Tag Archives: implementation

Big Wheel Deal

Anti Fed Ed Warriors, have you ever had one of those items you knew you needed to address but thought it wouldn’t take too long? Yeah, right. That’s pretty much been my experience in education research. Today’s article is just one of those items.  A mere 4 page document..no worries. Not much can be gleaned from those pages..Boy, was I mistaken! Find out how no matter which way the wheel spins, the schools of America lose.

charliebrown
Everyday is a GREAT day to yank the CCSS ball right out from under the Machine’s feet.

A 2018 global education meeting. The goal? Another global declaration. As if we don’t have enough of those going around. However, look at the picture (below). This isn’t your every day global declaration, this is an EDUCATION declaration for globalization.

This particular Declaration reaffirmed the global takeover of education. But, wait, Lynne, the US pulled out of the UN and UNESCO (United Nations and United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization), so this won’t impact American education at all.

WRONG! American education is still 100% aligned to the UN’s SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals), no matter what small portions of the US government have ‘left’ the UN/UNESCO.

There’s more than enough evidence (here on my blog and other’s researched publications) to prove the US is still a UN member-state.

Brussels, 2018:

Brussels2018(Source)

So what does the 2018 Brussels Declaration for Education state?

1) It reaffirms the call to transforming the world via education.
2) It decries the fact the global community is not on the 100% alignment track to the SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals), mainly #4: Quality Global Education for All
3) Pulls in the 2015 Incheon Declaration (where the WEF, World Education Forum adopted the ‘education for all by 2030’ agenda)
4) Sets out the Education for All by 2030 Framework for Action
5) The Framework is based off UN’s global regions consultations for SDG #4.
6) “Ensures inclusive and equitable quality education and promotes life-long learning opportunities for all.” (In spite of not being on track)
7) A reaffirmation to protect the UN’s declared ‘right to inclusive education’. This ‘right’ is a fundamental role in education AND training carried out by life-long learning and higher education.
8) Research on #7 is a key driver for Sustainable Development. Especially in climate change global adoption and mitigation (reducing the harm to the Earth).
9) Calls for a stronger collective effort for SDG #4.
10) Use formal and non-formal education to wipe out illiteracy.
11) Institute and strengthen legislation/policy/strategy so that all education and training is inclusive. Devote more funding to this end so that ‘no one is left behind’. (For example, in Congress HR 1453 seeks to align more energy activities between the US and the European Union)
12) Tied to #11, those efforts need to include crises and humanitarian efforts.
13) Commit to include migrants, displaced people, and refugees in the host nation’s education and training system. Recognize their ‘qualifications’ (aka: competencies and skills) and ensure these are in line with national and international education agreements.
14) Commit to gender responsive quality education and training, especially for females.
15) Commit to strengthen global citizenship education, especially for the SDGs. This will promote values (respect for life, dignity, cultural diversity) and will help bring social cohesion for democracy, peace, and social justice. It will also improve accountability in education as a ‘public good’.
16) Commits to an open/flexible and responsive education and training system which will support a broader range of kindergarten, secondary, and, college students (aka: early child to adulthood; ‘cradle to grave’; ‘life-long learning’; birth to death tracking) By doing this, global contributions for sustainability, peaceful, inclusive, and just societies will occur.
17) Engages global ‘decent work for all’, especially for rapidly changing labor markets.
18) Calls for public funding to increase for relevant PD (professional development) and continuous PD.
19) Stronger domestic resources and mobilization of these for international co-operation. Once this is set in place, solidarity and increased improvement of education can occur.

Warriors, that’s not all. If you look at the notes for all these items, you’ll find that politics and legislation are to ‘beef up’ host nations for these activities.

You’ll also see that teachers are to be elevated to some ‘god-like’ status.
You are sure to see the economic changes, as well as the social, political, and environmental changes which each host nation will have to bare.
Then, the increase in technology is a ‘given’. Add to that the ‘democratic and sustainable societies and lifestyles’. We’re really talking a total reconfiguration of our nation.

uscaucuslist.jpg

Education costs are to be placed at 4-6% of of host nation’s GDPs (Gross Domestic Products) and use 15-20% of all public funds (aka: taxes).

If you look at the United States GDP for 2018 ($21.trillion) and figure what 4-6% is, that anywhere between $860 billion and $1.29 trillion). The recent FY 2020 Presidential Budget request was $62 billion, just for American education. Fifteen to 20% of ALL US public funds? That’s outrageous!

P3s (Public private partnerships) are to be used to monitor and data track all the activities to ensure the plan is played out as this Declaration decrees.

Lastly, the Brussels Declaration reaffirms that education is a human right AND a public responsibility.

ICYMI: here’s the ‘catchy’ YouTube video about the entire meeting, Dec. 3rd-5th, 2018.

Warriors, was the United States involved in the Brussels 2018 meeting? Yes. In October of 2018, the US and other North American countries, as well as Europe, put together their progress notes and ‘advice’ for meeting SDG #4 by 2030. You can access that information here. The official “Outcome Statement” is a bit more concise. It was used in the Brussels meetings as well.

That information was then forwarded on and used at the Brussels meeting to help create the Declaration.

To access the entire website from the Brussels meeting, go here. (*Note, since signing the 2015 Agenda 2030 Agreement, this is the first time global education for all has been addressed in this fashion.)

While I couldn’t easily identify (in the photos and videos section) any member of the US officials in attendance, some of the groups we are members of (World Bank, UNICEF, OECD) were there. Also, NGOs (Non governmental agencies) were in attendance, so it’s highly likely someone or some people from the US were there.

