How To Tell Which Candidates Support Common Core Tutorial

Just find out where former Intel CEO, Craig Barrett, donated his money.

Barrett is the Chairman of Achieve who was charged with developing the Common Core Standards.

Barrett is also the Chairman of Governor Brewer's Arizona Ready Council who has been marketing and promoting the new (sub) standards.

Obviously, he and his wife donated to John Huppenthal.  Although, it was only a measly $320.  Based on Huppenthal's recent debate performance, he probably won't be seeing any more financial help from the Barretts.

However, the biggest jackpot has gone to LD 16's Chamber of Commerce employee-newcomer, Taylor McArthur. Mr. and Mrs. Barrett have donated $4000 to Taylor's campaign.  

LD16 is home of the former Arizona State Senator, Medicaid sellout, Wyoming State Superintendent,  Rich Crandall.

McArthur has received over $24k in primary Independent Expenditure support from the "Stand for Children" PAC and the Chamber of Commerce.

According to the 2013 annual report, Stand for Children receives over $1M annually from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as well as donations from the Broad Foundation, Bashas Grocery Stores, Arizona Community Fund (whose board members include Paul Luna - President of the Helios Foundation who also donates to Stand for Children, and Lisa Arias with the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce), and the Arizona Chamber's Greater Phoenix Leadership Council.

Accomplishments in the annual report state:

"We educated and engaged more than 66,000 parents and community members on Common Core, fighting misguided attacks against improved academic standards that will help more students succeed."

Also that they helped pass HB2425 "replacing the existing AIMS test with an improved performance assessment aligned with the Arizona College and Career Ready Standards.  In addition, Stand Arizona partnered with the Arizona School Boards Association to train over 125 school board members and other education leaders across the state on these standards."

The Chamber of Commerce, of course, has been actively marketing the Common Core standards.

STAY VIGILANT, MY FRIENDS!

Common Core's College, Career, and "Citizenship" Ready

In February 2013, the Council of Chief State School Officers drafted a new Framework to tie in to the new Common Core Learning Standards.  It is titled:  

The Innovation Lab Network State Framework for College, Career, and Citizenship Readiness

Now, one might think that adding "Citizenship" to the "College and Career" Standards means enlisting in the military.  However, you would be wrong.

By "Citizenship" the Framework means "Dispositions" in order to become a "successful citizen."

The organization which is testing out this new Framework is called the Innovation Lab Network.  States who are in the ILN include: California, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Oregon, West Virginia and Wisconsin.  All of which are states who either mandate or encourage Character Education in schools.  

The Innovation Lab Network (ILN) is a group of states 

brought together by CCSSO taking action to identify, 

test and implement student-centered approaches to 

learning that will transform our public education 

system. With a constant focus on student outcomes, the 

goal of the ILN is to spur system-level change, scaling 

from locally-led innovation to wider implementation, 

both within and across states. 

The report states:

Comprised of ILN chief state school officers and their deputies, key stakeholder groups, and national thought leaders, the Task Force sought to guide state education systems toward a more clearly articulated definition of CCCR 

consistent with a broadened understanding of the student characteristics necessary for success in the 21st century. Reflecting on the Common Core State Standards, members asked what kinds of young people their parents and communities hoped would emerge from their transformative state education systems...

The task force consulted with several sources to create International definitions and skills frameworks.  These groups included:

1. The OECD Definition and Selection of Competencies project to examine expansion of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) into additional domains
2.  The Asia Society’s analysis of knowledge, skills, and dispositions necessary for global competence (funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation)
3.  Public education goal statements and skills frameworks articulated by high-performing nations such as Finland, South Korea, Singapore, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the European Union, among others.

In the end, they created a list of dispositions which "epitomize the vision of college and career ready student-citizen."

Initiative
Integrity
Intellectual Curiosity
Adaptability
Time and Goal Management
Leadership
Collaboration
Critical Thinking
Self-awareness
Self-control
Social and Personal Responsibility

You might recognize these same qualities in your own school's Character Education "6 Pillars of Character" campaign.


