Tuesday, March 12, 2013

CCSS: Science Standards? I haven't Seen No Stink'n Science Standards.

According to the statements of Arizona State Board of Education Executive Director, Vince Yanez, he hasn't seen any full drafts of the proposed Science Standards to go along with the ELA and Math Standards which have been forced down our throats. 
In fact, Arizona was one of the LEAD STATES tasked with writing the Next Generation Science Standards.  One of the members of the writing team is Jennifer Gutierrez from the Chandler Unified School District.  Ms. Gutierrez's bio states that she has served on several writing committees for the Arizona Department of Education working on 4th grade state assessments in science. 
Also, back in 2009, Ms. Gutierrez was quoted as saying that the science standards "haven't changed recently, but I still think they're rigorous....They challenge our kids at the scientific level."

Wait!  I thought we were re-writing the science standards to MAKE them rigorous.

And how is it possible that our State Board of Education hasn't seen the brainwashing  Agenda 21   "fewer concepts but deeper learning" curriculum set to roll out this month?  The first draft was released for public comment in May 2012.  A partner of the Next Generation Science Standards is Achieve, the same education reform organization who brought us the CCSS.  Not only that, but the Governor appointed the Chairman of Achieve, Dr. Craig Barrett, to be on her Arizona Ready Council to market the CCSS. 
Mr. Yanez was asked if there were any plans to implement a science standard.  (How is it that the members of the House Education Board didn't know about the proposed Science Standards when their Chairman, Rep. Goodale, sits on the National Council of State Legislators Education Committee who is PUSHING the CCSS?)  It was then that he admitted that the Board HAD seen presentations for a new science standard that would tie in to the CC.  He responded, "It's a lot to bite off all at once."
But, oh, it's coming.  Here's a sample of what we have to look forward to:
"A mid-sized manufacturing company called FabCo has contacted the town council. FabCo manufactures cloth. FabCo is looking for a new location to build its company headquarters and manufacturing plant. FabCo is very interested in relocating to Wamego...

Many of the residents, including some town council members are concerned. They worry that FabCo could mean problems for their community. Now the land is used for agriculture. If FabCo comes to town, the use of the land will change. The land will be needed for residential, commercial, and industrial purposes. Some people wonder if this will change the river and the wildlife of Wamego. Ten miles downstream is the resort town of St. George. People use the river for fishing, swimming, boating, hiking, and camping in the area. The residents of the town are worried that the changes in Wamego might affect their lives.

As you answer the Big Question, you will also take on the challenge of giving advice to the town council of Wamego. What should they take into account in deciding whether or not to let FabCo move in? What will be the ecological advantages of FabCo building its plant in Wamego? What ecological problems might the project cause? What ecological problems do you think might arise if FabCo moves in? What do you need to know more about to give the Wamego town council advice?

Central Performance expectation:
• Students should be able to present evidence to the Wamego town council that would explain what will or might happen to the town’s water and land resources if a new manufacturing facility is built along the river.

Defining problems
• Designing solutions
• Argument from Evidence"

 Grooming future protesters/agitators. 
Who knows, maybe a student will be able to receive extra credit points for picketing FabCo at the Capitol or the next town council meeting.
See, the leftists who are behind this monstrosity know that math, English, and science can be effectively and subtly intertwined.  We've posted evidence of this before.  Here's another example:
By cutting down a forest full of beautiful trees, a logger makes $20.
(a) What do you think of this way of making money? 
(b) How did the forest birds and squirrels feel?
(c) Draw a picture of the forest as you'd like it to look
Mr. Yanez also testified in front of the House Education Committee that one of the biggest deficits that employers found was that their new hires were lacking in math and science skills.  But, he also said that the Arizona AIMS standards "actually held up very well compared to others across the nation." 

Remember when Mr. Yanez stated that "you have to talk Standards before you can talk assessments"...
Which is exactly why the Consortia of States got together to create the PARCC assessments  BEFORE the math and ELA Standards were even written. And why Achieve, an assessment organization, has been working with the NGSS to draft the Science Standards.


Why are our leaders willing to force us into a federal take-over of our state's education system rather than just concentrating on fixing our own state standards?  Especially when our State Executive Director admits that the AIMS standards actually faired very well compared to other states?  Why are they not working to make our state more competitive and give our high school graduates the best opportunity to stand out?  If we adopt the CCSS, what will distinguish our high school graduates from those in other CCSS states?  Or will the best colleges and universities be more eager to accept graduates from NON CCSS states? 
The "Common" in Common Core isn't just referring to the course material.  It refers to the fact that ALL students will be just that....common. 
Unfortunately, it will be 10-20 years before we begin to see the results of this leftist, social experiment.  At the expense of a lost generation.