Closing:

Warriors, why am I bringing up a meeting from 3 months ago? Because one of the resources from that meeting will definitely impact America and its education. The GEM Report for 2019. AKA: Global Education Monitoring Report.

That Report is close to 440 pages. My next article will dive right into what those pages reveal. Trust me, you’ll need a break between this article and THAT one.

Why is it good to go over the GEM Report 2019 again (if you’ve already read it)? With the national immigration issues we are facing in 2019, it is imperative. Remember, the Brussels Declaration has stated legislation and public money will be used for SDG#4.

Also, because so much of this involves displaced people, immigration, and humanitarian efforts, this will be ‘visited’ on ALL educational choices due to the fact it’s being implemented community wide! What will this do to our rights? Our Constitution? Rather than ask me what to do, ask those who are your authorities.

Advertisements

Under Our Noses

Anti Fed Ed Warriors, if I’ve said it once, I’ve said it hundreds of times that STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and, Math) is a coined acronym in use to deceive us all.
Yes, I know, I’ve heard it before, “But, Lynne we’ve always had science and math. We’ve had engineering in the past and technology, too.”
HOWEVER, Warriors, the deception is that by creating an acronym with things we are familiar with, the agenda is easier to be implemented.

What do I mean? A few years ago, I wrote an article showing you how the NSF, National Science Foundation (a government funded agency of the USA), was tasked to come up with a marketing tool to ‘win’ the nation over with.

WHY? Evidence suggests their ties with the UN (United Nations). More to the point the UN’s damnable SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals). STEM was (and is) the vehicle to change the course of education. At least according to the UN SDG Toolkit (created here in America). (*Note: you can access and read the Toolkit for yourselves. Look for the link under the Paragraph “From 2002”. The sentence beginning with “Tool Kit” is where you’ll find the document.)

THEN, once the acronym was selected, the President (Obama) had to be influenced. I also revealed HOW he was influenced (a PCAST Report).  (*Note: when you go back and read the embedded links, you’ll notice that the Presidential influence began well before President Obama, especially in regards to the NSF.)

pressurecooker

So, what WAS the agenda and does it still survive under our current President?

Agenda: STEM ushered in about the same time as Common Core, so no one would notice. Use STEM to create a STEM people with a STEM education for STEM jobs and a STEM economy. In other words more mastery based education, or as it’s been sold to us, competency based education (CBE). Why CBE? Skilled workers. Skilled in STEM, that is.

Is the Agenda surviving? Absolutely! In fact, President Trump is a huge supporter of STEM because it means jobs. As we know, jobs means economy.

However, Warriors, the STEM economy is NOT for America, it’s for the global good and their economy.

U.S. Sec. DeVos has done an outstanding’ job of promoting STEM, too. Since STEM is global and she has seen it as her duty to sell our nation out to global mastery based education, you can be assured STEM will be popping up in current proposed DC legislation.

sdgstem

STEM In Legislation for 2018 And Beyond:

Warriors, right now, we are nearing the end of Fiscal 2018. On October 1, 2018, our government begins FY 2019.Currently,  STEM is woven into several of the FY 2019 Budget Bills. I shared with you, back in August, several of the ways in which, not only STEM would live on, but the top-down educratic control.

The biggest ways STEM will survive, as well as the educratic control are apprenticeships, CTE (Career Tech Education), College/Career Readiness, and P3s (public private partnerships).

partnership

STEM’s P3 Legislation:

Warriors, if you’ve not seen what a STEM P3 would look like, consider NASA.

More recently, there’s been concocted a lesser known legislative bill.
It’s HR 5119, simply titled The P3 Act. This Act was introduced back in February 2018 and hasn’t seen much action (if any) since then. However, what the Bill contains cannot be acted upon until there’s the money to bring its agenda to fruition!

hr5119

ICYMI: The researched evidence behind the Harvard/Pearson project turned educratic overreach. You can also learn more from this archived article.

So what does the P3 Act stand for, Warriors? After all, every DC Bill has some sort of acronym to it. “P3” in this instance stands for  ‘‘Partnerships for Progress and Prosperity Act’’. It’s a fancy way to ‘dress up’ the regular P3 meaning (public private partnership). The Bill has one sponsor and 5 co-sponsors and is currently in the U.S. House of Representative’s Education and Workforce Committee. Rep. Bill Foster from IL is the sponsor. If you look at Foster’s campaign donations the U.S. Dept. of Energy contributed the most money. If you look at the committees Foster serves the nation in, Energy in among them.
(*Note: in 2017, in Foster’s district, Joliet Junior College received a NSF Grant for STEM.)

Here’s how the P3s will play into STEM and ‘education’:
1) Requires the U.S. Dept. of Ed to award grants to LEAs (Local Education Agencies) for STEM, exclusively.
2) The grants MUST be used in the following ways:
a) to improve education in K-12 and higher education institutions
b) every awardee is required to  partner with a STEM business or employer
c) internships and apprenticeships are mandated to be included
d) development of STEM curricula and metrics
e) dual credit courses are mandated
f) tutoring/mentoring in STEM, especially for underrepresented student groups
g) STEM activities and events outside the schools and in the communities are mandated for teachers and students
h) after-school STEM and summer STEM programs
i) purchase of STEM resources for STEM instruction

The U.S. Dept of Education (in these STEM grants) will pay special attention to any LEA who promotes STEM for students/teachers; uses tech based content; pairs mentors/tutors with students struggling to meet STEM benchmarks; and/or targets low-cost or free lunch eligible students.

