
[4] § 1000.03(3), Fla. Stat. (2012).
[5] 20 U.S.C. § 7907(a).
[6] 20 U.S.C. § 3403(b).
[7] 20 U.S.C. § 3401(4).
[8] 20 U.S.C. § 3403(a).
[9] Robert S. Eitel and Kent D. Talbert, The Road to a National Curriculum, Pioneer Institute, August 5, 2013, http://pioneerinstitute.org/download/the-road-to-a-national-curriculum/
[10] Id.
[11] 20 U.S.C. § 1232a.
[12] PARCC PROPOSAL FOR SUPPLEMENTAL RACE TO THE TOP ASSESSMENT AWARD 1 (2010), availableat http://www.edweek.org/media/parccsupplementalproposal12-23achievefinal.pdf
[13] Robert S. Eitel and Kent D. Talbert, The Road to a National Curriculum, Pioneer Institute, August 5, 2013, http://pioneerinstitute.org/download/the-road-to-a-national-curriculum/
[14] H.R. REP. No. 95-1531, at 47 (1978). 

Source of info: This site is chocked full of informative goodness, please subscribe to and visit this site frequently.

http://bwcentral.org/2013/08/making-the-case-against-the-illegal-common-core-state-standards/

Department of Education replacing “Mom and Dad with parent 1 and 2” to halt gender roles

Department of Education replacing “Mom and Dad with parent 1 and 2” to halt gender roles

The U.S. Department of Education (DOE) has announced it will replace “gender specific terms like ‘mother’ and father’” in the 2014-2015 federal student aid form with neutral language.

The terms “mother” and “father” will no longer be used on the Federal Application for Student Aid.
The new language, “parent one” and “parent two,” is aimed at accommodating students who have grown up in gay households and have either two mothers or two fathers, according to a statement released by the DOE late last month.

“All students should be able to apply for federal student aid within a system that incorporates their unique family dynamics,” said U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan in the press release.

The new language will “provide an inclusive form that reflects the diversity of American families,” he added.  

According to Duncan, “gender-specific terms also fail to capture income and other information from one parent when a student’s parents are in a same-sex marriage under state law but not federally recognized under the Defense of Marriage Act.”

A spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Education did not return calls for comment from Campus Reform.

The Federal Application for Student Aid, or FAFSA, determines a student’s eligibility for federal student aid, according to the U.S. Department of Education.

Follow the author of this article on Twitter: @oliverdarcy

http://www.campusreform.org/blog/?ID=4747

Please visit the site above many times, it is chocked full of great information.

I’m curious, who will be parent number 1 and who will be parent number 2. Seems this delineates one  to a lesser role? 

A liberal wack a mole socialist agenda is coursing through our educational system and it must cease.

Why aren’t we focused on teaching the kids instead of trying to get them to change their whole thought process and comfort zone and adjust to someone else’s idea of how they think the world should be.

ABC’s, the three R’s, what ever happened to that? 

If you choose an alternative lifestyle, so be it! Godspeed and may you live long and be prosperous. 

My question is this, why should my children be asked to change the way they think because a few choose to do their thing? 

Common Core: Letter to Editor addresses Ringstaffs defense of standards

BCN Editorial:

Mr Martin Ringstaff you are wrong on so many levels about Common Core. 

You have been delivered perhaps a federal, State, Haslam issued talking points and you are sticking to script.

You have the appearance of being a total puppet or useful idiot of the federally directed program called Common Core that is ultimately nationalizing our states and local school systems.

Your many blunders in the recent article in the banner speaks volumes of your ability to follow marching orders.

We the people, we the legislators, we our representatives did not “vote” for Common Core. 

In 2009,  President Obama, created a stimulus package with taxpayer dollars to “get the economy going”  and from that allocated around 4.3 billion or so for RTTT, Race To The Top.

You, the state and it’s many bureaucrats were asked to bid, jump through hoops to get this money, a sort of competition. Everyone likes competition, right?

The starting pistol sounded and the race to the top or bottom however you choose to look at it has started. 

You put your beat foot forward and several stages later you were awarded a federal grant of 501 million to initiate RTTT.

