Tag Archives: John Dewey

Big City, Private Education

Warriors, I was recently contacted by a concerned Anti CCSS Warrior from a big city in Texas. My fellow Warrior lives in Houston. She also is involved in a faith-based private school. The photos she sent me have been troubling her. She wants to know when the shift from academics to workforce took over her church’s school.

Previously, Warriors, I’ve shared with you a few articles about the Catholic Church’s leap from academics to Common Core (or, as it is now called, ‘College and Career Readiness’ or “Challenging State Academic Standards” found in ESSA, Every Student Succeeds Act). You also may remember how the private, faith-based schools are tied to a newer wave of education called ‘micro schools’. The Catholic Church has been targeted by this movement based on its love of serving communities.

If you’ve followed my blog for a long time, you’ll remember the articles about private education using CCSS aligned assessments.  That article shared an account of a distraught mother and the private Catholic school her children attended.

However, Warriors, this latest mom is from the Lutheran church. She has allowed me to share her evidence.

Let me pause long enough to answer one of her questions. She has asked me when did the Lutheran church schools sell out to the CCSS Machine? I cannot say for every single church school, but I can share that 3 large Lutheran bodies belong to the CAPE (Council for American Private Education). Look below:

luthercape
Source for image 

 

Mom Supplied Evidence:

“Maggie”, as I’ll refer to her shared that her Lutheran Church recently joined forces with a more liberal Lutheran sect, Lutheran Social Services. This now allows the Social Service group to run a school. From the slides shown at a meeting about the school, Maggie noticed a definite shift. Tell me what you see, Warriors.

maggie1
Then, this:

maggie2

Other slides Maggie sent me were geared around how all this education shift was a great “Christian” thing to do. It was hyped as ‘opportunity’. There were also more slides about the people in Upbring leading the school. These are a bit more fuzzy than the 2 above, but I will share them with you.

maggie3
To see how Upbring is part of the Lutheran Social Services, go here.
To learn about the ties to the CCSS Machine the newly announced principal has, go here.
(*Note: if you do not see the ties immediately, think Head Start, Early Head Start.)

According to Maggie’s information, the LSS (Lutheran Social Services) is a federal government contractor for refugee resettlements. When you look at the LSS’s website, look at the community wide classes offered. All kinds of religion, just not Christianity.
I was able to find that others have written about this. What I discovered is it isn’t only TX this is happening.

This newest Upbring school in Maggie’s church will closely mirror the Austin, TX Upbring School of Arts and Science. That school uses the Reggio Emilia educational approach. If you do not recognize that early learning philosophy, think ‘child centered’, open classrooms, and ‘critical thinking’. USAS, Upbring School of Arts and Science is a STEAM curriculum user. Recently, I shared with you an Alabama elementary school which is a STEAM recognized school. (*Note: look below for the highlighted “STEM and STEAM” phrase to see that AL elementary school.)

For the Lutheran School being a STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, the Arts, and Math) means, “STEAM empowers students to connect what they learn about science, technology, engineering and math through the STEMscopes curriculum with reading, writing, music and other arts.”

STEMscopes is from Accelerate Learning in partnership with Rice University. It’s tied to NGSS (Next Gen Science Standards), and those ‘state standards’. According to the website, STEMscopes is the most widely used science program in the State of Texas in all types of PreK to 12th grade settings.

If you’re interested, Warriors, I found a thesis on how well Reggio Emilia, Project Based Learning and Common Core work together. The author gave big nods to John Dewey and then tied the research back to her major, psychology.

How Low Can We Go?

Warriors, I know we are all beleaguered by the awful impact the CCSS Machine has rendered upon our schools. But to do all this and then slap a faith-based label on it? I’m sorry Warriors, but to me, that’s pretty deceptive. 

formaggie
Source of the image 

 

Closing:

Warriors, I hope the evidence Maggie has provided paints the picture of just how much the CCSS Machine is overreaching into our lives. I hope you can see the agenda behind this type of reform in church based schools. If not, here it is:
 global uniformity in the name of educational excellence

Of the code names you see in the image above, almost every one of these can be traced back to the United Nations. Most especially STEM and STEAM. Maggie had asked me about those as well.