One last mandate from the P3 Act for STEM: all grant award ‘winners’ MUST match 50 % of their award. The fifty percent must be non-federal funds and can be in cash or ‘in kind’ (which means any type of support in exchange for work or other services like free food or free housing.
(*Note: cash received in this manner is non-taxable. In kind can be claimed as a tax write off by the giver, but not the receiver unless otherwise advised.)

workforcenochoice

Warriors, when you read this 8 page Bill (HR 5119), you’ll see the familiar educratic buzzwords/phrases like ‘rigorous’, ‘evidence based’, ‘engagement’ (especially in the classroom), and my personal ‘favorite’: “high quality research”. Now the irony of this entire Bill is that is based of RECOMMENDATIONS, not objective facts.

The Bill also cites the PISA (Program for International Student Assessment), which is geared for not only CCR (College/Career Readiness) aka: Common Core, but the OECD’s (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) workforce based global system of CBE (Competency Based Education).

OECD is where the horrible label of ‘human capital’ comes from.

Human capital concept in tag cloud
How the Initiative behind all that Common Core encompasses SEES us.

Related Archives:

STEM In The U.S. State Department:
ICYMI: How the State Dept. has become a STEM disciple for targeting women. You’ll see UNESCO involved as well.  Included will be both NASA and NSF, too.

STEM In Other U.S. Agencies/Departments:
ICYMI: NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) and others are STEM disciples, too. (*Note: The State Dept. and all the agencies mentioned were/are CCSS Machine member groups, too.)

Closing:

Warriors, if ever there’s a time to be bucking the system it’s now. Those chilling words (at least to me) about the STEM people for a STEM nation are playing out right under our noses. Are we so stuffed with compliance and apathy, we don’t smell the stench of agenda? The agenda TAKES our freedom! The agenda erodes our education! formerusa

Up and Coming

 

Anti CCSS Warriors, here are the upcoming items I will be focusing on either this weekend, or next week in the War Against the Core. Participate when and where you can. If you cannot participate, use the information as tools for what is coming up in your State.

Sunday, an Interview:

Normally, my media appearances on scheduled for Wednesdays. However, when I am asked to speak out, regardless of the day, if I can, I do.

This Sunday, May 15th, I will be the guest on the Lori on Liberty Show, based in CT. While setting things up with Lori, she shared with me that she is in this War because she is experiencing, first hand, the damage of CCSS through her high school children. You can access the show, set for 2 pm, Eastern Daylight Time. See the screen shot below:

lori

 
Tuesday, an Opportunity to Speak Out:

This live event will find me joining several other NC based anti CCSS Warriors when we gather at a NC Dept. of Public Instruction “Stakeholders meeting”. We will meet at the East Forsyth High School (2500 W. Mountain St., Kernersville, NC). According to the NC DPI website, this meeting (held from 4 pm to 6 pm) is one of a handful held across the State to seek stakeholders input on how to make the ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) truly a state controlled education reform.

Now, Warriors, we know for a fact that this goal is merely a posturing move by the Dept. to give the illusion of grandeur. Why would I say this? Consider the mountains of evidence I have shared with you in the recent past about the ESSA’s TRUE intent; think about the other mountains of facts other anti CCSS Warriors have shared about the agenda embedded in the ESSA.

So why would we go to such an event?
1) It will be video recorded and and can be shared.

2) It can be used as an example of what you can expect from your State if and when they decide to host stakeholder meetings.

3) We are to have 3 minutes each to ask questions or make comments. Going on public record in opposition is ALWAYS worth it. Public dissent helps our War efforts tremendously! Oh, I almost forgot, if you wish to speak up, you must register to do so before the meeting begins (so, my group is planning on being early, so we can be among the first to speak). The Dept. has also said we are invited to come prepared with written copies of our questions or statements. Almost as an afterthought, the Dept. has stated that we can also use their on-line ‘ask a question’ page.

4) According to the NC DPI Communications leader, there will be NO NC DPI responses given. This meeting is to only HEAR what the citizens have to say. I was told by the Communications Dept. that these Spring 2016 meetings are only the FIRST round of public interaction. So, I guess if I have a question and not a comment, it will not be answered right away.

Also, the NC DPI Communications lady said there is to be more ESSA interaction in Fall 2016, as well as when the Final Draft of NC’s ESSA Plan is up for Review (which should be just before it is submitted to the U.S. Dept. of Education.)

This leaves me with a few questions, a) Will the Final Draft stay the same by the time it leaves NC and heads to Washington, D.C.? b) Since NC is using so much pre-canned ESSA material (see below), how truly ‘local’ will this Draft be? c) What recourse is there for parents after the Draft has been sent away to be judged and it comes back unacceptable, will we be included in the tweaking process at all?

To see the NC DPI page for these meetings:
http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/newsroom/news/2015-16/20160308-01

Related: To see the NC DPI ESSA Timeline for Implementation:
http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/program-monitoring/succeeds/

To see what the NC decisions are said to be:
http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/docs/program-monitoring/succeeds/state-decisions.pdf
(*Note: at the bottom of the page, it is revealed that the supposed NC specific decisions are largely copied verbatim from the Penn Hill Group through the CCSSO (Council of Chief State School Officers! This explains why the header of the document says ‘Key State Decisions’ and not “NC Key ESSA Decisions”!)

Warriors, see if your State has this same document!!

Related: To find out about the Penn Hill Group (a D.C. based bipartisan group):
http://pennhillgroup.com/ (*Note: from their website, this excerpt: “Members of our team have been involved in the most recent authorization or reauthorization of nearly all major bills in these areas, including the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Higher Education Act, the Perkins Career and Technical Education Act, the Workforce Investment Act, and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.”)

So much for objective bipartisanship, huh?