With only dollar signs in your eyes you forgot to look and see what was was inside this neatly wrapped package.

In fact, very few if any knew Common Core was tucked in it and gulped down by useful idiots only because the taste of money overpowered the urge to see it’s content. 

You accepted Common Core, sight unseen, because at the time of your acceptance, the Common Core standards had not even been completed and signed off when the check was written. Was this purposeful? I’ll let you decide.

Tucked neatly and discreetly inside was only the mention of new standards, very little mention of Common Core or what it entailed.

This was mainly because so many on the board that issues the standards of Common Core would not sign off on them because they were convinced they would not work and get the results desired.

Mr Martin Ringstaff, and Dawn Robinson you are wrong on so many levels.

I received this well written letter to the editor of Bradley County News and have elected print it’s content, unedited.

This encourages me greatly that many within our community are starting to awaken to what our county, city and state leaders are doing to our community and our children.

It is obvious to me and as our thorough research deepens we can clearly see who the puppets and useful idiots are of our federal government.

As the facts are exposed and the dust clears you can begin to see that many of our local city, county and state led representatives have their arms extended through the fog interlocking with the federal government as they attempt to nationalize our education and take over the minds of our children through indoctrination.

Let history be the marker and all involved be held accountable for this federal takeover of our state educational system.

When the chips fall, and they are crumbling fast, let these leftist stand alone with the blood soaked grant money they received for the minds of our children.

Allow me to finish with this thought in mind. Ponder these few questions, please.

Who is responsible for bringing this to Bradley County and our state?

What vote is Mr Ringstaff and Mrs Robinson talking about? Clearly, they assume that state legislators or an elected representative did vote on it, that did not happen. It was a bidding war for stimulus money. NO VOTE was cast that I am aware of by my State  Representative!

Who is vested in this endeavor? Clearly, adjusting the curriculum to the needs of big business makes me wander and guess to the extent of the Chamber of Commerces, a lap dog for the UN, involvement in this endeavor.

Is getting rid of reading literature and adjusting to reading of “technical manuals” going to keep the interest of our children and optimize their learning?

Will reducing our learning standards from the current  “135 to less than 50” Common Core Standards really going to heighten our learning experience?

Why are we not addressing parents in this issue? In the Banner article that started this conversation, Mr Ringstaff did not mention one time the parents and if I recall correctly he did not mention the students as it pertained to their well being. Something is rotten here and it does smell good.

Why are our concerns, many emails and phone calls not being returned when we are inquiring about Common Core.

I have seen one email  from Mr Ringstaff where he dismissed the revealed research as “propaganda” and an article to the Banner about his visit to the Rotary, a UN representative, an NGO or Non Governmental Organization of the United Nations.

I will complete my editorial here and ask you to read the words below very carefully and see the concern of this citizen, taxpayer who is very concerned about the direction that Mr Ringstaff and Mrs Robinson are taking our children in exchange for federal grant money.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR:

Dear Martin Ringstaff and Dawn Robinson,

I read the article recently published in the Banner in which you addressed the Rotary Club on the subject of Common Core.

You paint a very positive picture for the future of education in Cleveland and all of Tennessee because of this new set of standards and the curriculum that will be brought in to align itself with these new standards. 

I have read many things on Common Core as well as other education systems that are being implemented around the country.

I am sure you would disagree with a lot of that analysis that I have studied and would just dismiss it off hand so I promise I won’t bother to argue my points using these sources. 

I find local officials are quick to be dismissive and not engage in debate because they don’t like the sources of information rather than deal with the substance of the information presented. I know this from experience. However my most typical response in none at all. This being the case, I will argue my points strictly from your own words as presented in this article.

The very first thing I noticed in this article is that the word “parent” is nowhere to be found; not even the slightest hint of a reference is ever brought into consideration.

It is very clear from my research (sorry I said I wasn’t going to do that) and from this article that parents are completely left out of this process and their consent was never sought in any of this. 