The framework assumes:

Causing consistently high levels of learning among young people from widely varying backgrounds and with diverse needs will require radical changes in current beliefs, policy, practice and structure.

While Common Core requires knowledge and skills in the 21st century, it also requires students to graduate possessing:

Dispositions – mindsets (sometimes referred to as behaviors, capacities, or habits of mind) that are closely associated with success in college and career. 

The ILN also holds that the same set of knowledge, skills and dispositions is vital for student success in terms of citizenship readiness, including the ability to contribute and succeed in our increasingly diverse, democratic, global society. 

"The training of mental abilities is only secondary.  First place must be taken by the development of character, especially promotion of will-power and determination, combined with the training of joy in responsibility.

A man with little scientific education but with good, firm character is more valuable for the national community than a clever weakling."

Mein Kampf

Huppenthal Admitted Arizona Education Was Improving BEFORE Common Core

Tucked in an Arizona Ready Council meeting in December 2012 was an interesting admission by Superintendent Huppenthal.

"Superintendent Huppenthal began the meeting with an update on Arizona graduation rates, which showed our gains ranking 3rd in the nation from 2006 to 2011 and our national rank improving from 46th to 27th overall.  In that 5 year period, Arizona students went from graduation at a rate of just under 70% to graduating at a rate of just under 78%."

Arizona didn't even BEGIN to implement the first phase transition to Common Core until the 2011-2012 school year. In fact, teachers are still being "trained" how to do "close reads" of paragraphs and "informational texts."

So, if we were showing noticeable improvement PRIOR to Common Core, why are people like Huppenthal claiming we still need to go with the unproven, untested, untried Common Core Standards today?

Sample Common Core PARCC Test Questions

Since Arizona is in the same testing consortia, PARCC, as Louisiana, we thought you might enjoy the following sample questions for English III students produced by the Louisiana Department of Education.

Remember, it's just a set of "standards."

The items that follow are based on an excerpt from the book In Defense of Women, which is located at the end of this set of questions. 

1. What are two central ideas presented in the excerpt? 
A. Men have prevented women from succeeding, but with new-found economic security, women will have the upper hand in the workplace. 
B. Women have more economic freedom, which means they will have more choices, especially when it comes to marriage. 
C. Women have a little more freedom, but the progress has been slow and the gains very small. 
D. Most women prefer to work than to marry, and as a result, family life is diminishing. 

Correct Answer: B

2. What is the purpose of mentioning “grandmothers” and “woman of a century ago”? 
A. To show that women of all generations prefer marriage to working 
B. To illustrate how little progress women have made through the years 
C. To emphasize the change in what women can expect in their lives 
D. To acknowledge the efforts of the first women activists  

 Correct Answer: C

3. In paragraph 3, the author refers to certain “propagandists” of the women’s movement. Based on the author’s description, his attitude toward them is best described as 
A. amused. 
B. fearful. 
C. confused. 
D. scornful. 

Correct Answer: D

4. Which words or phrases from paragraph 3 provide the best clues to how the author feels about the “propagandists”? 
A. “averse to marriage” 
B. “man-eating suffragettes” 
C. “preachers” and “prophetess” 
D. “wake the world with no such noisy eloquence” 

Correct Answer: B

Henry Louis Mencken (1880–1956) was an American journalist, essayist, and magazine editor. Mencken is regarded as one of the most influential American writers and prose stylists of the first 
half of the twentieth century. His book In Defense of Women was published in 1918 during the height of the suffragist movement, whose supporters sought to give women the right to vote. 

