Tag Archives: IEPs

FTF: New CCSS “Unpacking” Guide

This is from 21012. Just published (2015), is a new 'unpacking guide' from another company.
This is from 21012. Just published (2015), is a new ‘unpacking guide’ from another company.

It seems fitting for my “From the Files” post, that we look at CCSS and it’s unpacking. After all, if we’re going to continue to see students fail, teachers frustrated to the point of resigning, and other staff members saught after for MORE CCSS alignment, we need to know the latest. The graphic you see above is from 2012, supposedly as the CCSS was just being rolled out.  Just by the sheer fact the Standards needing an ‘unpacking’ guide should tell you that even then, the Standards were convoluted, but I digress. I will add that according to most veteran teachers I have talked to during this War Against the Core, educational standards are to be SO clear and concise, a teacher automatically knows how to approach them on their own. However, as we’ve seen with the CCSS Initiative’s agenda, nothing (or no one) connected to education can accomplish much ‘on their own’, it has to be all one way…sadly, that’s the ‘Common Core Way’.

A Bit of History:

From 2012, (where you’ll find the graphic above) and the State of NY, watch this short video and note how ‘talked down to’ the teachers are. Before you scream at me over that statement, consider that teachers have graduated colleges and universities, obtained many degrees, thus, they shouldn’t need to be told how to draw a circle, find the nouns or verbs, BUT that’s just what this presenter is doing!



Did you notice the makeover of “Bloom’s Taxonomy” to fit the CCSS?! While “Bloom’s” is considered a great model for education, it is OUTCOME based education. As such, it makes sense CCSS folks in NY would use this. We anti CCSS Warriors know and have proven CCSS is all about ‘student outcomes’, ‘leveraging’, and on and on.

Not to pick on NY, I wanted to see what the CCSS official website had for ‘unpacking’. So, I found this You Tube video from THE CCSS official site. It’s from 2013. In the 2012 video, you saw the main point as how to ‘unpack’ or utilize the CCSS. This one instructs you on how to read and utilize CCSS!

Did you notice that not even 1 minute into this short video, you heard CCR (college and career readiness)?! Did you spot that the example was a K-5 page?! Did you hear that math isn’t supposed to be taught in an exact order, but rather clustered together? If you’re a parent who has wondered WHY your students struggle with math, this is key information! “No sequential order”, that is a disaster happening before our very eyes every single day throughout our nation when it comes to math. For math to make any sense, there MUST be a sequence. Is it any wonder we have students AND teachers giving up, burning out, and quitting?!

Fast Forward to 2015:

Just published by the Learning Sciences International (part of the Robert Marzano group) has a NEW CCSS ‘Unpacking’ guide. It’s by Toby J. Karten (a staff member of LSI) and is all about ‘inclusion’ for students and teachers using CCSS. Now, if you don’t know who Robert Marzano is or what Learning Sciences International does, I urge you to read my previously published articles, which I will include at the conclusion of this article. In short, LSI and Marzano are using CCSS for globalist mindsets and bending social and emotional learning (another huge part of CCSS indoctrination).

All that said, you’re probably wondering about the guide, after all this article is about ‘unpacking CCSS‘.
You can find the book on LSI’s website for sale in their ‘bookstore’ tab. Website: http://www.learningsciences.com/ When you visit the website (if you’ve not done so before) notice the names of the programs designed for students and educational staff. Just awful, in my researched opinion.
In order to promote Karten’s new book, LSI hosted a webinar (10/28/15). I’ve included in here for you. It’s just about 1 hour. Some of the key points are listed below for you. Please, don’t take my word for it, watch it, share the information with parents and others fighting this CCSS scourge.