Back to the NC Decisions Document. Here is the downloadable version of the 7 pages for NC’s ‘state decisions’: state-decisions
While the document does say States are to submit plans to the Secretary, they left out that this is the U.S. Dept. of Education’s Secretary! They omitted the fact the ESSA states said Secretary must approve those plans, too!

A slightly different contrast to NC and the ESSA will find what you see below. A Draft Timeline NC has created. Look at what groups are involved (and which ones are NOT):

nctime

To see the rest of the Draft Timelinehttp://www.dpi.state.nc.us/docs/program-monitoring/succeeds/timeline.pdf (*Note:  look at the bottom to see that NC will even subject its timeline to that of the U.S. Dept. of Ed. Again, if it were truly local, wouldn’t it need to only include those dates for meeting the U.S. Dept. of Ed instead of using every one of the Ed’s? Another note: This Draft does include the approval by the U. S. Dept. of Education.)

When looking at your State for ESSA timelines, implementation plans, etc. Be sure to know what groups are involved (and which are left out), note if there are any specific ESSA committees or sub-committees being put into motion. Are they elected or appointed? If so, whom is deciding who serves? Are the ESSA committees/sub-committees accountable? If so, to whom?

 

Wednesday, Women on the Wall:

Make sure you mark the calendar for this call. I will be joining Alice Linahan (our hostess) and long time education researcher/Warrior, Diana Anderson. We are taking a fine-tooth-comb approach to the recent White Board Advisor’s Education Insiders May 2016 Report. The Report features their look at the ESSA, higher education, and the upcoming Presidential election. We will be focusing in on the top choices by both the Democrats and Republicans for the next U.S. Dept. of Education’s Secretary. It is important to note that the current U.S. Dept. of Ed Secretary, Dr. John King, may OR may not be asked to stay on as the leader under the next President. If he is allowed to stay, we already know what to expect, but IF he is relieved of his duties, who will be taking his place? This Report has several ‘qualified’ candidates we will be discussing. Many of them are tied to the CCSS Machine..some moreso than others. But, still, any tie, is one too many.

edpicks

The Women’s Call will begin at 8:30 pm, Central Daylight Time. Access it:
302-202-1110, code 702165 or use the SoundCloud app on your mobile device. You can find the Channel under Alice’s name.

To access the White Board ReportWhiteboard_Insider_May 2016_0

Pearson’s GI: More Alignment in the Workplace, Two Parts

gipearson

 

Starting off our week and continuing the ‘War Against the Core’, we will look into ‘Gender Intelligence’ and Pearson Publishing. Is it connected to the CCSS Machine? Most definitely! This is an in-depth look, as there are many twists, turns, and other CCSS Machine members to reveal!

Pearson’s Grab at Our Minds, Part One:

According to the Pearson GI website, there are 5 main components to GI (Gender Intelligence):
1) Defining GI;  2) GI in the working environment; 3) Women in leadership roles at work; 4) GI and Directive Thinking; and 5) GI can give a company a better bottom line. Below are the break downs of each of these 5.
1) Definition of GI (Gender Intelligence)
From Pearson’s own website, “Gender Intelligence goes beyond biological differences and cultural influences to include variations in brain structure and chemistry that influence our thoughts and actions. Gender Intelligence is the awareness that gender differences are first informed by nature, and then influenced by family, education, culture, and environment.”
**I feel  it is important to note that while Pearson is calling this ‘Gender Intelligence’ and based on what evidence presented, it looks more like the classic study of TEMPERAMENTS. Could there be some purposed confusion? Could it be that temperaments has gotten a re-branding, too? As crazy as it sounds, it does seem to fit/better aid the agenda behind Pearson’s quest to align everything in education.

2) Work Environment
From the teaser page for GI, you get this idea “It’s not about fixing the men or changing the women—it’s about collectively changing the work environment.” However, when you click on the learn more option, it suddenly becomes all about the women. Read further down and you can learn the goal of Pearson is to transform your mindset concerning misunderstandings and related topics! (*Personal note: I am going on the record to say that I, in no way, am discounting the fact that better understanding in the workplace is a worthy goal, but I DO know Pearson Publishing’s interventions will be global, collective, and aligned to everything related to Common Core. As evidence, look up at the screen shot again. See the STEM, College/Career Readiness, Response to Intervention, etc.)

3) Women in Leadership
Here, Pearson cites a global study for their stance concerning more women in leadership. The excerpt, “In a corporate performance survey by McKinsey (2009), 800 business leaders were asked what leadership styles would be most effective when addressing global challenges post-crisis. Of the nine key leadership styles listed, women were rated higher than men—meaning that they applied the listed leadership style more—in five of the categories, and rated as equal to men in two others.” (Again, no problem from me concerning women leaders, but I smell a rat.)
**Is there more to this worthy goal of leadership equality? Is there, indeed a rat?!
YES!!  McKinsey and Company are partners with the CCSSO(Council of Chief State School Officers)!
The SAME CCSSO which works with Pearson; is supporting the ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) 1,000% and helping lead a host of organizations in rapidly implementing the mandates embedded in the law; owns half the copyright to the Common Core State Standards/College and Career Readiness Standards!

