It Takes A Village And Other Leftist Thought

Remember when a commentator from MSNBC said this?

 

That's because radical leftists honestly believe that only the state and federal government is capable of taking care of OUR children.  You can get a better idea from this picture:

That's why non profit organizations such as the United Way, Boys and Girls Clubs, and Big Brothers/Big Sisters have joined the "It takes a village" effort to help fund their after school programs.

Aside from federal funding, the United Way seeks to partner with private corporations.  They say: 

  Partnering with United Way provides companies a way to invest strategically in their communities and advance the common good by creating lasting, sustainable changes that lead to better, stronger places to live and work.



(Remember back in the day when we thought the words "common good" was code for communism?)

The federal government has donated over $150M since 1992 to the Boys and Girls club.  In recent years, the organization has focused on reducing high school drop out rates. The CEO back in 2010 received a measly $1M salary.  

For the common good.....


Another example is the 21st Century Community Learning Centers here in Arizona.  The state has received over $46M since 2010 from the Department of Education to fund 21st Century Community Learning Centers for after school programs. 

 

"This federally-funded program supports afterschool community learning centers that operate primarily on school campuses statewide. Services include academic intervention and enrichment activities along with a broad array of youth development opportunities. These after school and summer classes complement the student’s regular school day program. The 21^st CCLC programs mainly serve students who attend high-poverty and low-performing schools and their families. After school programs help students meet the core standards in academic subjects such as language arts and math. In addition, other educational services are offered to family members of students participating in the program in order to further engage parents in their student’s learning and achievement goals."

According to the 21st Century Community Learning Centers website, they claim:

The average center provides services:

• 32 weeks of the year
• 4.8 days a week
• 3.2 hours per day
• To 287 students on a regular basis

That's a lot of common good.....


In 2010, the Obama administration authorized the "School Turnaround AmeriCorp" initiative through the Department of Education.  This initiative is a three year grant to pay "volunteers" to go to failing schools in an effort to boost graduation rates.  These "volunteers" then receive a scholarship to attend college.  (How qualified are they to tutor/mentor failing students?)

For the common good.

So You Think You Will Be Able To "Opt Out" Of The Common Core Assessments?

Think again.

According to the State Director of the Arizona Board of Education, Vince Yanez, by 2017 the PARCC assessment grade will be incorporated into the students final grade.  Parents will not be able to opt their child out of the assessment without it affecting up to half of their final grade which essentially means, the child will fail the course.

Nudge.

The plan:

And for a little comic relief, here's Ms. Stacey Morley again from the Policy Development & Government Affairs Office at the Arizona Department of Education testifying before the Education Committee about how the tests will be graded...

Ms. Morley joked that when she was in law school, her professor

"was like, 'You don't want me to grade more than five blue books a day.' "

Common Core: If You Give A Kid An iPAD...

Obama is all about everything being equal and fair.  Including outcomes.

 

Which is why he wanted to make sure that if he set the goal to have a 90% graduation rate by 2020, it would only be fair that all students had the same final exam.  In order to have the same final exam and reach the 90% graduation rate goal, you have to have the same (dumbed-down) curriculum. 

 

If you're going to have a common curriculum and a common exam, of course you need a way to be able to TAKE the test.  This will require schools to be equipped with the latest technology. 

 

In order to have the latest technology, you have to have broadband access.  And if you're going to create the broadband infrastructure to schools, you will naturally provide lines to EVERYONE in the community.  

 

And if you're going to make the most use of the latest technology and broadband service, you will naturally convert to digitalized textbooks which can now be accessed both at school and at home....on the school's new laptop or tablet.

 

Clever.

 

Here's how Obama pulled it off:

 

Back in 2008,  a coalition called Internetforeveryone.org got together to push for Internet access for, well, everyone.  One of the members of the coalition would be Obama's future Green Jobs Czar, Van Jones.  They claimed that a "digital divide" among Internet users might leave lower-income and minorities behind.  After all, it was Jones who claimed that "In the California wildfires, those who had access to information at the drop of a hat could figure out if they were in danger and get out.  It's a matter of life and death." (As if looking out your window and seeing a giant wall of fire or smelling something burning wasn't a big enough clue). 