from In Defense of Women 

by H.L. Mencken 

1 The gradual emancipation of women that has been going on for the last century has still a long way to proceed before they are wholly delivered from their traditional burdens and so stand clear of the oppressions of men. But already, it must be plain, they have made enormous progress—perhaps more than they made in the ten thousand years preceding. The rise of the industrial system, which has borne so harshly upon the race in general, has brought them certain unmistakable benefits. Their economic dependence, though still sufficient to make marriage highly attractive to them, is nevertheless so far broken down that large classes of women are now almost free agents, and quite independent of the favor of men. Most of these women, responding to ideas that are still powerful, are yet intrigued, of course, by marriage, and prefer it to the autonomy that 
is coming in, but the fact remains that they now have a free choice in the matter, and that dire necessity no longer controls them. After all, they needn’t marry if they don’t want to; it is possible to get their bread by their own labor in the workshops of the world. Their grandmothers were in a far more difficult position. Failing marriage, they not only suffered a cruel ignominy,[1] but in many cases faced the menace of actual starvation. There was simply no respectable place in the economy of those times for the free woman. She either had to enter a nunnery or accept a disdainful patronage[2] that was as galling[3] as charity. 

2 Nothing could be plainer than the effect that the increasing economic security of women is having upon their whole habit of life and mind. The diminishing marriage rate and the even more 
rapidly diminishing birth rates show which way the wind is blowing. It is common for male statisticians, with characteristic imbecility,[4] to ascribe the fall in the marriage rate to a growing disinclination on the male side. This growing disinclination is actually on the female side. Even though no considerable body of women has yet reached the definite doctrine that marriage is less desirable than freedom, it must be plain that large numbers of them now approach the business 
with far greater fastidiousness[5] than their grandmothers or even their mothers exhibited. They are harder to please, and hence pleased less often. The woman of a century ago could imagine nothing 
more favorable to her than marriage; even marriage with a fifth-rate man was better than no marriage at all. This notion is gradually feeling the opposition of a contrary notion. Women in general may still prefer marriage to work, but there is an increasing minority which begins to realize that work may offer the greater contentment. 

3 There already appears in the world, indeed, a class of women, who, while still not genuinely averse to marriage, are yet free from any theory that it is necessary, or even invariably desirable. Among these women are a good many somewhat vociferous[6] propagandists, almost male in their violent earnestness; they range from the man-eating suffragettes to such preachers of free motherhood as Ellen Key[7] and such professional shockers of the bourgeoisie[8] as the American prophetess of birth-control, Margaret Sanger. But among them are many more who wake the world with no such noisy eloquence, but content themselves with carrying out their ideas in a quiet and respectable manner. The number of such women is much larger than is generally imagined, and that number tends to increase steadily. They are women who, with their economic independence 
assured, either by inheritance or by their own efforts, chiefly in the arts and professions, do exactly as they please, and make no pother[9] about it. Naturally enough, their superiority to convention 
and the common frenzy makes them extremely attractive to the better sort of men, and so it is not uncommon for one of them to find herself voluntarily sought in marriage, without any preliminary scheming by herself—surely an experience that very few ordinary women ever enjoy, save perhaps in dreams or delirium. The old order changeth and giveth place to the new. 


[1] humiliation 
[2] financial support controlled by a person or organization 
[3] irritating 
[4] silliness, absurdity, or stupidity 
[5] excessive care or delicacy 
[6] outspoken 
[7] Swedish feminist writer 
[8] middle class 
[9] fuss, disturbance

Race To The Top DISTRICT Competition

From the makers of the Race To The Top "State-level Competition,"  we now have a DISTRICT competition called RTT-D.

Must be nice to be able to print money...

"The Race to the Top District competition will build on the lessons learned from the State-level competitions and support bold, locally directed improvements in teaching and learning that will directly improve student achievement and teacher effectiveness.  More specifically, Race to the Top District will reward those LEAs that have the leadership and vision to implement the strategies, structures and systems of support to move beyond one-size-fits-all models of schooling, which have struggled to produce excellence and equity for all children, to personalized, student-focused approaches to teaching and learning that will use collaborative, data-based strategies and 21st century tools to deliver instruction and supports tailored to the needs and goals of each student, with the goal of enabling all students to graduate college- and career- ready."