To see the McKinsey study:
http://www.mckinsey.com/global-themes/leadership/leadership-through-the-crisis-and-after-mckinsey-global-survey-results
To see the CCSS Flowchart of supporters (Includes McKinsey and Company): http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/18442-flow-chart-exposes-common-cores-myriad-corporate-connections

4) Directive Thinking
For this ominous sounding part of GI, you are directed to an almost 2 minute long video about the differences between relational people and action-oriented people. The video’s speaker(Barbara Annis of the Gender Intelligence Group) is saying women tend to be more relation and men tend to be more action oriented. To see her short video, use the link below. Then note the screen shot.

https://genderintelligence.intrepidagile.com/share/pearsontalent/barbara-discusses-directive-thinking
To see how connected to the CCSS Machine Ms. Annis is, look below:

Full article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jarod-cerf/barbara-annis-and-dr-keit_2_b_5489895.html
Full article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jarod-cerf/barbara-annis-and-dr-keit_2_b_5489895.html

 

5) More Financial Gain for Companies
Yep, no hidden agenda here, is there? How many times have we heard the rhetoric supporting the CCSS contain sentences for ‘national economic good’, ‘global economic greatness’, etc. This aspect of GI is one which needs to be watched closely, in my researched opinion. Evidence used to come up with the reason Pearson is including this comes from Fortune 500 Company studies. How objective these studies are and which companies are CCSS Members? You can access the referenced studies in the footnotes from Pearson’s page for this aspect of GI:
https://genderintelligence.intrepidagile.com/share/pearsontalent/advantage-5-superior-financial-performance
If you want to see how accurate the Fortune Magazine portrays CCSS:
http://fortune.com/common-core-standards/

 

Pearson’s Grab at Our Minds, Part Two, RTI (Response to Intervention) for K-12 and Professionals:

In Part One, I circled the ‘Response to Intervention’ under the K-12 column and the ‘Diversity and Access’ in the other column. When I clicked on the embedded links for this website, I received error messages. However, after doing a general search for Pearson’s RTI (Response to Intervention) I found the following:
 http://www.pearsonschool.com/index.cfm?locator=PS2a2y&acornRdt=1&DCSext.w_psvaniturl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Epearsonschool%2Ecom%2Fresponse-to-intervention

There are non-academic RTIs, programs, monitoring tools, and more! Cogmed and Review 360 are used in K-12th grades. pearsoncogThe screen shot above is Cogmed. Access the site: http://www.cogmed.com/

Cogmed Need to Know Items:

Cogmed is used by health care professionals world-wide and with adult learners, too. Be sure to read the ‘Success Stories’ from actual participants: http://www.cogmed.com/user-stories
In schools, Cogmed is being promoted by Pearson as a great learning tool, keeping kids on task, performing memory challenges better, and more! How? By improving a student’s ‘working memory’! How does the Pearson medical researcher define a ‘working memory’?
Working memory (WM) involves the ability to focus on a task, keep information in mind and to do mental processing of that information. It is a fundamental brain  function that underlies most of our conscious mental work. WM is required in order to understand the content while reading and it is the brain’s work space when solving a math problem. It’s used when following instructions, reading a map or simply carrying on a conversation. It is limited in its capacity and sensitive to distractions.

Your school can contact Pearson for Qualified Educators to become Cogmed Providers!
You can find Cogmed in your area, mine is below:

http://www.cogmed.com/find-a-practice
http://www.cogmed.com/find-a-practice

Get the Claims and Research Evidence Pearson has created for Cogmed so you can see how dangerous it is to have an agenda-driven CCSS Machine Member like Pearson in charge of a program to shape our WMs:
ClaimsEvidenceV.3_ExtendedVersion

While Cogmed trains your brain, Review 360 trains your behavior.  See below:
behave360Access the Review360 website: http://meetreview360.com/

What you need to know about Review360:
It replaces/updates ‘aimsweb’, another type of assessment for behavior interventions. Pearson has at least 2 different websites for these. The first one is on the Review360 website. (http://meetreview360.com/aimsweb/)
The second one can be found by following this link. However, notice the CCSS and ELLs (English Language Learners)http://www.aimsweb.com/whats-new

Are there other aimsweb providers? Yes, Here is a Teachers Guide to Aimsweb Benchmarking and Progress Measuring from 2009aimsweb-binder-for-teachers (look at how often the teachers were to assess the students and in what ways)
Pearson began taking over the aimsweb in 2014, according to some of the FAQ responses. Also included in the answer was how Pearson would ensure all alignment to current standards/procedures would continue.

Pearson’s aimsweb uses Universal Screener Analysis
There are some downloads you need to get, like this one for the 5 step Implementation Path for Review360’s RTI.  Look at the picture above and find the Downloads Ticket on the left hand side of the screen. See: http://meetreview360.com/images/implementation%20path_final.pdf
The research for Review360? Oh, you will ‘love’ how it begins..“According to the U.S. Dept. of Education…..” Access the report: Research Basis of Review360

Is there RTI for the professionals in the workplace?
Yes! According to Pearson, the ‘diversity matters’ in the workplace is also very skewed to meet the CCR (College and Career Readiness) part of the CCSS! One of the main articles about why being so open/diverse/accessible is written by the head of Pearson’s CCR Division! See:
 http://www.pearsoned.com/education-blog/diversity-matters-in-business-policy-people-and-the-power-to-innovate/

As far as Pearson’s assessments/intervention for employees? One such business tool is called Knowledge Capture. See: http://www.pearsoned.com/professional/products-and-services/knowledge-capture/
You can find Talent Assessments, Clinical Assessments, and more:
http://www.pearsoned.com/professional/products-and-services/assessment/

Closing:

I wonder if these RTIs/Assessments will become Gender Specific so the Gender Intelligence can be even more researched and aligned to all things Pearson?! My last question: is there no one who will stop Pearson’s grasp for world domination in ‘education’?