Key points:
a) using CCSS for inclusive classrooms
b) affirming what you already know about CCSS
c) different strategies for using CCSS even better
d) at about 3:09, Karten points you to the crayon drawing beside her picture. It’s here she states the ultimate goal of CCSS is CCR (college and career readiness) {*personal note: please listen to how she describes the picture}
e) what will ‘trip the CCSS up?’ No support!!
f) special needs students, anyone who is ‘outside’ the ‘normal’ is used as an example in this presentation. You’ll see IDEA talked about, IEPs for IDEA students, etc. *7:08 in the video)
In case you’re not watching the video, here’s her slide for IEPs and CCSS:
iepskarten
g) CCSS is successful for ALL learners, differences or likenesses, aside.
h) collaboration is a non negotiable part of CCSS. This extends to not only teachers and other educational staff but the students families as well!
i) 19:10 different strategies for more CCSS modeling and monitoring of the students (which is to be an on-going process) are revealed (they are repeated at 26:30 as well in not only their ‘alphabet soup’ forms, but what each stands for)

Related resources:
Marzano, LSI:

https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/03/02/monday-musings-purposed-embedding-for-the-core/ (This one highlights the global aspect of the Marzano Institute before it became the LSI)
https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/08/03/monday-musings-rigor-walk/
(This article describes for you the ‘rigor’ LSI is after in our schools and how it grades both staff and students)
Project Based Learning:
https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2014/10/25/sic-em-saturday-ccss-progressives-and-pbls/
Special Needs, IEPs, IDEA:
https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/10/19/monday-musings-idea-when-good-goes-ccscte-bad/
https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/07/02/tech-thursday-cte-ccss-and-special-needs-in-post-secondary-education/


Closing:

Anti CCSS Warriors, please, read, review, and share all this information. From the pro side of CCSS, you heard it: with out support, CCSS will not succeed! That’s our intent..to NOT support it. However, many others must know this, too!

Monday Musings: IDEA: When Good Goes CCS/CTE Bad

Source: ideamoneywatch.com
Source: ideamoneywatch.com

Fighting CCS and CTE for those with special needs is especially heart rendering. I’ve had the honor of speaking with several parents of these wonderful students. In my educational experience, I’ve worked with these families and seen how an education that fits them, NOT streamlines them is a delight. However, when I speak with parents today, they are not delighted, their students are miserable, and all involved feel absolute anger and frustration toward the misuse of education and IDEA funding.

What’s IDEA funding? It is a federal statute set up in 1975. It’s original name was “Education for All Handicapped Children”. Congress, at some point, began to refer to it as “IDEA”. The name then or now isn’t so important as WHAT the funding does.
From what I’ve found the Act has 2 purposes: a) due process detailing parental rights, and b) permanent grants available to states for ‘free, appropriate public education to all children with disabilities in the least restrictive environment’.
(*Source: http://atlas.newamerica.org/individuals-disabilities-education-act-overview)

.

Where Good Went Bad:

Let’s see if we can pinpoint what other groups are supportive of the shift where IDEA went from its original purpose (stated above) of ‘appropriate education in the least restrictive way’ and when it aligned with Common Core

From 2009, a pdf file from the NASDSE (National Association of State Directors of Special Education). Why this pdf? See the screen shot below:

badidea2

To access the entire pdf: idea_partnership
Why this matters in 2015: 1) if you’re a new anti CCSS Warrior, this may be information which is new to you; 2) knowing the dates of the pro CCSS Machine’s activities can help those who’ve been fighting CCS and all its other entities by tracking when and where it showed up in their states, who might be involved and knew what the states were in for, but went along with it, etc.

So what’s the NASDSE up to now, in 2015? Currently they are conducting 8 projects. One of which might be of particular interest in our War Against the Core. It is called the “National Center on Educational Outcomes Subcontract”. (NCEO for short). This particular subcontract is through the University of MN. Working with the NASDES, the Univ. of MN, is the CCSSO (Council of Chief State School Officers)! The goal of their teamwork? Assessments! More assessments for our special needs students. To read more about this project, see: http://www.nasdse.org/Projects/TheNationalCenteronEducationalOutcomesNCEO/tabid/421/Default.aspx
(*NOTE: this page will have an embedded link to the NCEO’s website. Go to that website. You’ll find “College and  Career Readiness Standards”, formative assessments, Universal Design of Assessments, and, you can access any of their publications {which date back to 1996}. You can access the 2015 publication where you can find out how CCSSO is driving IEPs to be written, as well as how assessment for ALL learners was discussed: 2015ForumReport Be sure if you live in CO, AL, or KS, you see how your states are used as success models.)