Who is in control and driving this? I can certainly refer to my research and rattle off the names of government agencies, think tanks, foundations and major corporations but that would violate the promise I made to you at the very beginning of this e-mail. To answer that question let’s refer to your article to provide the answer:

1. State Leadership Council. Who are they? Apparently there are 22 of you arguing details. Did we elect these people as our representatives? No we did not.         

According to this article, this group is charged with the task of “working through the transition” to Common Core so they are certainly not objective and independent.

2. K-12 Educators, College Educators. Again, a generic name to given to create the illusion of approval. 

I challenge you to have one of your teachers go to the Banner and make their own personal, stirring, passionate case for the need of Common Core from their own heart. 

On the other hand, I know several teachers who are at minimum shaking their heads and at maximum making plans to exit the profession because of what this represents. Concerning college “educators”; Are you really trying to tell me that literature professors are begging you to make students read  menus, technical manuals and speeches instead of Homer, Gibbon, Dickens, Longfellow, Tolstoy, Dostoyevsky, and Shakespeare? 

Are you telling me that math and science professors are begging you to strip away the already bare minimum content of Euclidean geometry and physical science classes to allow for more writing and critical thinking skills to be taught during that class time? 

3. Here is the best one that really gets me; Business leaders. This may be just me, but I do not care less about the opinions of business leaders as to what they think my child needs to learn in kindergarten. They have no right to dictate that we change our historic liberal arts education system into their own personnel workforce development racket. This is just another example of corporations transferring their costs (in this case it is employee training and development) to the taxpayer.

Don’t you see how the local school systems have been cheated out of money and made to go beg to the state and federal government for funding just for their very existence?

 Do you not understand that all the PILOT agreements/tax abatements to corporations and now the new tool of tax increment financing pose an ever increasing threat to our tax base and ultimately school funding? 

In this state, the school board has no voice on these decisions on whether to enter into these agreements.In some states you do. 

Do not believe the lie that the school portion of taxes is protected in these agreements. The city of Cleveland as well as the county have run up massive amounts of debt over the last 20 years. Ask these mayors, city council members, county commissioners and members of the local industrial development board why these agreements with corporations haven’t produced budget surpluses? I have asked them. They won’t answer me. Maybe they will answer you. (Warning: broken promise ahead!!) 

If you would like a copy of an NEA study on the effects of tax abatements on school funding, I would be happy to give that to you. 
Sorry, I got off topic. 

In summary, these corporations have taken our money to build their plants, buy their equipment, pay portions of their employees wages through tax credits and now they want to use our money and our K-12 and our universities to be their own personnel training grounds for equipment operators, quality technicians, and other general plant workers and supervisors? 

I say train your own workers with your own money and stay out of education which should belong and be accountable to parents and students alone.

You say “it is not a mandatory, nationally driven, “you have to do it or else” kind of situation”. Really? 

You would have me to believe that the federal government just handed Tennessee $501,000,000 with no strings attached??? 

There was nothing in the Race to the Top application process in which you agreed to implement these standards sight unseen? 

There was nothing that Lamar Alexander had to agree to in order to get us out of the consequences of not being able to meet the requirements of No Child Left Behind? I need help to believe that but I am certainly willing to listen.

In closing I never really made the case for what is wrong with Common Core in and of itself? I will do that now.

– What you described is outcome based education principles. How will that help translate into the real world?

How would you like to be on the operating table and have an outcome based surgeon? Will you give them credit for 85% of the operation being done right? 

Would you get on a plane with an outcome based pilot? Would you give him a passing grade for missing the runway by only 200 yards?

How about outcome based dentistry? 

Outcome based accounting? 

I can go on but I hope you get my point: You are directing children toward mediocrity. 

When your aim is mediocrity you end up a total failure. We don’t accept this anywhere else, why do so in education?

– You are robbing the youngest student of the joy of learning at a time that they are the most teachable just for the sake of utilitarianism. They are not being taught anymore; They will now be trained and assessed. You will direct them toward a predetermined career path by an extremely early age when I personally would council a person to not ever worry about what you want to be before the end of your second year of college. Obviously we differ on that point.

– The removal of great books for “relevant” non-fiction. What is wrong with that? I am not a very smart person but let someone who is answer this question. 