RMT: Have You Heard of the CCCII?

cathcomm

Happy Sunday, anti CCSS Warriors! Today’s “Riddle Me This” topic is one an avid reader of my blog asked me to look into. This mom is an active person in her child’s school. Her child was reading their faith formation guide when they stumbled across the words ‘rigourous’, ‘rigor’, and ‘assessments’. As she stated, ‘all clues’ to what she hoped wouldn’t be true. That CCSS had been inserted.
She sent me the link where I was able to get the screen shot you see above. Be sure to enlarge the shot. In the event you aren’t able to, I’ll share below what is so vital to see.

The emblem you see belongs to the National Catholic Educational Association (http://www.ncea.org/my-interests) “NCEA is the largest private professional education organization in the world.” 

The NCEA:
“NCEA guides Catholic schools on the path to educational excellence through ongoing initiatives such as the Common Core Catholic Identity Initiative (CCCII), and the New Directions Initiative. Our research efforts consistently highlight the strengths and benefits of Catholic education and emphasize the importance of strong Catholic identity.” 
NCEA also offers professional development for teachers in the Catholic schools.
Below is the NCEA’s promotional video. Watch careful and you’ll see the Pearson Publishing booth at an NCEA Convention.

Here’s the screen shot of the NCEA Partners. The website address to see the entire list is included.
nceapartners

Here’s an excerpt from their position paper on Common Core, “Catholic schools have a long-standing commitment to academic excellence that is rooted in the faith based mission of Catholic education. The Common Core State Standards in no way compromise the Catholic identity or educational program of a Catholic school. The Common Core State Standards initiative, begun in 2007, is a state-led, bipartisan effort that is not a requirement for participation in the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) or any other federallyfunded program, and there are no mandates for any Catholic school to follow any federal rules if they adopt the Common Core. Adoption of the Common Core is voluntary; individual states, Catholic dioceses and other private schools make their own decisions about whether to adopt the standards. The Common Core State Standards are a set of high-quality academic expectations that all students should master by the end of each grade level. The standards establish consistent learning goals for all students that focus on preparing them to succeed in college and careers in a globally competitive workplace. The standards define and clearly communicate grade-specific goals and inform parents about learning outcomes, making it easier for parents to collaborate with teachers in helping their children achieve success.” If you’d like to read the entire position paper, http://www.ncea.org/sites/default/files/documents/ncea_commoncorestatestandards_053113.pdf

The CCCII (http://cici-online.org/):

cccii

As stated above, CCCII stands for ‘Common Core Catholic Identity Initiative’. *NOTE: As part of the NCEA’s accountability aspect, assessments that are standardized, both state and nationally, are used. All kinds of data is collected for use not only for NCEA, but federally, too. Among the data, students who are considered Title One. As we know, the re-authorization of ESEA (the current Student Success Act, HR5) would greatly impact any school receiving Title One funding. To access the data page on the NCEA website, http://www.ncea.org/data-information/catholic-school-data I found their statement concerning HR5 on their ‘public policy’ page. See: http://www.ncea.org/data-information/public-policy


So what does the CCCII look like? Here’s the promo video:

Did you hear that?! Wow, if you are like my reader who asked me to look into this, I hope you will respond with truth about CCSS to the NCEA!

From the ‘white paper’ about CCCII’s success with CCSS, The Reality of Implementing the Standards: As part of the conference, one diocese explained its experience with the Common Core outlining the process from curriculum alignment and professional development to the assessment and results based on the Common Core Standards. The journey was three years in the making.
In year one, emphasis was placed on instructional shifts, preserving Catholic identity, and building the capacity of instructional leaders and the understanding of teachers. This included professional development for principals and teachers through various modalities. The other component for its first year was the creation of English-Language Arts and Mathematics unit plans. In year two, instructional specialists were engaged to provide a multitude of resources and to help capture the work of the Common Core Catholic Identity Initiative. The two challenges were getting teachers to shift from using the textbook as a curriculum to using the textbook as a resource and aligning four Mathematics textbooks as a resource to the unit plans and standards.
In its third year, there was a new form of assessment that used different types of questions to assess student academic progress. In preparing for the new assessments, interim assessments that were aligned to the Common Core were implemented, as well as an increase in the instructional time for Mathematics. Based on its experience, it was recognized that the Common Core challenges included:
• deconstructing the standards
• reviewing all materials for Catholic appropriateness
• funding and time for quality professional development
• differentiating professional development for schools and teachers that are now at different places along the transition continuum
• meaningful use of the assessment results to improve teaching and learning.” To read the entire 4 page report, http://cici-online.org/resources/articles-research/130-common-core-and-diocesan-catholic-school-leadership-white-paper

Related resources:

The ELA Rubric: cici-unit-review-rubric-form-rev-08-20-2014 When you access this document, read the fine print at the bottom of the page. “EngageNY” is the CCSS laden NY state level board of education.

A Summative Assessment “Mini Lesson”http://cici-online.org/images/Resources/Section-1-Mini-Lessons/CCCII-Mini-Lesson-Assessment.pdfThe letter to settle a CCCII disturbance: http://www.ncea.org/sites/default/files/documents/cccii_superintendent_letter_15oct13.pdf


A pep talk about implementing the Standards so your Catholic school can be a Blue Ribbon School (U.S. Dept. of Ed ‘honor’): http://www.ncea.org/department-news/implementing-your-strategic-plan

The precursor to today’s article was last Saturday’s expose about CAPE, of which NCEA is a member ofhttps://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/04/18/sic-em-saturday-grab-a-cape-ccss-warriors/

One last thing:
That New Directions Initiative mentioned above in the paragraph describing NCEA? Oh, that’s all about blended learning! Here’s just one of the workshops NCEA has on it: http://www.ncea.org/events/2015-ncea-new-directions-blended-learning-symposium

FTF: Hey, Parents! The CCSS Roundup is Coming for You!