Warriors, we will not be free of the global agenda in education or in our nation as long as we are tied in ANY way to the UN. The US has invested too much time, taxpayer dollars, and, energy creating legislation (at all government levels) adhering to the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. Embedded in these Goals is the shift we’re seeing:

One type of education for everyone. One way to live and work. Attacking faith-based schools with this? It’s all part of the plan toward a one-way-to-believe-society.

Is There Anything Else?

Years ago, I remember hearing Robin Williams rattle off a routine about the future of his (then very young) children. In a mere matter of seconds he vacillated between their college graduation, great success, OR as a worker at the burger joint down the street, saying “You want fries with that?”.

As we know, all parents have big hopes and dreams that regardless of WHERE our children become a success, as long as it is THEIR success. Success SHOULD NOT mean it’s only applicable when you graduate college and get the big fancy house with the fat paycheck. Successful people throughout history have often been dirt poor or middle income.

The CCSS Machine is stopping at NOTHING to ensure our children have almost NO success whatsoever…except what the Machine is willing to dole out to them.
After this past week’s digging into the agenda moves behind the “I Just Sued the School System” and “The Thinning” (believe me, I am not done with either yet, but more on that in a day or so.), I have about had my fill of the depths of deception the CCSS Machine is going to make ‘blastedly’ sure NO child (regardless of age) will succeed at his or her own pace.

Meet the Young Math Corps:

Actually that is not really their name, but it might as well be. Why do I say this? Look at the screen shot:

mathwhiz
The REAL name of the program I am pointing out is known as “The Young People’s Project Math Literacy Workers (YPP’s MLWs)”. If you need to enlarge the picture, please do.

You can access the YPP’s MLWs site: http://www.typp.org/
To see how Civil Rights Activist Bob Moses got involved: http://www.typp.org/typp_20

Before we proceed, I am stating for the record, my ‘axe to grind’ is not with Civil Rights. As always, it is the CCSS Machine. What I want to know, as do you, how involved is the CCSS Machine in a program like this?

We all know tutors are great! Many successful people have had tutors in their lives. However, with the age of this program, the amount of time our educational system has been reduced to what we have today, I wonder how much MORE damage to ALL involved when ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) is fully and finally locked in.

Bits And Pieces Of  The MLWs Program:

So, how does the Math Literacy Program work? What math curriculum is used? Is this nation-wide? I will answer each, but not in order.

The curriculum is John Dewey and Lawrence Cremin based. I found this in the 2001 publication “Mathematics, Numeracy,  and Democracy: The Case for Quantitative Literacy”
I am pausing here because if I don’t say it, I will burst…America is NOT a democracy! UGH!! Moving on now, this paper was prepared by the National Council on Education and the Disciplines (NCED). NCED is a part of the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. What you see below is from the opening pages of the over 140 page document.

ncedwood
The Board of Trustees include representatives of CCSS Machine member groups: Blackboard, GSV, Global Education Learning, The Hunt Institute, and Dream Box Learning. There are others you may be able to spot, too. Access: http://woodrow.org/about/board-of-trustees/

Since the Woodrow Wilson Foundation is dedicating itself to K-16 education, you know not only will ESSA be a factor in what they have influence with, but the HEA (Higher Education Act) and the WIOA (Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act) will also be included. If you’d like to see their ‘researched’ publications where you will see the U.S. Senate HELP Committee among the topics, http://woodrow.org/news/publications/

As far as the over 140 page document, be sure you look at the Table of Contents. I especially am pointing you to the section titled “Numerical Common Sense for All”, page 61.
Access the Document: 8952_mathanddemocracy2

You’ll also be interested in seeing the curriculum for MLW are NCs (Neighborhood Circles). The NCs are a product of the Lawrence CommunityWorks. The linked document MLW has is from 2007. Almost immediately, you will see that the best start to globalization begins in your neighborhood. You REALLY need to see/read this dated, but still used, plan. 0155_neighborcircles (*Note: back in 2010, Lawrence,MA did receive a Promise Neighborhood grant. See: http://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-awards-promise-neighborhoods-planning-grants) Promise Neighborhoods are now codified in ESSA.