 

 

 

 

 

 That Van Jones.  He's a real joker.  Pretending he had never heard of Twitter before.

 

In 2009, ninety-one percent of Americans had access to broadband services, although only 57% of Americans actually used it.  This, of course, required Obama to completely overhaul the system.  Obama announced his plan for the FCC to create an essential broadband platform because the Internet was no longer just a luxury for the few (91%). To accomplish this goal, Obama dedicated over $7B in stimulus funding to bring broadband lines to rural areas.  Also, through public-private partnerships, companies such as Comcast, under the FCC conditions of their merger with NBC in 2011, began providing technology and Internet access to schools.  They also made cheap monthly rates available to low-income communities which would be subsidized by the wealthier subscribers who pay upwards of $60 per month for the same service.

 

Naturally, Obama saw public backlash when people began complaining that his plan would lead to net neutrality and complete control of the Internet.

 

So, he simply changed his marketing strategy.  The Prop-in-Chief began using kids to push for Internet access in schools because, who can say "No" if it's for the children.

Here is Education Secretary, Arne Duncan's Chief of Staff, Joanne Weiss.  She stated that one of the effective tried-and-true levers at the federal level is the "Bully Pulpit."   She said, "There is a tremendous amount of power when the Secretary (of Education) takes to the microphone and talks about the national education technology plan that we've put together, a vision for what teaching learning assessment need to look like in the 21st century."

 

 

She also talked about "equity" of assets and mentioned that they worked with the FCC and the Departments of Commerce and Agriculture to "Not just focus on access but now on adoption.  So, how do we make sure that even though that broadband wire is passing by a school, that actually at the school, and in the community, people have the ability to tap into it?"

 

Ah.  So, if you can get SCHOOLS to have Internet access, you can then justify why it is necessary in every HOME too.  Ms. Weiss continued,

 

 "We look at access and equity traditionally as if 'I'm going to buy a computer for one kid, I need to buy a computer for EVERY kid' and the price tag is so dramatically high that we don't do it.  Instead of saying, 'a whole bunch of kids are coming into school already with the computer in their backpack, how about if we let them take it OUT of their backpack and use it.'  Then we don't need to buy as many computers and suddenly everybody's got it and we can all be on doing the work we need to do."

 

Equity.   Or rather, the Haves and Have nots.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Like the movie, Field of Dreams,

"If you build it....they will come."

 

 

Arne Duncan October 2012:   "We need to move from textbooks to digital....I think particularly in disadvantaged communities, I think technology can be a great equalizer.  A huge part of the equity agenda."

 

 

And if you're going to switch to digital learning, then naturally, every student will need to have their own laptop or tablet (at least those who can't afford it will get one).  The same technology that will be obsolete in two years.

 



"Schools in Los Angeles last month allocated $50 million to start buying tablets for every student; the project is expected to cost $500 million by the time it is completed. Schools in McAllen, Texas, distributed 6,800 Apple tablets last year at a cost of $20.5 million.

 

But it's not just the biggest school districts making the shift. The Eanes Independent School District in Austin is distributing more than 2,000 iPads to every student, from kindergarteners to high school seniors.

The cost: $1.2 million."

 Here's some real life math that you won't see in the Common Core curriculum: 

QUESTION:  A school buys 2000 iPads at a cost of $1.2M.  How much money did the school overpay for the iPads?  Explain your answer.  


ANSWER:  The school spent $600 for each iPad.  Best Buy has iPads for $399 each. This means that the school spent $400,000 more of the people's tax dollars than necessary.  In fraction form, this equals 1/3. In real life, this equals eight teacher's salaries.

Instead, the new Common Core Math exam will include questions like these:

If you're going to switch to digital textbooks, one can only imagine the historical information and context that will be left out during the transition.  Parents can't complain about the rewriting of history if the controversial subject is no longer even mentioned.  We already know that the CCSS will only address half of the content that was previously taught.  Problem solved.

Obama's FCC Chairman Genachowski is praising the new digital curriculum plan. 