One group is targeting parents to 'round' up in hopes of gaining their support for radical education reform.
One group is targeting parents to ’round’ up in hopes of gaining their support for radical education reform.

We know the CCSS Machine has set its sights on our kids. I’ve shared with you (as have others) how parents have been targeted as well. However, did you know there’s one group dead set of creating enough pressure to influence parents TOWARDS radical education reform?!

The Rodeo Begins:

Meet AEI (American Enterprise Institute). Website: http://www.aei.org

According to their ‘about us’ page the Institute is a non partisan, not-for-profit, private group of folks interested in spreading liberty. Sounds great, right?! Well, AEI isn’t telling you everything. At least, not on their ‘about’ page. Looking at their academic advisory members as well as the board of directors, you’ll be able to begin to see that several pro CCSS schools, groups, and businesses are in positions of influence.

Searching their entire website with the phrase “Common Core Standards”, I was able to find this ‘cow’, “CC Meets Education Reform”. Published in 2013. This seemingly ‘liberty’ minded group sounds more liberal than free. Read this excerpt, “as panelists concluded at an AEI research conference on Monday, the state-led initiative will face an uncertain future as it intersects with additional efforts to improve schooling, such as teacher accountability policies and charter schooling. AEI’s Mike McShane began by explaining the numerous complications associated with implementing national initiatives such as the Common Core” Yes, they are steering us wrong with that whopper. We KNOW CCSS isn’t now, nor was it EVER, state led! See the rest of the article this quote came from as well as all the articles from the symposium where all this was discussed. See: http://www.aei.org/events/common-core-meets-the-reform-agenda/

A Cash Cow:

Knowing how much the Gates Foundation is a part of the CCSS Machine, we don’t have to look far into AEI’s funding to find the cash cow. Gates’ group became bullish on AEI quite a few years back. According to the GF Grants database, GF has granted AEI money on a consistent basis since before 2009. The descriptions of the grants reads more like the ‘livestock for sale’ announcements in the local farming news.

See the screen shot below:

Read all the fine print: http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/2014/08/OPP1110206
Read all the fine print:
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/2014/08/OPP1110206

So Where are the Parents?

If you enlarged the above screen shot, you’ll notice no where did you see ‘parents’. However, did you notice the amount of influence to be given? More than likely, big bucks where thrown about (think a cow pattie throwing contest) to include parents. Why? According to one AEI writer penned this, “Families are the primary clients of public schools, but they are one of many groups that have a say in how schools actually operate. In all the technocratic fervor around school reform, it is easy to lose sight of the fact that public schools are democratically controlled. School boards, mayors, local referenda, and even public opinion shape the way schools operate.” Excuse me, what?? Have we, the opposed to CCSS, not seen enough evidence to support that schools are not as ‘democratic’ as they should be?! Have we not seen enough parents arrested, pestered, and run out like cattle from schools? Yet, we’re considered ‘clients’?? Give me a branding iron, please!

Watch Out, Electric Fence Up Ahead!

The above quote was from a December 2014 publication titled “Turning Lighting into Electricity: Organizing Parents for Education Reform” by Andrew P. Kelly. Mr. Kelly’s background ties him to NSF (National Science Foundation) which is into the CCSS/STEM roundup big time. Other CCSS ties connect him to Berkeley where he was able to hone collective bargaining in education skills. See all the rest of his bio:

 http://www.aei.org/author/andrew-p-kelly/

Key points from the report on parents as reformers include:

Collective action in our communities

How implementation of standards actually increases parental power

Choosing who gets to select the agenda the parents are to follow

How to use parent power to influence legislative steps toward implementation

NY’s involvment with InBloom

Jindal and CCSS

Also of a Worthy Cow Poke:
The groups Kelly uses as successes, be sure to look at each of them and see how/if they are CCSS tied. (for example, he cites Students First in the first few pages of the publication.) SF is tied to CCSS. See this article by the “American Thinker”,

 http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/03/suspect_common_core_standards_linked_to_studentsfirst_former_board_members.html

Or you may like to read any of the 54 CCSS policy briefs,  blogs, etc. that SF has on their website: https://www.studentsfirst.org/

The Document in full: Kelly_Turning-Lightning-Into-Electricity

Final Round Up:

I have a message on behalf of the parents out there who are opposed to being used, courted, or otherwise engaged in efforts to support CCSS as an educational reform we didn’t ask for, vote for, or see come into our lives legally (meaning honoring the Constitution).

I hope you like my meme I created to send a distinct message to the CCSS Machine!
I hope you like my meme I created to send a distinct message to the CCSS Machine!

FTF Tuesday: The “Core” is “Ready”, Are You?

This is the cover of a series of books by Pam Allyan available through Pearson, Amazon, and Barnes/Noble.
This is the cover of a series of books by Pam Allyan available through Pearson, Amazon, and Barnes/Noble.

Like we need a reminder about Common Core and the ridiculous question, “Are you ready for the Core”?! Notice how whimsical the above picture is made to look. Almost like a storybook. From what we’ve all learned about the inappropriateness of the Standards for students, it ought to be a horror tale. However, where our files will be pulled from today isn’t in a storybook setting.

“Core Ready Schools”, http://corereadyschools.org/:

From their overview, “The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) articulate inspiring, ambitious goals for student learning. The CCSS elevate what educators have always known to be good instruction, including development of critical thinking, collaboration, and communication skills. But in most schools, translating these goals into results for students will require significant shifts in instruction, professional learning, and school leadership.” Before we get too far into more about CRS, you need to know that this is a project of the Aspen Institute. A HUGE CCSS supportive group. (more about Aspen in a bit)

According to the CRS (Core Ready Schools) the purpose is quite simple, have all schools ready not just for the “Core” but for College/Career Readiness. Published back in 2013, the Implementation Guide to help schools become CRS stated this:
“The Aspen Institute Education and Society Program, along with Education First, Insight Education Group, Student Achievement Partners, and Targeted Leadership Consulting, have developed clear advice, planning tools, and metrics to help schools accomplish this significant transition.” 