In The Closing of the American Mind, By Dr. Allan Bloom he says these things that I pulled out that text:

“It is not merely the tradition that is lost when the voice of civilization elaborated over millennia has been stilled in this way. It is being itself that vanishes beyond the dissolving horizon”.

“As the awareness that we owed almost exclusively to literary genius falters, people become more alike, for want of knowing they can be otherwise”.

“Thus the failure to read good books both enfeebles the vision and strengthens our most fatal tendency – the belief that the here and now is all there is.”

To all on this e-mail. You did not start us down this road. It has been going on a long time but I believe Common Core represents the final death nail in the coffin of our educational journey in our nation. 

Please consider these words and consider the ramifications of this system to future generations.

Thank you,

Rob Bower

Source of conversation: I encourage you to read this paper often as The Cleveland Daily Banner does an excellent job of covering the “happenings” in our community. Go to the stands and buy up multiple copies and give them to friends and families. Please use the Banner as a great source of information, then entertain your self and turn to BCN for the rest of the story.

http://www.clevelandbanner.com/view/full_story/22315165/article-Ringstaff–Common-Core–has-%E2%80%98awesome%E2%80%99-prospects

Please remember, all my posts, future and present, are my opinion based on facts and my research. I am simply using my first amendment rights to redress concerns with my elected reps, those appointed to represent me and my tax dollars they spend.

Common Core: RNC/GOP passes resolution against “one size fits all” nationalized education curriculum

Common Core: RNC/GOP passes resolution against “one size fits all”  nationalized education curriculum

This week the RNC, the Republican National Committee, passed a resolution to stop Common Core during their annual spring meeting in California.

In what can be best be described as a top down federally mandated curriculum with communistic ties and a push to socialize our country by taking over the minds of our children, the RNC has delivered a devastating, if not fatal, blow to the Obamas, Ayers, Gates, Duncan nationalized curriculum.

Many parents, bloggers, concerned citizens, certain legislators and activists have done an excellent job of bringing to light the evils of this education mandate and have hopefully spearheaded its eventual death.

The mainstream media, the major news channels and the Department of Education have avoided this story like the plague and have reported or commented on it rarely, if any.

With all the sad unfortunate bombings and ricin mailings eating up the airways, the Common Core mandate has suffered a silent major blow with very little reporting.

While many in the mainstream have chosen to ignore this resolution the blogosphere and everyday mouth to mouth reporting outlets have gotten the information to the masses.

The RNC has stepped up in a major way, now is the time to use our grassroots synergy to spur and create change at the state levels, thus influencing the entire nation. 

Our combined efforts to stop Common Core has been tremendous and continued pressure is needed. 

The local grassroots activist must continue to expose this attempt by our own government and globalist of this elaborate coup and takeover of our educational system and the minds of our children.

Continue to talk to each other, spread the information and demand that our elected representatives get their hands out of the federal pie. 

Let’s allow the free market and parents to direct our children’s curriculum, not federal mandates with plenty of implementation money.

In Tennessee, particularly Bradley County, this “change of mind” will be extremely hard to do considering we have an ultra liberal progressive Governor, Senators, Legislators and local representatives that accepted a 500 million dollar bribe for the roll out of RTTT with acceptance and implementation of Common Core, sight unseen. 

Many within this group will do whatever the Governor requests or demands, so letting our liberal Governor know you are unhappy may be a great place to start then work your way down to the local level. 

Attend school board, council or commission meetings and let the administrators know that Common Core is not acceptable for our children.

This willing marriage to a huge federal grant for a mandate is a terrible precedent to establish and is sadly driving the decision making throughout the country at all levels.

Common Core and its removal by our elected reps will be difficult but not impossible. 

As public opinion shifts, pressure mounts and parents become aware of it’s dangers, change will come.

Tn Governor Bill Haslam and his many state, local lap dogs and useful idiots will stand firm initially because of personal pride but the real results can come as you let them know you want Common Core and it’s implementation and further funding stopped immediately in your community.

Hearing their constituency send a strong message can change their ways. Fear of  surrendering their coveted and prosperous elected seat may awaken them to this federal takeover of our educational system and provoke change. 