Somewhat related is the 2006 Report I found featured on the website for the National Assoc. of Secondary School Principals  (which just this past weekend I showed you how aligned to CCSS/CTE they are).  This particular report is addressing the need for IDEA to become ‘fully funded’. Take note of the other groups in the IDEA Partnership involved in the full support of this. It can help you trace IDEA funds timeline, especially where the 2004 re-authorization of the ESEA (Elementary and Secondary Education Act) was concerned. See: principalsreport
Another project of the NASDSE is the “Idea Partnership”. Fully funded and equipped to work across  ‘federal agencies, federal investments, national organizations, State agencies and stakeholder groups’. To see the full description of this project, see: http://www.nasdse.org/Projects/IDEAPartnership/tabid/413/Default.aspx


To see the 2015 list of all the IDEA partners: http://www.ideapartnership.org/the-partners.html
One of the IDEA Partnership ‘Working Together’ activities? The “Cradle to College and Career Pipeline”! When did this happen? 2011, according to the website. You need to have the rest of the information on this directly from the website. Visit: http://www.ideapartnership.org/working-together/collaboration-on-issues.html?id=1572:overview-on-cradle-to-college-career-collection-work&catid=400:cradle-to-college-a-career-ccc-collection
Below is a screen shot from the IDEA Partners stating what they believe to be their purpose in the Pipeline.

cradlespecial

Be sure to click on the website address directly above the screen shot, scroll down and click on ‘Dialogue Guides for Cradle to College and Career’. Once there you can see an ‘Early Learner’ Guide, which is for pre-K to 3rd grade; for Middle School, it’s the “Breaking Ranks” reports I told you about in this past weekend’s news. Lastly, the transition for middle to high school in included. Other than the national group of those secondary school principals I told you about, you can see how the ECS, ‘Education Commission of the States’ is cited as a source for the dialogue documents.  If you are curious as to the alignment of the ECS to CCSS and CTE? Don’t be. It is 100% evident on their website. See below.

This group claims 'they don't take sides' in education. The states pay to belong to this group. They also span P-20 education.
This group claims ‘they don’t take sides’ in education. The states pay to belong to this group. They also span P-20 education.

As far as not taking sides, I would have to disagree. Why? Here is an excerpt of just one of the education projects they are conducting, ‘ECS is continuing the Blueprint Project, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Designed for state leaders, the Blueprint features a menu of 10 critical policies that promote college readiness and success.’
Briefly, the 10 policies most critical according to ECS:
1) high school policies (has 4 distinct subsections)
2) higher education policies (has 4 distinct subsections)
3) policies for bridging from high school to higher education (has 2 which include data mining)
To get the “Blueprint”: ECSBlueprint (*Note: 2 states which didn’t take CCSS, TX and VA, are used in this report as shining examples of college and career readiness.)
To learn more about ECS, http://www.ecs.org/html/aboutECS/home_aboutECS.htm
(*Note: I will be digging into this group more in the near future. There’s a lot more information we need waiting there.)

Bottom line for the musings today: We’ve got some great information for using to fight the Core, let’s get busy!

Tech Thursday: CTE, CCSS, and Special Needs in Post Secondary Education

Back in December 2014, I first wrote about Common Core, Career and Technical Education and its impact on the Special Needs students. What’s the latest for this population group in Post-Secondary education? Let’s find out in today’s article. Below is the link to the 2014 article:

https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2014/12/03/tech-thursday-career-techcommon-core-and-alternative-education/

Also related to this is the CCSS alignment of IEPs: https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/03/10/rmt-ccsss-present-to-special-needs/

Want to know how aligned post secondary education can be? Imagine your student on any one of the 3 tracks you see.
Want to know how aligned post secondary education can be? Imagine your student on any one of the 3 tracks you see.