Built into the implementation “high-impact actions, measures, and tools”. Are we sure we’re talking about schools where students are taught OR a military strategic maneuver? Of course to be totally successful at being CRS: time and money..lots of both. ‘Highly skilled instructional coaches’ are the ones to make sure your student’s school is “Core Ready”. Now, you’ll love this next part. Only a team very knowledgeable about the Common  Core Standards can determine the plan of action for the school desiring to become CRS. Are you beginning to sense the theme here? I hope so!

Other “Core Ready” moves: ‘Ensure the alignment of instructional resources used by teachers and students with the goals and expectations of the CCSS.’  Then there’s the showing-teachers-how-to-use-data taken from assessments to align everything following to CCSS. You’ll ‘love’ the added bonuses of making parents and other ‘stakeholders understand how CCSS is success for your student.

According to the publication, a further bit down,  the leadership team accomplishing all this. This is where, we as citizens, need to be looking. Who are the leaders? How did they obtain that leadership? Is it transparent to you, the citizen/parent? At which turns will all the measuring, high impact plans, and tools be used–will they be many or few? How in-depth? What recourse as a parent do you have? The file I’m providing has many links embedded to direct you to just what those knowledgeable CCSS leaders must do, what data is used, how the measuring is to occur, and other key things you need to use as information. (remember, every bit of this will be from the ‘pro’ side of the CCSS). See: corereadydoc

An update to the CRS from November 2014:

You, as anti CCSS warrior, you HAVE to watch this over 1 and a half hour You Tube video that details for you much about not only the “Core Ready Schools”, but information about the in-depth goings-on of Aspen Institution as well as their partners.

Notes:

1) ‘Curmudgucation’ also has written about CRS.  You may know that, you may not. Here’s a link to that article: http://curmudgucation.blogspot.com/2014/11/core-ready-schools-aspen-and-achieve.html

2) The You Tube video above refers to the ‘corereadydoc’, also located  above.

3) Of interest to my fellow NC anti-CCSS fans, the Aspen Institute and Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools (back in March of 2012 when Peter Gorman was still the School Superintendent) worked together. Also working with Aspen: Ann Clark (who currently is serving on the NC Academic Standards Review Commission). Here’s the excerpt, “Thank you to the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Public Schools teachers, principals and central officestaff who participated in this study. Special thanks to Pete Gorman, Ann Clark,Andy Baxter, Vanessa Benton, Mary Martin, Susan Norwood, Sam Sipes and Tom Tomberlin. Thank you also to Ross Wiener, Erin Hammond and Ariel Jacobs of the Aspen Institute Education & Society Program for guiding the development and production of this case study.” {for those outside of NC, Char-Meck is the largest school district in the state.} Why is this note worthy? Great question! Here’s a bit more directly from the published study, “CMS is developing a system that will measure teacher performance and linking compensation to
it by 2014. The district began to develop its own value-added formula in 2009, with the goal of ultimately being able to provide a value-added score for every teacher. In 2010, CMS adopted the new state teacher evaluation standards, augmenting them with indicators aligned to the district’s priorities and beginning to use it to assess teachers’
classroom practice. The system tackled the issue of developing value-added scores for teachers whose classes are not included in the state assessments by piloting summative assessments in non-tested grades and subjects in the spring of 2011. This work on summative assessment will be expanded in 2012, working in collaboration with the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction and its Race to the Top plan. The district is also exploring other metrics it will use in measuring teacher effectiveness, such as student surveys, leveraging what it is learning through implementation of its Teacher Incentive Fund grant and as a partner district in the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation’s Measuring Effective Teaching (MET) study.” 

4) I wrote about the MetLife connection to Common Core on the website “Prevent Common Core” a few months ago. You can access that article with all kinds of information about CCSS, http://preventcommoncore.com/?p=1154 

5)Even if you don’t live in NC, you’ll benefit from having this publication because it is laying the ground work for how not only teachers, but principals are to be measured with high stakes assessing. Which we all know now is a vital part of CCSS. For my warriors in NC, it’s great because it details Superintent Gorman’s plans and how the NC DPI overrode them. (see: aspennccharmeck) You might be interested to know that Mr. Gorman now works for “Amplify”, a company knee deep in not only CCSS curricula materials, but assessments. Its partners are well connected to CCSS as well. (to see Amplify’s leaders, Mr. Gorman’s one of them: http://www.amplify.com/leadership) Oh, before I forget, Ms. Clark is the acting CMS Superintendent due to the hasty resignation of Mr. Gorman’s replacement, Dr. Heath Morrison.

6) Aspen’s ties to Common Core? That’s easy. The Washington Post reported the Gates Foundation ‘investment’ into CCSS with Aspen among those groups which benefited. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/05/12/gates-gives-150-million-in-grants-for-common-core-standards/) Among the Board members of Aspen Institute? David Koch (of THE Koch Brothers); Condolezza Rice; a United Nations expert who specializes in humanitarian advocacy; Salman Khan (of Khan Academy, another Gates Foundation CCSS recipient), and others who are connected in some way to CCSS. (see the Board of P3 members (public, private partnerships): http://www.aspeninstitute.org/about/leadership

So, folks, ready or not..the ‘Core’ is coming for your students. Question is, what will we do to kick the “Core” to the door?