You’ll also need to see how the NSF (National Science Foundation) is involved in the MLW curriculum. I especially despise the NSF for their access to huge government funds as well as their use of those funds to churn out as much CCSS/STEM rhetoric as humanly possible. If you are not sure how toxic the NSF involvement in education is, please, search for them among my archives. What they do and have access to is truly worth knowing. Below is a screen shot of the SCRATCH curriculum.

nsfmlw

Embedded in the SCRATCH curriculum is a video with Chris Bosch, Bill Gates and others. When you go to the video link, you will see a website address of ‘code.org’.

Here’s the video, try not to scream when you see the ‘Who’s Who’ among the ‘stars’:

To see the rest of the SCRATCH7874_ypp-itestcurriculum-introtoscratch

The MLWs (Math Literacy Workers) must have training, complete community wide events which include STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, the Arts, and Math). To see what else they need to do: http://www.typp.org/programs

If you’ve not see my research on tying STEM and STEAM to the CCSS Machine:
a) https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/05/27/wybi-stem-to-steam-ties-to-common-core-pt-1/
b) https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/05/28/tech-thursday-pt-2-stem-to-steams-ties-to-common-core/
c) https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2015/05/29/friday-special-post-part-3-stem-to-steam-ties-to-ccss/

Closing:

The last question, which we’ve not answered yet is, is all this national? Yes.
The Young People’s Project (YPP) is an outgrowth of the Algebra Project, “a national mathematics literacy effort aimed at helping low income students and students of color successfully acquire mathematical skills that are a prerequisite for a college preparatory mathematics sequence in high school and full citizenship in today’s technological society.”


Partners of the Young People’s Project include the Kellogg Foundation, a well known CCSS member organization. There are plenty of other partners. See: http://www.typp.org/our_valued_partners

So, Warriors, you tell me…is there anything else for our students of all ages?

Hiding Behind the Tests

Warriors Against the Core, with school back in session (or just about to be back in session), we know assessments are on everyone’s minds.

Tests, assessments, check-ups, quizzes, and whatever else these measurement tools are being called have been the bane of our educational system since Outcome Based Education via the Common Core State Standards rolled out.

We’ve read countless headlines, participated in numerous opt-out movements, held our children as they cried about these ‘wicked weapons’ used against them, and cursed the CCSS Machine for being so cruel.

So, what more could I possible share with you that might help our efforts to END the mindful abuse?

In digging through some ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) resources, I found an organization which has been researching not only assessments, but education in America for the past 100 years. That’s right, since 1916, our education has been studied by an organization not too far removed from the federal government.

**What follows is an in-depth look at one mammoth organization.

Enter, American Educational Research Association (AERA):

Website: http://www.aera.net/
From their “About Us” page, this excerpt, “founded in 1916, is concerned with improving the educational process by encouraging scholarly inquiry related to education and evaluation and by promoting the dissemination and practical application of research results.”

Look at bit further into who is involved with AERA and you will find a mixed bag of public-private groups, testing companies, non-profits, federal and state agencies, as well as international organizations. (see the rest: http://www.aera.net/About-AERA/Who-We-Are) (If you would like to see some of the AERA members and their accomplishments, see:
http://www.aera.net/Membership-Achievements) *Note, you need to not only look at the names but what these folks are doing in education. For example, Linda Darling-Hammond was among 3 educational women to be named as one of the 2015 “18 Women Everyone Should Know in K-12 Education”.