Competitive Preference Priority-- Cradle-to-Career Results, Resource Alignment, and Integrated Services

Familiar eligibilty criteria include:

LEAs may join a consortium that includes LEAs across one or more states.

At least 40% of participating students across all participating schools must be students from low-income families, based on eligibility for free or reduced-price lunch subsidies.

The LEA has, at a minimum, designed and committed to implement no later than the 2014-15 school year:

- A teacher evaluation system

- A principal evaluation system

- A LEA superintendent evaluation

- A LEA school board evaluation

SCHOOL BOARD EVALUATIONS????

One has to wonder how ELECTED school board members and those who elected them might feel about this? 

But, then again, we allowed the federal government to give individual states RTTT money and therefore, authority to mandate a national standard and curriculum.

Why WOULDN'T the federal government go after local districts next?  

Applicants must be willing to subject themselves to increased "transparency" which includes reporting to the federal government the actual salaries at the school level for personnel, as well as instructional and support staff.

Wonder why that information is necessary? 

Also required:

The LEA has a robust data system that has, at a minimum-

- An individual teacher identifier with a teacher-student match

- The ability to match student level P-12 and higher education data

"The LEA has policy and regulatory protections in place that ensure Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) compliant privacy and information protection while enabling access and use by stakeholders."

It's a good thing Arne Duncan already changed the FERPA laws to allow our children's personal data to be shared with outside organizations and corporations  stakeholders.

Signatures by the LEA Superintendent, local school board and union/association president will be required.  Also, look for letters of support from "key" stakeholders such as parent and student organizations, early learning programs, the business community, civil rights organizations, advocacy groups, local civic and community-based organizations, etc.

It's the bully  community organizing way.

Three districts in Arizona have their hands out for upwards of $30MILLION including Cartwright Elementary, Peoria Unified and Tucson Unified School Districts.

Following closely behind are districts applying for a mere $20-$25Million such as the Glendale Elementary and High School District, Humbolt, and Sunnyside Unified Districts.

Even a newly formed charter school in Phoenix called Empower College Prep has their hand in the cookie jar begging for $4-$10Million.  That's a far cry from their FY 2013 budget of around $1M.

If all of the applicants win the highest award available, the 14 districts will receive a whopping $290M!

Other people's money.

Good-bye local control.

Wonder what Arizona Superintendent, John Huppenthal, thinks now?

Common Core Scoring By Pearson's "Experts"

Part of the required upgrades to implement Common Core will be for computer generated scoring of the exams.  One such program is the Intelligent Essay Assessor (IEA) by Pearson.  In fact, Pearson paid for three overseas trips in 2011 for our State Superintendent, John Huppenthal, involving the CCSSO.

Hmm.

With their partnership with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Pearson has developed an "Artificial Intelligence" scoring program.  They claim:

 



 

 

 

 

So, the "experts" tell the computer what to scan for in their IntelliMetric system.  The "experts" decide what information is important for a student to regurgitate and what is not.  Here is a sample values clarification question in our new "internationally benchmarked" curriculum on Population Distribution:

 

 This is the essay being scored:

 And this is a list of criteria that the computer will be programmed to look for and where the student will need to improve.  For example, this particular student needs to focus their efforts more on population distribution and the challenges of population growth.   

Luckily, the student will have six more tries to get it right.  Afterall, it IS a more rigorous curriculum.

 

 

Here is another Language sample essay on Community Service which dovetails nicely with Obama's new Executive Order to use young members of the taxpayer subsidized AmeriCorps to try and turn around failing schools:

 

 

So, even with an essay that would seem to encourage a student to write about an emotional and personal subject, Pearson admits that IEA can't evaluate creativity or reflective thinking.  Only "factual topics":

 

 

 

 

What key words and "facts" would the so-called "experts" look for in an essay such as the one listed above?  Will there be no recourse for a student who questions the results if the person who graded the exam wasn't even their teacher?  These aren't simple multiple choice answers.