An Education Webinar from June 30th:

Just a couple of days ago, the Gates Foundation backed “Education Week” hosted a free educational webinar about post secondary life for those with special needs. The following information is from links suggested as credible resources during the webinar. Credible for us, the anti CCSS Warriors, means we can use the resources to know where to look to access the CCSS Machine’s grasp for our students with special needs.

Education Week’s article, “Advocates Hope Common Core Will Rub Off” shares this criticism that not enough transitional planning is going on for those with special needs shifting from high school to post secondary education. While that may or may not be true, it’s the source EW used which is skewed towards CCSS/CTE (AIR, American Institutes of Research) offering the criticism. “”Many plans lack depth, breadth, and personalization; have low expectations for students with disabilities; do not include plans for postsecondary education; and do not map out how the K–12 education system should connect to other systems, such as postsecondary, vocational rehabilitation, workforce training, or independent services,” says a 2013 report from the American Institutes for Research. “As a result, many students with disabilities leave high school with amorphous and generic plans that fail to address their individual circumstances or interests.” To access the entire article: http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2015/06/04/advocates-hope-common-core-will-rub-off.html?intc=EW-DPCT15-TOC

From that 2013 AIR Report (be sure to click on the image to enlarge it):

AIRneeds

To access the 2013 AIR Report: Improving College and Career Readiness for Students with Disabilities

NASDSE, the National Association of State Directors of Special Education, Inc.:

This group based in VA, is supporting the ‘Every Child Achieves Act’ (aka: HR5 as the re-authorization of the NCLB law which in turn gave us Race to the Top and Common Core). Here’s an excerpt from their letter of support to Sen. Lamar Alexander, “NASDSE commends you for including in your bill language that only allows up to one percent of all students – those who have the most significant cognitive disabilities – to take an alternate assessment based on alternate achievement standards. This cap is critical to ensuring that students with disabilities will remain on track to graduate from high school prepared for postsecondary education and/or a career. We therefore urge that you oppose any efforts during the bill’s markup that would raise or eliminate this cap.” You can read the entire letter, http://www.nasdse.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=hLXguhdRtoM%3d&tabid=36

Also available from the NASDSE, is a 2004 data collection document which spells out what ADDITIONAL data is collected on each student with special needs. You can read it: SpecNeedsDataCollect

NASDSE has been around since 1938, but its most recent set of goals includes more post secondary success for the students served. Here’s a short paragraph you may find interesting, “The continued collaboration with our key partners, including the National Association of State Title I Directors and the Council of Administrators of Special Education brings us closer to common language in serving and improving outcomes for all students and remains a priority for NASDSE, as is collaboration with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Special Education Programs, in order to provide input regarding implementation of the State Systemic Improvement Plans,  Results Driven Accountability and the role of the National Center for Systemic Improvement (NCSI) in providing direct support to our members.”

The Board of Directors are all from various states across America and their Public Instruction departments. AZ, VA, MT, NH, UT, CA, GA, and SD. See: http://www.nasdse.org/AboutNASDSE/BoardofDirectors/tabid/406/Default.aspx (*NOTE; from here you can explore more about the organization via the left hand menu)

If you’re curious about the funding each state receives for educating special needs students, NASDSE and AIR (as in the group above) partnered together back in 2010 and published a report about this topic. See: NASDSEAIR

To find out all the NASDSE’s corporate sponsors and other groups involved: http://www.nasdse.org/ResourceLinks/tabid/59/Default.aspx

Pacer’s National Parent Center on Transition and Employment, http://www.pacer.org/transition/:

From their website, “Founded in 1977, PACER Center was created by parents of children and youth with disabilities to help other parents and families facing similar challenges. PACER Center enhances the quality of life and expands opportunities for children, youth, and young adults with all disabilities and their families so each person can reach his or her highest potential. PACER operates on the principles of parents helping parents, supporting families, promoting a safe environment for all children, and working in collaboration with others.” It is a non profit organization based in MN. It is funded by the U.S. Dept. of Education’s Office for Special Education Programs (*NOTE: you can find this fact at the bottom of every page on the website highlighted in blue)

From the Pacer’s 2014 published resources, a ‘new’ way to look at career paths for those students ready to go from high school to post secondary education. Here’s an interesting couple of paragraphs to read. When reading, consider the context of Career Pathways and/or Career and Technical Education (which are CCSS aligned), “To be able to acquire these skills and effectively change jobs, and plan and manage multiple careers over one’s life time, career development skills are important. The process by which youth get to know their strengths and interests, learn how different jobs connect with those interests, and build these career planning and management skills is called career development.” 