As far as the leadership behind AERA? Currently, the ties extend to the NSF (National Science Foundation, a huge CCSS/STEM supporter); The American Bar Foundation (yes, I have found CCSS ties to the American Bar Association); the University of PA; and the University of Michigan. In the recent past, the leadership has been from the Ford Foundation ( a huge CCSS, CTE, STEM financer). Even further back in the leadership, you will find Linda Darling-Hammond (1995-96), Harvard University ties (2000-2001), and a host of other universities we now know which have been a part of the CCSS Machine. Oh, and AERA has lots of SIGs (Special Interest Groups).

The programs AERA has? Those include educational research communications, advocacy, making sure any government legislation impacting education has their input (especially to preserve the scientific parts), professional development for educators, AND social justice issues. See: http://www.aera.net/About-AERA/Key-Programs

As far as AERA and the future of educational research? Here is an excerpt I found on their 2017 Annual Conference theme page, “As we begin AERA’s second century, the theme of the 2017 Annual Meeting is a call to examine these critical dimensions of educational opportunity and rigor in research as they pertain to the diversity of issues, populations, and contexts served in and by educational inquiry. These range from young children to their parents and families, from PreK-12 to postsecondary education and adult learning, from affluent districts to financially struggling schools, and from immigrant to low-income communities within urban and rural settings alike. They are studied in large datasets and in field studies, and through multiple methods, including qualitative approaches, experimental designs, and discourse analyses. They are investigated in both vastly different and complementary theories of learning, human development, literacy, sociolinguistics, and culture, and within different contexts. They are connected to race, language, and gender, and are embedded in systemic inequalities. Finally, they exist alongside enormous technological innovation, new approaches to studying diverse and historically underserved populations, refinement of existing methodologies, recurrent policy revisions, and the wide reach of global exchanges.” To see the rest (and you really should):
http://www.aera.net/Events-Meetings/Annual-Meeting

Bring on the Assessments Research!

Among the SIGs (Special Interest Groups), you will find the following organizations:
a) SIG #18, Classroom Assessments, their website: http://www.aera.net/SIG018/Classroom-Assessment-SIG-18 (Key contact, University at Albany – SUNY)

b) SIG #167, Cognition and Assessment, their website:
http://www.aera.net/SIG167/Cognition-and-Assessment-SIG-167 (Key contact, University of Georgia)

c) SIG #22, Computer and Internet Applications in Education, their website:
http://www.aera.net/SIG022/-Computer-and-Internet-Applications-in-Educ-SIG-22
(Key contact, the University of South Florida)

d) SIG #179, Data-Driven Decision Making in Education, their website:
http://www.aera.net/SIG179/Data-Driven-Decision-Making-in-Education-SIG-179
(Key contact, WestEd)

e) SIG #56, The John Dewey Project, their website:
http://www.aera.net/SIG056/Dewey-Studies-SIG-56

f) SIG #96, Inclusion & Accommodation in Educational Assessment, their website:
http://www.aera.net/SIG096/IAEA-SIG-96
(Key contact, Anne Davidson)

g) SIG #141, Large Scale Assessment, no website or contact information. The purpose, however, ‘To provide a forum for discussion of the status, issues, and concerns related to large-scale assessment, including practices and innovations in state assessment programs.’

h) SIG #63, Longitudinal Studies, their website:
http://www.aera.net/SIG063/Longitudinal-Studies-SIG-63
(Key Contact, CA State University, Los Angeles at Long Beach)

i) SIG #64, Measurement and Assessment in Higher Education, their website:
http://www.aera.net/SIG064/Measurement-and-Assessment-in-Higher-Education-SIG-64
(Key contact, University of IL at Urbana-Champaign)

j) SIG #99, NAEP Studies, no website information. Key contact, the California Dept. of Education. However, the purpose is as follows, “To facilitate secondary analysis of the National Assessment of Educational Progress ongoing surveys regarding U.S. students knowledge, attitudes and experiences in diverse learning areas.”