 

Finally, we will be forced to use this kind of technology even though the company that created it admits that "while IntelliMetric seeks to model a human brain to score essays, it pales in comparison to the human brain."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our Education Leaders Received "Gifts" From Groups Pushing CCSS

Some of our elected leaders have received some very generous "gifts" over the last few years from the very groups who have been shoving the CCSS mess down our throats.  These generous donors have been involved with writing the standards, coordinating for common testing and establishing a data collection system.  They also provide scholarship programs for low income and disadvantaged students and everything else in between.

For example, here is Rich Crandall's 2010 financial disclosure statement where he received over $2000:

Who are these donors?

National Conference of State Legislatures is the group allowing themselves to be used in an effort to make Common Core appear to be "state-led."  Our own Rep. Doris Goodale is also a member of the NCSL and who sponsored HB2047 to replace the AIMS testing with PARCC. When that bill failed, Rich Crandall was prepared to come up from behind and pick up the slack with his Crandall Amendment in HB2425. 

The Foundation for Excellence in Education is a "nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, focused on education reform, state-by-state."  A partner of the Foundation for Excellence in Education is Jeb Bush and Joel Klein's Digital Learning Council which Rich Crandall is a member.

Achieve, Inc was the organization tasked with writing the Common Core State Standards.  In fact, the Chairman of the Board is Dr. Craig Barrett, former CEO of Intel who Governor Brewer tapped to head her Arizona Ready Council in Arizona to push for the implementation of the CCSS.   Achieve's biggest donor is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation along with other leftist donors such as the Hewlett Foundation, Lumina Foundation, and Carnegie Corporation, just to name a few.

College Board facilitates the common college entrance exams and focuses on aide to low income and disadvantaged students.  College Board is also pushing for the CCSS to go along with their "common" college exams and receive hefty donations from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

 

Rich Crandall's 2011 "gifts"

(1) National Conference of State Legislatures

(2) Lumina Foundation who donates to groups such as the Center for American Progress, Brookings Institute and Aspen Institute.

(4)  West Ed whose Board of Directors include John Huppenthal and several Arizona School Superintendents.  Their funding comes from groups such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Carnegie Foundation, and the Hewlett Foundation (who donates to the Soros' Tides Foundation and the United Nations).

(5) National Center on Education and the Economy  funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Carnegie, Lumina, Annie Casey Foundation, etc.  It was the NCEE who produced the international education benchmark piece called Tough Choices or Tough Times funded almost exclusively by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.  Arizona's AIMS Task Force was introduced to this piece in March 2009. 


(6) Education Commission of the States.  Rep. Doris Goodale is a member of the ECS Committee and receives funding from many of the same organizations listed above.

(7)  Data Quality Campaign  who has been organizing the data collection for CCSS and assessments.  Major funding comes from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. 

(8)  American Diploma Project launched by Achieve in 2005.

(9)  Foundation for Excellence in Education  (see above)

 

Rich Crandall's 2012 "gifts"

 

 



Same groups as 2011 plus McGraw Hill, another company ready to implement CCSS.


How incredibly convenient that after the mess regarding the Republican Victory Fund, Crandall decides to quit.  Right after he helps push through the final important pieces of legislation to fully implement the  state-led  United Nations led CCSS.

Who else received "gifts"?

Newly elected State Superintendent, John Huppenthal in 2011: Trips to China, Brazil and Japan with the Pearson Foundation, a British education publishing company and partner of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation pushing for digital learning programs. Pearson donates to Jeb Bush's Foundation for Excellence in Education.  Why did Huppenthal have to travel to China, Brazil and Japan? 

Representative Doris Goodale in 2011 from Jeb Bush's Foundation for Excellence in Education.

Senator Kimberly Yee in 2012 for her participation as a judge at a Microsoft Partners in Learning Forum.  Partners in Learning is Bill Gates' global technology and digital learning initiative to basically encourage educators around the world to use his products.

Speaker of the House Kirk Adams in 2010 who attended meetings paid for by the Lumina Foundation and that Aspen-Rodel Fellowship.  Aspen's goals are to 
 

Continue to grow the leadership initiatives globally and expand public programs.