“By helping to support youth in making important informed decisions about their future, parents and other caring adults can contribute a great deal to their children’s post-high school success. For youth with disabilities in particular, families often play the very important roles of setting high expectations for youth’s future employment, and of advocating for opportunities for them to identify their strengths and interests and to explore career options. Families who learn about and begin the career development process with their youth early will be better prepared to support them in choosing and building a bright future. “Family” here is defined broadly as adults and children related biologically, emotionally, or legally, including single parents, blended families, unrelated individuals living cooperatively, and partnered couples who live with biological, adopted, and foster children.” The entire document was found on a linked website from the Pacer’s website. The National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability (NCWD). To read the NCWD’s entire document, http://www.ncwd-youth.info/node/1463 (*NOTE: The NCWD is part of the Institute for Educational Leadership which is a supported by a grant from the U.S. Dept. of Labor’s Office of Disability Employment Policy, ODEP; you can find this information at the bottom of the page when you access the article mentioned directly above. It’s highlighted in blue.)
“Think College!”, http://www.thinkcollege.net/:

From their website, you can find out that  “Think College is a project of the Institute for Community Inclusion at the University of Massachusetts Boston. The Think College initiatives are funded by grants from the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, the Administration on Developmental Disabilities, the Office of Special Education Programs, and the Office of Postsecondary Education.”

For this information and more like it, http://www.thinkcollege.net/publications/annual-reports
For this information and more like it, http://www.thinkcollege.net/publications/annual-reports

If you’d like to see the CCSS tie between the Standards and Boston College, http://frontrow.bc.edu/program/braun/

For more proof of BC’s CCSS stance:

BostonCollegeccss

Closing:

If you need more evidence of how intrusive the CCSS Machine is being in regard to our families and students with special needs, please let me know. If you have such evidence or wish to provide a real life account of your family’s saga with Career and Tech Education or Common Core, please let me know.

WYBI: More Recap for Anti CC Warriors

Imagine, those who make the assessments, That the child you see is YOURS.
Imagine, those who make the assessments, That the child you see is YOURS.

It’s a “Would You Believe It” Wednesday for those of us fighting Common Core and the CCSS Machine (meaning all those groups/programs/resources, etc. which are also Common Core regardless of the name). I do hope all this week, you’ve been finding the recap theme to be helpful. Today’s is going to be devoted to 3 of the most visited 2015 articles which have really surprised folks.
Note: the jpeg picture you see above is one a fellow anti CCSS warrior created that I’ve shared before. It captures the essence of what many of us feel about CCSS. It’s been one of the top commented on pictures I’ve featured.

January 2015 started you off with this top viewed article:

https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/01/07/wybi-wednesday-icaps-common-core-and-more/
Showing you, the ICAP (Individual Career and Academic Plan), how its’s connected to IEP (Individual Educational Plan), the Council of Chief State School Officers and so many other parts of the Core. Be sure to read not only the article, but the comments that were posted following the article.
In February of this year:

https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/02/11/wybi-jhuy/
I shared the research, links, and related information with you about ‘career readiness’ in other countries and how it is being used in America. If you aren’t familiar with CCR (college and career readiness), it’s another part of Common Core that’s been given a new name so it appears to be un-related to CCSS. However, when you look beneath the surface, you quickly find AIR (American Institute of Research), The Clinton Global Initiative, and many others.

Just a couple of weeks ago, I shared with you:

https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/05/20/wybi-global-ed-for-all-through-2030/
This article details the plan for global Common Core (or Common Core-like) education through the year 2030.
It ties the UN, UNESCO, the Gates Foundation, and others together. Not too surprising if you’ve fought the CCSS Machine for awhile, but if you’re new to the battle, this is a vital piece.