k) SIG #83, Rasch Measurement, their website: http://www.raschsig.org/
(Key contact, University of Memphis)

l) SIG #90, Research on Evaluation, their website: http://www.aera.net/SIG090/Research-on-Evaluation-SIG-90
(Key contact, University of TX at El Paso)

m) SIG #151, Technology as an Agent of Change  in Teaching and Learning, their website:
http://www.aera.net/SIG151/SIG-By-Laws *Note: be sure to click on the “By-Laws” to see exactly what purpose this SIG is seeking to accomplish.
(Key contact, George Mason University)

n) SIG #72, Test Validity Research and Evaluation, their website:
http://www.aera.net/SIG072/Test-Validity-Research-and-Evaluation-SIG-72
(Key contact, University of Nebraska at Lincoln)

Warriors, I urge you to investigate AERA’s SIG list on your own. Why? Social emotional learning research, whole school reform research, workforce learning research, special needs education research, and so much more! See: http://www.aera.net/About-AERA/Member-Constituents/SIGs/SIG-Directory/First/A/Last/Z

So Are There CCSS Machine/ESSA Ties to AERA?

Absolutely! From an undated AERA Press Release, this excerpt, “Among the AERA members who contributed their research perspectives and expertise were Bridget Hamre, University of Virginia; Steve Hurlburt, American Institutes for Research; Steven Tozer, University of Illinois at Chicago; Mark Schneider, American Institutes for Research; Shaun Harper, University of Pennsylvania; Robert Balfanz, Johns Hopkins University; Gary Miron, Western Michigan University; Laura Perna, University of Pennsylvania; Michael Olivas, University of Houston Law Center; Yasmin Kafai, University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education; Richard Ingersoll, University of Pennsylvania; Deborah Loewenberg Ball, University of Michigan; Anthony Bryk, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching; and Bryan Hassel, Public Impact.”

What about all those universities? Aren’t they part of the CCSS Machine? Warriors, from my research I have been able to connect several colleges and universities across America as part of the CCSS Machine in one way or another.

I invite you to contribute any anti CCSS Warrior knowledge about ANY of the colleges/universities in this article. A simple way to see if an educational institution you suspect as tied to the CCSS Machine, is to get to their main website page (or, in the case of it being a university, go to their college of education’s main page). Type in ‘Common Core’ (or any of the code phrases you know are connected).

For example, my favorite college football team is from the University of GA (you saw them above in the SIG projects). In less than 1 minutes, I found almost 2,000 resources on GA’s main search page.

These public universities are perfect hiding places for the CCSS Machine to ‘improve’ the CCSS into the now famous CCR (College and Career Readiness); the “Next Generation”; the STEM to STEAM; the CTE (Career Tech Education), and on and on. Many privately funded educational post-secondary institutions are also in this mix. No educational offering should be considered safe anymore.

Remember, the public-private partnerships and their money grease the cogs in the CCSS Machine. It is our job to find as many wrenches to throw into those cogs!

To see what OTHER CCSS Machine member groups AERA works with, belongs to, contributes among: http://www.aera.net/Research-Policy-Advocacy/Coalition-Partners

To see AERA’s Position Paper on High Stakes Assessmentshttp://www.aera.net/About-AERA/AERA-Rules-Policies/Association-Policies/Position-Statement-on-High-Stakes-Testing
*Note, their position is based on a 2000 publication.

To see how AERA is supportive of the ESSA, AERA ESEA Rulemaking Comments
*Note: Much of AERA’s comments circle around the States and Title One. In the ESSA language, Title One is definitely tied to the assessments and these assessments are mandates from the Federal government.

Mentioned in the AERA comments is the “Common Rule”, to see what AERA is doing for the “Common Rule” for researching education (as well as their other research pet projects in the ESSA era), http://www.aera.net/Research-Policy-Advocacy/Issues-and-Initiatives

aeraessa

If you would like to see a recent AERA Research Report on how ‘great’ measuring non academic skills is and should be, see: http://www.aera.net/Newsroom/Recent-AERA-Research/Measurement-Matters-Assessing-Personal-Qualities-Other-Than-Cognitive-Ability-for-Educational-Purposes  *Note: be sure to delve into their OTHER recent research, you’ll need to see the alignment to the CCSS Machine.