I know many will not dare stand tall against their own party recommendations as this may spur the RNCs failure to support them come time for a re-election bid. The breech has been softened, time to attack.

The Resolution to stop Common Core by the RNC:

RESOLUTION CONCERNING COMMON CORE EDUCATION STANDARDS

WHEREAS, the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are a set of academic standards, promoted and supported by two private membership organizations, the National Governor’s Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) as a method for conforming American students to uniform (“one size fits all”) achievement goals to make them more competitive in a global marketplace, (1.) and

WHEREAS, the NGA and the CCSSO, received tens of millions of dollars from private third parties to advocate for and develop the CCSS strategy, subsequently created the CCSS through a process that was not subject to any freedom of information acts or other sunshine laws, and never piloted the CCSS, and

WHEREAS, even though Federal Law prohibits the federalizing of curriculum (2.), the Obama Administration accepted the CCSS plan and used 2009 Stimulus Bill money to reward the states that were most committed to the president’s CCSS agenda; but, they failed to give states, their legislatures and their citizens time to evaluate the CCSS before having to commit to them, and

WHEREAS, the NGA and CCSSO in concert with the same corporations developing the CCSS ‘assessments’ have created new textbooks, digital media and other teaching materials aligned to the standards which must be purchased and adopted by local school districts in order that students may effectively compete on CCSS ‘assessments’, and

WHEREAS, the CCSS program includes federally funded testing and the collection and sharing of massive amounts of personal student and teacher data, and

WHEREAS, the CCSS effectively removes educational choice and competition since all schools and all districts must use Common Core ‘assessments’ based on the Common Core standards to allow all students to advance in the school system and to advance to higher education pursuits; therefore be it

RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee, as stated in the 2012 Republican Party Platform, “do not believe in a one size fits all approach to education and support providing broad education choices to parents and children at the State and local level,” (p35)(3.), which is best based on a free market approach to education for students to achieve individual excellence; and, be it further

RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee recognizes the CCSS for what it is– an inappropriate overreach to standardize and control the education of our children so they will conform to a preconceived “normal,” and, be it further

RESOLVED, That the Republican National Committee rejects the collection of personal student data for any non-educational purpose without the prior written consent of an adult student or a child student’s parent and that it rejects the sharing of such personal data, without the prior written consent of an adult student or a child student’s parent, with any person or entity other than schools or education agencies within the state, and be it finally

RESOLVED, the 2012 Republican Party Platform specifically states the need to repeal the numerous federal regulations which interfere with State and local control of public schools, (p36) (3.); and therefore, the Republican National Committee rejects this CCSS plan which creates and fits the country with a nationwide straitjacket on academic freedom and achievement.

Sources of info:

1) RNC passes resolution to stop Common Core:

http://truthinamericaneducation.com/common-core-state-standards/rnc-passes-anti-common-core-resolution-at-their-spring-meeting/

2) RNC Draft resolution:

http://truthinamericaneducation.com/common-core-state-standards/rnc-draft-resolution-on-the-common-core/

3) RNC passes resolution to stop Common Core:

http://truthinamericaneducation.com/common-core-state-standards/rnc-passes-anti-common-core-resolution-at-their-spring-meeting/

4) Senator Chuck Grasey (R-Iowa) is asking fellow Republican Governors to ask Senate Appropriation Committee to cut all funding for Common Core that the Obama Administration is using to cajole States into adopting the CC Standard/Curriculum:

http://www.politicalchips.org/m/blogpost?id=4095899%3ABlogPost%3A166100

5) GOP blasts Obama backed national education standards:

http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/education/item/15108-gop-blasts-obama-backed-national-education-standards

6) Grassroots, bloggers, concerned parents, elected reps, national activists spearhead drive to  stopping Common Core:

http://educationviews.org/conservatives-spearhead-drive-at-rnc-meeting-to-stop-common-core/

For further information, continue to comb through this blog and insert in the search area “common core” and several articles on the devastating effects of Common Core will pop up. 

You keep reading, I’ll keep reporting.