CLOSING:

Yes, there are many other Would You Believe It ‘posts, however, I’m keeping this brief for you today. Why? I’m inviting you to listen in to my guest appearance on the Women on the Wall national conference call. The WYBI-worthy topic is the Higher Education Act and how the upcoming re-authorization plays directly into the plans of the CCSS Machine. I’ve been able to comb through 3 related documents, as well as the actual legislation to find the connecting dots. To access the call (which will be archived), call 302-202-1110. Use the access code: 702165. The call is free. It begins at 9:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time (that’s 8:3o PM for Central Daylight Time; 7:30 PM for Mountain Daylight Time, and 6:30 PM for Pacific Daylight Time). I truly hope you’ll be listening in,as what I have to share is vital to our students, our citizens, and our country’s freedoms. When you listen, you’ll see how these Top WYBI articles relate to what’s in store for our nation.
If you’d like to learn more about Women on the Wall and their quest for educational freedom, visit:
https://www.facebook.com/WomenOnTheWall.org

Thank you for your continued support.

FTF: ICYMI, CCSS’s “Present” to Special Needs

CCSS is NO gift to anyone!
CCSS is NO gift to anyone!

This is a re-post of Sunday’s Riddle Me This. It is SO important that we shine the light on CCSS in special needs that I felt this was worth the re-posting. I also know not as many of my followers were able to access this story due to my road trip.
My  fellow anti CCSS warriors, if you read this on Sunday, consider sharing it with someone in the warrior world against CC whom you know hasn’t read it. IF you didn’t get to access this on Sunday, I hope you will use the information to help raise as much awareness as possible. So many folks don’t really see how several groups (including Presence Learning seen above) are promoting CCSS for those with special needs. Today, as on Sunday, you’ll get an in-depth look at HOW ‘PL’ is selling school districts, families, and students on how ‘great’ Common Core can be for those with special needs.

Presence of Deceit:

I feel it’s important to point out that before we get too far into this company, we remember that CCSS is the absolute presence of deceit! Violating the U.S. Constitution, breaking laws of all sorts, AND being featured almost everywhere you turn. Not once, is anyone with a corporate logo willing to admit, all this is based on a false pretense; a lie; a disgrace. The CCSS serves no one well who’s not profiting. ESPECIALLY those who have needs outside the ‘norm’. For these students and teachers, CCSS is not only WRONG, it’s a crime that has gone unpunished.

Presence Learning:

In the screen shot below, note the ‘team’ members, notice their previous backgrounds as well. To see more about the ties that can alert you to more possible CC involvement, visit:
http://presencelearning.com/about/team/

Stanford Univ. got help from BOTH Carnegie AND  Gates for a CCSS Language Initiative.
Stanford Univ. got help from BOTH Carnegie AND Gates for a CCSS Language
Initiative.

Presence’s Involvement in CCSS:

It appears the involvement of Presence Learning with CCSS is quite extensive. When I conducted a general search on their website, I got 3 pages of results that in various ways draw the line between the Standards and this ‘leader’ in areas for special needs students. Here’s one paper that especially needs to be seen by us anti CCSS warriors. Why? Because instead of the standards meeting the student’s needs, the students are to do what’s needed to conform to the Standards’ needs. To be able to access the entire document, you have to subscribe to PL. Here’s the link: http://presencelearning.com/news/presencelearning-white-paper-examines-role-slps-helping-students-develop-foundational-skills-needed-meet-ccss-2/

Here’s a second paper you might find worth investigating. The description of the paper includes the following, “The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) English language arts (ELA) goal is for students to develop “communicative competence,” which is the students’ ability to express themselves through different words and text.” Here’s the link to download a copy this paper (which also covers SLPs and assessments): http://presencelearning.com/resources/library/the-core-of-the-common-core/

You’ll more than likely want to see the videos PL has of the success stories their CCSS aligned services and products has given students and their schools. http://presencelearning.com/resources/videos/  You’ll probably be interested to know that on PL’s product tour page, they have this to say, “Organizations such as the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA), the American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA), American Psychological Association, National Association of Social Workers, American Counseling Association, US Department of Health and Human Services Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) and the Mayo Clinic all recognize the effectiveness of online therapy, as do numerous research studies. Students who receive service through PresenceLearning perform the same or better than the national average in functional communication measures such as spoken language production, spoken language comprehension, and sound production. Students tend to meet their IEP goals 22% faster with PresenceLearning.” 