Provide opportunities for more horizontal integration across programs by linking public programs, leadership initiatives and policy programs. Environment, education, and health are the initial areas for cross- fertilization.

Representative Steve Court in 2010 received gifts from the NCSL and the Foundation for Excellence in Education.

Representative Heather Carter attended a meeting in 2011 for the Data Quality Campaign.

Senator Linda Gray who attended a bunch of education conferences in 2011 for the NCSL, Education Commission of the States, and the Casey Foundation who donates to the NCEE and other groups supporting the CCSS.

Crandall, Goodale, Yee, Carter, Gray and Court were all members of the legislature's Education Committee at the time of the "gifts." Huppenthal, of course, had just been elected as the new State Superintendent.  Our Governor and Superintendent Horne had just signed the Memo of Understanding (MOU) to implement the CCSS in June 2010.  It would appear that our legislators were being schmoozed into supporting the necessary legislation in order to fully implement not only the CCSS but the important PARCC exams and data collection as well.

 

Feeling a little taken advantage of yet?

Green Ribbon Schools

Skyline and Mesa High School in Mesa were awarded the Obama Administrations,   EPA,   Department of Education's "Green Ribbon" award in 2011. 

Some of Skyline's Green Ribbon projects included "informing the public about the misuse of energy," using Earth Week to "inform the masses about recycling and other aspects of the Green Movement" and encouraging students to "live a healthier life and reduce pollution by walking or carpooling to school" and then rewarding them with longer lunch breaks.

Other school projects from around the country can be seen here.


The Mesa school's Green Ribbon awards didn't come as a big surprise.  Mesa has been front and center of the global warming climate change scam for several years. The Mayor of Mesa, Scott Smith, is the Vice President of the U.S. Conference of Mayors which is a partner of the ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives).  Mayor Smith signed off on the U.S. Conference of Mayors "Climate Change Compact" in 2009.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors joined with the ICLEI in 2006 in an effort to "combat the effects of global warming." 

 

The U.S. Conference of Mayors has formed a new partnership with ICLEI – Local Governments for Sustainability USA – to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in cities through outreach, education and technical assistance. The mayors also formed a Mayors' Council on Climate Protection with the goal of providing mayors the tools they need to carry out their mission.  Formerly the International Council of Local Environmental Initiatives, ICLEI is the nation's foremost organization working to provide cities with resources to lead on climate protection in the U.S. and internationally.

 “Mayors have done a tremendous amount of work on the issue of Climate Change and Global Warming,” said Conference President Long Beach Mayor Beverly O’Neill in announcing the partnership, “Mayors have been leading the way on this issue through local efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which is a major cause of climate change.”

 

 

By 2011, Obama's head of the Department of Education, Arne Duncan, began the pilot program for Green Ribbon Schools. 

The recognition award honors exemplary achievement in reducing environmental impact and costs; improving health and wellness; and providing effective environmental and sustainability education...

As a result of the award, state education agencies now collaborate with health and natural resource agencies to support schools. Likewise, among federal agencies, through the Green Strides Webinar Series and Speakers Bureau, ED-GRS is a platform to connect all schools with existing resources, programs and grants.

 

 

Who is behind the Green Ribbon Program?

 

 

Campaign Steering Committee

Campaign for Environmental Literacy, Earth Day Network, National Wildlife Federation, U.S. Green Building Council

 

Supporting Organizations (National)

Alliance for Climate Education, Alliance to Save Energy, American Architectural Foundation, American Federation of Teachers, Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education, BlueGreen Alliance, International Council of Environmental Deans and Directors, Earth Force, Green Charter Schools Network, Green Community Schools, Green Fox Schools, Green Schools Alliance, Green Schools Initiative, Green Schools Network, GREENGUARD Environmental Institute, Healthy Schools Campaign, Hispanic Access Foundation, National Association of Elementary School Principals, National Audubon Society, National Education Association, National Energy Education Development Project, National Green Schools Coalition, National Green Schools Network, National School Boards Association, North American Association for Environmental Education, Ocean Foundation, Project Learning Tree, U.S. Partnership for Education for Sustainable Development, Zerofootprint Challenge for Schools.

