Anti Fed Ed Warriors, what do you do when those in charge of education use words to try to confuse us?
Double talk, double speak, educratic buzzwords.
We, the taxpayers, hear a phrase like ‘student outcomes’ and think, ‘Oh, okay. This means the school really cares how my Johnny or Suzy’s education will turn out.’ Sadly, and thanks to the CCSS Machine, the truth is, ‘student outcomes’ means something far more controlling than caring.
Why is it important to look at the words used for education in 2018? Warriors, it will continue to be embedded in our schools, our towns, and, even our homes.
We MUST understand that the words used, even today, are chosen for two specific reasons:
a) socially acceptable
b) meant to patronize taxpayers
For example, ‘student outcomes’. What, exactly DOES that mean?! Does it mean the same thing in one State as it does in the others? Is it somehow different? If so, how?? What does ‘student outcomes’ mean when used in the sentence below?
“We must have both student outcomes as well as student outputs.”
Exactly! When I heard a recent recording of a birth to 3rd grade meeting (here in NC), a statement very close to what you see above was said. When I contacted a State DPI (Dept. of Public Instruction) employee I’d been guided to, my question was “What’s the difference between ‘student outcomes’ and ‘student outputs’?”
I also asked if the two were NC’s specific definitions. The response I got wasn’t clear at all. In fact, it was revealed that the two terms were not necessarily specific to NC. Instead of a clear and concise answer, I was referred to a blog article for a group out of Ohio.
Warriors, I do not know about you, but it almost like we NOT supposed to question those in charge of education, yet, we’re the scapegoats when something goes awry. We’re also the ‘chosen few’ when it comes to forking over our hard earned tax dollars to pay for all this educational alignment.
“Student Outcomes” VS “Student Outputs”:
Warriors, here’s the 2014 article link I was directed to. Remember, this was an effort to help me understand the difference. Below is a quote from the article,
“Mediocre organizations are stuck on making decisions based on outputs. Great organizations are managing to outcomes.”
The missing context? “Organizations” are NOT taxpayer funded school systems. They are non-profit groups! The article goes on to compare ‘outcomes’ and ‘outputs’ as types of hamburgers. Are you serious?! Hamburgers, non-profits, and, ‘not necessarily’?!
Okay, we have a non-profit view of outcomes/outputs.
Here’s an education policy view of what ‘outcomes’ and ‘outputs’ should be. It’s from 2011.
Instead of hamburgers, we see that outcomes/output all lead to the same results: digital technology for school readiness: aka: personalized learning, aka: competency based education (CBE).
CBE is a ‘creative delusion’. How? It steers us away from the harsh reality of CBE. Not only is CBE a workforce training, globalized way to learn, it MUST have access to the massive amounts of private and personal data in order to survive.
In short, ‘student data rape’.
Warriors, all this outcome/output jargon was during a birth to 3rd grade meeting I was listening to!!!
Mud Needs Dirt, “Outcomes”:
The institute which published this paper is the Innosight Institute. According to the final pages of the publication linked above, the Innosight Institute can be found in Harvard University. It’s also a non-profit group which uses disruptive tactics to create change.
Warriors, red flags!! Harvard is a dyed-in-the-wool CCSS Machine member group. The University has partnered with Pearson Publishing (among others) to use disruptive tactics not only in education, but in the shift to workforce training (aka: CBE, competency based education). To access that type of information, click here.
Back in 2008, Warriors, the same man who brought the business world “Innosight”, took his disruption to our classrooms.
Those ‘disruptions’ from 2008 are still in use in 2018 and ‘slicker’ than ever! Below are the 2008 tactics used, compare to what we’ve seen since ESSA was passed into law:
“Customized learning will help more students succeed in school, student-centric classrooms will increase the demand for new technology, computers must be disruptively deployed to every student, disruptive innovation can circumvent roadblocks that have prevented other attempts at school reform, and….we can compete in the global classroom – and get ahead in the global market.”
Warriors, the connection between ESSA’s mandates and Christensen’s disruption are closer than you may realize.
Mud Needs Water, ESSA:
In 2015, just days before ESSA was signed into law, a large group of CCSS Machine member groups decided to write a ‘fan letter’ to the US House-Senate Conference Committee on reaching a compromise between HR 5 and S 1177.
Of those ‘honorable’ Congress members, only one has retired. However, before he left DC, Rep. John Kline ensured Americans that his good buddy Sen. Lamar Alexander would carry on the education reform they started.
My point? All the other compromising elected leaders are STILL churning out CCSS Machine education reform legislation.
Warriors, as of this writing, only 3 States have taken the bait to use their education systems as test subjects for ESSA’s Innovative Assessment Pilot Program. Those States are NH, AZ, and, LA. According the the ESSA mandate, a total of 7 could seek permission to participate.
(*Note: in the ‘ESSA mandate’ embedded link, you’ll see that we are encouraged to see what NH has done as far as outcomes/assessments, etc. So, I did. from the 2011-12 information, I found, ‘outcomes’ were broken into 2 categories, “A”: ‘Positive Social Emotional Skills’ and “B”: ‘Acquisition and Use of Knowledge and Skills’. These 2 outcomes are also for early learners, Warriors!)
Not Mud, But You May Want To Throw It:
Warriors, watch this short You Tube video about the ‘innovation’ these SEL ‘outcomes’ are breeding. I found this here in NC by way of the early learning assessment CLASS. “CLASS” stands for ‘CLassroom Assessment Scoring System’.
Warriors, while our federal and State level educrats continue to try to placate us, let me be crystal clear. “Student outcomes”, ‘student outputs’, etc. are all the same: school readiness via digital technology.
By way of the CCSS Machine, these also fall under the CCSS (Common Core State Standards) re-brand, CCR or ‘College and Career Readiness’.
Let me also be clear, these types of disruptive innovation and outcomes are NOT reserved for Birth to 3rd graders only. Nor are they reserved for public education ONLY.
ESSA was expressly clear when it stated ‘All education Must be’…