You will most definitely want to watch the 3 part video on how to write a CCSS aligned IEP!! Access the page full of indoctrination: http://presencelearning.com/sped-ahead-webinars/shift-happens-new-iep-language-for-a-common-core-world/

plccssvid

About The Connections:

Earlier in my article I shared that the most common tie in PL team was Stanford University. Then I stated SU has been tied to CCSS. I think it only prudent to provide some proof for you.

Have you heard of the “Understanding Langue Initiative”? Stanford received help from both Carnegie AND Gates for this project. Carnegie’s Foundation gave $400,000 toward the Initiative (see: http://carnegie.org/grants/grants-database/  for June 2013) Gates’ Foundation has given Stanford several grants towards CCSS and/or related resources. While I couldn’t find a specific one for Understanding Language from June 2013, here’s the link to see all the funding GF has given Stanford. http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database#q/k=Stanford%20University

Here’s the paper for the Initiative: 04-Van Lier Walqui Language and CCSS FINAL If you want the present day website, http://ell.stanford.edu/

Council of Chief State School Officers also was involved in the Understanding Language Initiative. See their  document link, 

http://www.ccsso.org/Resources/Publications/The_Common_Core_and_English_Language_Learners.html

Here’s what the CC website has in their ‘assets’ section, a paper on how to use CC with Special Needs students. application-to-students-with-disabilities

Counter that with this news article from 2014 about how damaging CC is for Special Needs.

http://national.deseretnews.com/article/1844/common-core-accused-of-leaving-special-needs-students-behind.html

Closing:

While we all know how dis-serving CC is to all, I find it especially grievous that our most unique and wonderful children are being subjected to this way of learning. I feel so much for the teachers who must jump through the CC hoops as they watch what happens to their lovely charges in the classroom.

In my mind, I find it truly ironic that one of the most outspoken critics of CCSS also is connected to Stanford. If only the rest of those involved in CC would take a queue from him. Thank you, Dr. MIlgram. I’m glad you’ve joined the thousands of others who are against the CC.

Thank you to ALL those with the heart and care for our students..future leaders and citizens, regardless of abilities. You are tremendous!

WYBI: CCSS’s Ego Issues

We know the U.S. Dept. of Ed loves the CCSS, but find out how bloated their ego really is these days.
We know the U.S. Dept. of Ed loves the CCSS, but find out how bloated their ego really is these days.

What if I told you the U.S. Dept. of Ed had just completed studies to support MORE federal education overreach? Would you believe it?! Let’s find out how CCSS and the Next Generation stack up in this bloated ego atmosphere.

The Group Responsible:

I am not sure if you know this or not, but tucked into the U.S. Dept. of Ed. is an Institute for Evaluation pertaining to American education (just recently an international evaluation was published as well, but that’s another story). The official name of the Institute is the “Institute of Education Sciences”. Their website for today’s post: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/index.asp

The Tweet That Sent Me Off the Cliff:

Being an avid researcher, I get all kinds of Twitter news. One of Monday morning’s was a doozy. See for yourselves:

As seen on my CCDiva Twitter account 3/2/15.
As seen on my CCDiva Twitter account 3/2/15.