 

 

Green Ribbon Goals:

 

A primary goal of ED-GRS is to inspire schools to strive for 21^st century excellence.  To that end, the award recognizes schools that:

1)      Reduce environmental impact and costs;

2)      Improve the health and wellness of schools, students and staff; and

3)      Provide effective environmental and sustainability literacy, incorporating STEM, civic skills and green career pathways.

If a state or comparable authority wishes to nominate more than one public school, at least one must be a school with at least 40 percent of their students from a disadvantaged background. [1]  If an authority wishes to nominate a fourth school, it must be a private school.  No more than one of the four may be a private school.  A school may be selected as honoree only once every three years.  Authorities are encouraged to take a school’s academic achievement, achievement gaps and diversity into account when selecting school honorees.

---

[1] A student from a “disadvantaged background” is defined for this program by the CSSO of each state.  The definition must include students who are eligible for free and reduced-price school meals and may include students with disabilities and students who are limited English proficient, migrant, or receiving services under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.  Nominating Authorities must indicate the definition used and the percent disadvantaged for each school nominated.

 

 

Their stated goal is to "invigorate and empower schools nationwide for growing the 21st-century economy. By encouraging schools to apply for this award, powerful strides will be taken to ensure we meet our shared goal of greening America's schools within a generation."

 

They continue, "Green Schools are an effective agent for enacting positive environmental and educational change in schools and communities."

 

Yes.  Agenda 21.  Using our children to "spread the wealth around."

Did we mention that nominated schools must also be in compliance with the Office of Civil Rights and not have any pending suits with the Department of Justice? (see list of statutory and regulatory requirements)

 

We smell Van Jones and Eric Holder lurking around the corner.

 

 

In 2012, two other Arizona schools  received the Green Ribbon Award. 

 

Phoenix's Roadrunner Elementary School and the STAR School in Flagstaff are among 78 first-ever U.S. Department of Education Green Ribbon Schools.

 

The STAR School stated:

The approach to education and sustainability at STAR School aims to provide a platform from which the student can step in to the world of environmental challenges, empowered to contribute to a more sustainable future.  STAR School promotes self-reliance, alternative building methods, and energy sources such as solar power.  The school also hosts workshops about sustainable living, technology, and the arts.  Sustainability education is used to complement and reinforce the oldest Navajo traditions throughout the school.  

 

Each student is expected to complete an individual or group project during the middle-school years that: 1) meets identifiable national STEM standards, 2) investigates and provides possible solutions to environmental and sustainability challenges chosen by the student, and 3) provides service to the community that meets the STAR School service-learning rubrics.

It's too bad that Roadrunner Elementary and the STAR School weren't chosen for their academic achievement. 
 

Perhaps Roadrunner Elementary and the STAR School might focus a little more on actually teaching students about basic math, reading and writing rather than recycling?  It might help improve their 1 or 2 star ratings and test scores.  

 

 

 

You can watch the head of the EPA, Lisa Jackson, along with Arne Duncan praise the 2012 Green Ribbon program winners and specifically congratulate Roadrunner and STAR school.  In true Obama Administration style, the propaganda  announcement is done in front of props  a group of elementary school children.

 

 

We already know that members of the teacher's unions have suggested ways to creatively implement liberal agendas into our children's classrooms.  So it is no surprise when our children bring home verb structure or reading comprehension assignments like these:

 

 

 

Finally, the parent decided to make their own statement:

 

 

 

Schools can be nominated by a state's Department of Education.  Should you choose, let our State Superintendent of Public Instruction, John Huppenthal, know that we do not wish our schools to participate in the Obama Administration global Agenda 21 campaign scam and further expose our children to more liberal brainwashing propaganda.