Our last tie to the CCSS Machine? You had to know this Foundation would show up at some point:
The Gates Foundation, 2013, granted AERA $250,000.00. See the purpose of the grant: http://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Quick-Links/Grants-Database/Grants/2013/05/OPP1091034

Closing:

Anti CCSS/ESSA Warriors, there is plenty here to use as weapons of truth in our local fights. Use only what you need, share the other portions. It may seem a bit overwhelming, but when you divide a mammoth organization’s CCSS Machine ties among several like-minded Warriors, it makes light work.

We MUST use this information! Assessments, data mining, and using our educators and students as guinea pigs for research is unacceptable.

exittest

WYBI: Up Close with the NSF

Do you know how much power NSF has in education?
Do you know how much power NSF has in education?

How much do you know about the NSF (National Science Foundation) and their ties to CCSS and STEM? Would you believe Arne Duncan was considered an expert by them back in 2007? Yep! It happened. But wait, there’s more…

A brief look at NSF’s History:

NSF has been around since 1950. President Truman signed the NSF Act after the atomic bomb was dropped. The goal? Peace via science. In 1953 and 54, the federal agency beefed up teaching in the post-secondary and secondary areas. 1957 brought the advent of the social sciences under NSF’s grasp. Then, in 1971 and 72, improving minority education as well as being responsible for all science education began. A makeover/upgrade for K-12 science curriculum happened in 1987. 2000 brought “Partnerships for Innovation” where education, communities, and P3s (public, private partnerships) were encouraged. (for more history, see their timeline, http://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/history-nsf/timeline/index.jsp )

 

Bring on the Common Core/STEM beginnings:

From 1999, a paper about workforce, common standards, and education: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1999/nsb9931/nsb9931-5.htm

From 1999, a paper about common math and science education standards: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1999/nsb9931/nsb9931-3.htm

From the Meeting Minutes for the NSF, May 2014, this is what I found on page 5: “For the topic of the Common Core, which was popular in the media recently, he called on Dr. Córdova for information on this subject. She introduced Dr. Joan Ferrini-Mundy, Assistant Director, Directorate for Education and Human Resources (EHR), for an overview on common core standards and issues for the Board’s attention. Dr. Ferrini-Mundy reported that the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics and English Language Arts were the current phase of a long series of activity around K-12 standards based education from the 1980’s. These were developed by the National Governors Association (NGS) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) beginning in 2009 without a direct Federal role in the development. The two major goals of the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics are to create clearer and higher standards that (1) describe what students should know and be able to do in order to be ready for college or career at the end of high school; and (2) to ensure common outcomes across various jurisdictions. One of the major features of this movement is to look for equitable access to learning opportunities across the states, where previously there were major differences in expectations for students across the country. The Standards were released after an elaborate development process in 2010 for state adoption. As of 2011, 45 states plus the District of Columbia adopted the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics. The Department of Education funded two consortia to develop the Common Corealigned assessments of states that have come together with nonprofit groups to prepare the assessment tools that will then measure whether students are making progress towards these common standards. There is considerable controversy about the Common Core. She stated that it is complicated and it has multiple facets. Dr. Ferrini-Mundy stated that teachers in 45 states plus the District of Columbia were expected to work with the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics. NSF sees proposals for work that will help to better understand and to address the challenges of implementation of Common Core and other standards in states that are not using the Common Core. As NSF does not have a special program around the Common Core, the proposals go through the standard merit review processes. Federal support that was provided for their development is in the form of the support that the Department of Education provided for the assessment work. In response to a question on examples of Mathematics Common Core, Dr. Ferrini-Mundy indicated that the Common Core State Standards have many interpretations and do not prescribe curriculum or instructional approaches to ideas. One of the actual implementation issues is how to go from standards that say “here is what students should know and be able to do” to “what is the best way to effectively help learners get to these places.” She added that watching how these assessments play out will be important as they are coming at a time when the standards have not been fully implemented. From the NSF perspective, the potential of standards to help to improve access to good learning is important.”  (see the entire meeting minutes: http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/meetings/2014/0506/minutes.pdf )