The Studies:

After seeing this bloated ego of a tweet, I HAD to find out what exactly I could discover about the continued overreach of the federal gov’t in education. So, using the above website address, I discovered the following:
NCEE (National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance) has come up with a “Next Generation of Rigorous Evaluations” The purpose? So schools and school leaders can raise student achievement levels. You’ll need to access the website for today’s post (above) to read for yourselves the other things that are stated. However, here’s one excerpt that will send you over the edge of that cliff, “In particular, the NCEE focuses on conducting rigorous impact studies of promising educational programs and practices that are supported through federal funds.”  Guiding the studies? Three questions. Yes, that’s right 3 questions. Those questions are:“What is the impact of the federal program on the intended outcomes?”; “Is the program model effective?”; and “Is a specific intervention (or class of interventions) effective?” By reading the rest of what the IES has been bragging about, you’ll find over 30 studies have been completed.

Directly related to CCSS and have been studied (or are in the process of) are:
1) Pathways to College and or Career, especially through the federally funded GEAR UP (see my previously published article from 11/14 about GEAR UP: https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/tag/gear-up/) Conducting this study? Oh, another bloated CCSS ego group, AIR (as in American Institutes for Research) The amount of federal funds to support this study (which doesn’t expire until 2018) is over $6 million! (for all the details, http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/pathways_gearup.asp)

2) Striving Readers Program, especially as awarded to states for raising literacy through curriculum. I found a NV based You Tube tutorial demonstrating the ties of CC to SR. Watch it below:

If you’d like to see the 2010 Webinar for the Striving Readers and how funding was not only awarded, but CC thrown in the mix: webinar8262010  To see more about the NCEE’s study for SR, go to: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/assistance_readers.asp Be sure to take note of the amount of federal funding and how it’s split up.

3) Evaluation the “Nation’s Report Card” or NAEP. See: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/other_naep.asp This study’s all about the data collection and how achievement levels are treated. Study will expire in 2016.

4) Title I and II especially under the ESEA. See: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/other_titleI.asp

Over $13 million dedicated to studying what standards states are using, what assessments, and how even more data can be used, collected. All approved and funded by Congress. This study ends in 2018. Three different contractors got this study. I dare you to google them to see how ties to CCSS they are! For example, EdCount, LLC was the organization which created the accountability guides the CCSSO (Council of Chief State School Officers) used in each of the 50 states between 2003-2007. Partners include Pearson Publishing, AIR, and many others. (to see EdCount, LLC’s website for their partners/clients, visit: http://edcount.com/index.php/about/clients-and-partners Be sure to look at their ‘Services’ pages. You’ll be amazed at how much they do.

5) Implementing Assessments for Special Needs Students. See: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/projects/evaluation/disabilities_ideaimp.asp This study ended in 2011, cost the taxpayers of America, just over $2 million. Results? More outcome based education and ‘high standards’. I’ve included the final study report. You’ll especially need pages 72 and following where it is discussed that mandated standards are more common that IEPs. Get it: IDEAreport

For the Others:

There are other studies you’ll want to look at for yourselves. Try the Literacy Studies, the Math Studies, and the Teacher Studies. You won’t believe what you see! For example, in the Literacy Studies, under the “Evaluation for Reading Comprehension”. This Study was over $17 million to discover during its first year the reading curricula, “Reading for Knowledge”, showed NO positive growth. The Study’s quick to add that things did improve after the first year. When I searched for the said curricula I got the pro CCSS group “Amplify”. Gee whiz, another bloated ego. To access this Study and the others, use the same website address as in the beginning of this article and select your choice from the left hand menu.

Want to See More of the U.S. Dept. of Ed’s  Bloated Ego?

Then you’ll need to access their “What Works Clearinghouse”. The website: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/

Begin with the “Practice Guides”, then “Interventions” (especially the one titled “Fast Track”, for emotionally disturbed little ones), if you want to see reviews of the absolute latest in research, go for the “Quick Reviews”, you’ll find studies for charter schools and college/career readiness and other ‘blasts of ego’. To get to all these, just use the left hand menu.

Closing:
When I searched for an appropriate image to start this article off with, I found the teacher at the chalk board to be excellent. However, the caption it should have attached is the original one which reads, “An inflated ego is like a balloon. Over fill it and it will explode.” Can’t say I’d mind seeing CCSS explode altogether.

On your mark, get set, explode!!
On your mark, get set, explode!!