Microsoft, Intel, Verizon and Google are praising the new digital curriculum plan, too.  In fact, they made a Digital Promise to ensure that all (low income/disadvantaged) students will have access to this technology, including NYC schools.  Who knows, maybe NYC schools had a 90% illiteracy rate before they started handing out iPads.  

 

Eventually, States will discover:

1.  You take RTTT funding, you must adopt CCSS.

2.  You adopt CCSS, you must adopt a common assessment

3.  You adopt a common assessment, you must provide broadband access in order to take the assessment exams.  This access is also necessary for the federal government to more easily collect data from the assessments.

4.  If you have broadband access, you must convert to digital textbooks.

5.  If you have digital textbooks, every child must be able to access the content both at school and at home using a mobile device.

 

 

All of this, of course, at the State's  taxpayer's expense.

 

Is it any wonder why the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation funded the writing and implementation of the Common Core Standards?

 

 

Remember when Ms. Morley gave this head-spinning answer about the cost of the exams here in Arizona?

 

"....They've agreed of a maximum cost of $15.00 per student per test cost for the TECHNOLOGY-BASED exam.  This obviously doesn't include the cost for the TECHNOLOGY  (laughs).  It's just for the test administration, scoring, all of that.  Obviously, there will be pen and paper options for students with some accommodations for those states who, you know, many of us have rural areas and don't know about our...our connectivity is probably...devices is a much easier question to figure out an answer versus what's our connectivity, broadband, with everyone doing the test at the same time.  What's going to happen?  The fully operational exam probably will not be in the first year of '14-'15 but it will be completely field tested for all of the technology enhance and then fully operational in the next year."

 

 

 

Seriously? 

She went to law school.

 

 

And the Executive Director of the Arizona State Board said this?

"There are some challenges that come along with that (technology) in terms of our existing infrastructure and devices in our schools.  And that's something that I hope is a subject of conversation in this session."

 

 

Oh, we're going to pay for it.  But, let's cram this down the throats of our citizens first.  We can worry about the logistics, cost and lost freedom later......

 

 

How Is Common Core Good For Arizona Again?

Why is Arizona so eager to implement the Common Core State Standards?

According to Vince Yanez, Executive Director of the Arizona Board of Education, it was because of Obama's enticing Race to the Top money which States fell all over themselves to get their hands on...thinking nothing of the anchor they would have to carry.

"So, Race to the Top comes along, States now had an incentive to come together to try and build these new set of standards."

Well, that plus Obama made it mandatory for the states who accepted RTTT funds to adopt the CCSS.


And then Mr. Yanez continued with the talking points narrative, courtesy of the leftist Foundations who are pushing for the reform.

"But it WAS, and I want to be VERY CLEAR, it was the STATES that developed these standards.  OUR Board of Education was insistent that we take a leadership role in how those standards were actually put together.  We were very much involved in terms of our teachers, our administrators, our parents in both the ELA standards and Mathematics standards.  In fact, THE lead writer for Mathematics was from the University of Arizona."  (Who happened to donate over $20,000 to democrats and Obama in 2012.  The UofA also happened to receive a generous grant from one of the Foundations who partnered with the Obama Administration in an effort to "equalize" the standards.)

Then an interesting omission was made by Mr. Yanez. See if you can catch it.

"What most people DON'T know is that while the Common Core was adopted by 46 States, each state that participated was permitted to augment those standards with items that were important to them.  So, in Arizona, we did that.  The CORE of the standards remains the same but at the direction of the State Board, the department did an excellent job of scouring our existing standards, find out items that we felt were important, that we felt added to the rigor and value of the CCSS and the Board did add to both the Math standards and the ELA standards.  So, while there is a CORE that is identical across those 46 states, taken as a whole, they're not completely and totally identical.  Again, states were able to add to them and we did take advantage of that."

If you guessed that he omitted the fact that states in this "State-led" initiative, are only allowed to contribute up to 15% of the curriculum, you would be correct.  


Standards and Assessments:

If all of the "voluntarily" participating states have been allowed to add 15% of their own material, how will this not lead to separate assessment exams for each State?  Doesn't that defeat the purpose of having a "Common" assessment?  Or is that just the bone that states were given to get them to sign up, giving them the illusion that they are in charge, but students won't really be tested on that 15%? 

And what about AIMS?

So, what about the AIMS test for science? 

We don't really believe that the Board of Education will continue to give two separate tests forever.  As Mr. Yanez said about implementing the new Science Standards, "It's a lot to bite off all at once."  It's not a matter of IF but WHEN.  It won't be long before we start to hear that the reason for the implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards is because it doesn't make sense to have two different assessments.

Another component to the assessments is that the test grade will act as a final exam and be averaged in to the student's final grade as opposed to a stand alone score.

The reason for this, according to Mr. Yanez, is that a student may receive good grades in class but then fail an exam like PARCC. Likewise, he said that some students may fail the class but pass the exam.  Huh?  It's hard to imagine that this would be such a regular occurrence that it would require all States to surrender to a federal take-over of the system.  Either you understand the material and PASS, or you don't. 

Why bother giving a PARCC test at all then if we can just issue a regular final exam and have that grade incorporated into the final grade, like we used to do?  And for a lot less money? 
 

What IF a student fails the PARCC?  Can they retake the test?  If so, how will that affect the course grade? 

Logistically, how would this even make sense?

You have two tests.  AIMS for science and PARCC for ELA and math.  PARCC tests will be weighted and averaged into the final ELA and math grades, but the AIMS for science will not.  What about other classes like Social Studies or foreign language?  Is the idea of averaging the two grades together only being done in Arizona or will this be done by ALL of the participating States?    

Cost: 
The technology necessary to implement the PARCC exams will be the next pursuit of the federal government.  Another string that will be attached by the federal government to those states who voluntarily adopt the CCSS.  And it won't be free.

According to Jaime Molera from the Arizona State Board,

"AIMS is a very inexpensive assessment program...The test was given in April and teachers had to wait until the following September for the results. Also, the assessments were only given to certain grades to cut down on cost."

1.  Assuming we had all of the available technology (which we won't until 2017), a PARCC test would cost $15 per student.  Mr. Molera admits that the AIMS test is very inexpensive and to save TAX DOLLARS, is only given in grades 3-8 and again in 10th.   The PARCC exams will be given for all grades K-12 which will obviously incur additional costs to administer.

2.  According to Ms. Stacey Morley from the Policy Development & Government Affairs Office at the Arizona Department of Education, AIMS tests are taken in March or April and the results "aren't in until the end of May."

 

So, which is it?  May or September?

Which leads us to...

 

How will the tests be graded and will it REALLY save time (and money)?

Ms. Morley pointed out that the current AIMS tests require mostly filling in a bubble in conjunction with a small amount of written work for the ELA portion.  The PARCC exams will be more writing which will take longer initially to grade.  That is until computers are capable of reading the answers (assuming they will be able to read the handwriting) and pick out certain key words.  You know, key words like "sustainable" or "renewable energy."

How will this give us the immediate results that

Mr. Yanez stated was a benefit with PARCC? 

 

How can the PARCC scores be averaged with a student's grade if the results aren't in before the end of school?

No plans have been made as to who or what will actually be grading the tests.  Ms. Morley joked that when she was in law school, her professor

 

"was like, 'You don't want me to grade more than five blue books a day.' "

 

There's a vote of confidence for you.

Which leaves us with the two people who were supposed to convince the committee that this government take-over was so wonderful, and who didn't have all of the answers for themselves.  So here we are, once again, passing something before we know what is in it. 

And we have elected leaders who amid the numerous unanswered questions and concerns, proceeded to vote for the federal government take-over.  There is a reason why Governor Brewer appointed Senators Crandall and Yee and Rep. Goodale to her Ready Arizona CCSS marketing committee.

These foreseeable concerns will naturally lead us to using PARCC for all of the core classes which means if we are going to have a common exam, we need to test the students on common material.

Exit States Rights.  Enter the Next Generation Science Standards.

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. 

 

WE'VE seen them.....

 

 

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:

 

 

 

SAMPLE SCIENCE PROBLEM

"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.

 

Practices:

• 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.