From May 2014: The NSF’s vision for redefining education: AC_ReEnvisioning_Report_Sept_2014_01 (*Note: when you access this download, you’ll notice on page 6, the phrase ‘federal Common Rule’. If you don’t know what the federal Common Rule is, it’s definition can be found at the U.S. Health/Human Service’s website. You will be most interested to see what this rule allows/prohibits when it comes to the types of research and data collected on us as humans. You’ll want to see all the federal agencies with access to all this information, too. http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/commonrule/ )

The Power Congress Gives NSF:

If you aren’t aware of how much money and power our U. S. Congress gives the NSF, you’ll want to see the 2014 FIRST Act. Then, consider how much is devoted to blending academics, research, and workforce. See: BILLS-113HR4186ih-HR4186FrontiersinInnovationResearchScienceandTechnologyActof2014 (*Note: you’ll notice STEM is used repeatedly. Remember NSF is the group which coined the term as a updated reference to SMET (Science, Math, Engineering, and Technology) to influence us, especially in education. The first evidence of the use of “STEM” that I could find was from a testimony given by Dr. Rita Colwell back in 2002. Dr. Colwell was speaking to the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions as to why an increased federal budget was needed. (see her testimony: http://www.nsf.gov/about/congress/107/rrc_help061902.jsp )

Related:

1) It has been argued that STEM is not served well by CCSS. However, I had evidence that proves STEM, as an overall agenda item (meaning not only education, but workforce), is using CCSS as a means to an end. How so? See my previously published article: https://commoncorediva.wordpress.com/2014/09/02/from-the-files-pcast-stem-and-common-core/)

2) The 2007 National Action Plan for STEM is another resource you may wish to have. stem_action2007 (*Note: you’ll be pleased to know that current Dept of Ed Secretary Arne Duncan was among the members who was considered an expert on 21st Century education.  He was, at that time, CEO of Chicago Public Schools.)  This report is slam full of alignment for what’s taught, P-20 Councils, workforce, global good, and the usual rhetoric we hear for CCSS. Here’s an excerpt from one of the sidebars, “Dewey urged scientists to convey the science way of thinking to all phases of education as a “SUPREME INTELLECTUAL OBLIGATION.” Although this includes critical thinking, curiosity, skepticism, and verification by observation and measurement, its deeper meaning has to do with the sense of wonder and awe that emerges from the student’s gradual realization that the natural world is orderly and comprehensible. Th e overarching laws of science enable predictions: sunrise, weather, and the hour and day of the return of Halley’s Comet in 2061. Th e appreciation and respect implied here are tragically missing from our science classrooms.”

3) For all the NSF monetary awards given for CCSS, STEM, (which may also include NextGen Science Standards), see: http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/advancedSearchResult?QueryText=common%20core%20standards&ActiveAwards=true&#results (*Note: one of the biggest awards (almost $600,000) was given for CCSS curriculum)

4) See NSF’s statistics for college-ready students: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind14/index.cfm/chapter-1/c1s2.htm

5) To see a 2012 press release which states the shift from high stakes assessing to constant momentum tracking, http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=126071

6) To see NSF’s $200,000 grant awarded to Clark University for developing NextGen Exemplars, http://news.clarku.edu/news/2013/03/05/nsf-awards-clark-university-200k-for-innovative-next-gen-science-teaching-exemplar/

7) Here’s a 2010 press release detailing NSF’s funding to the Noyce Foundation and how it all ties back to CCSS. See: http://www.aaas.org/news/push-new-science-mathematics-standards-described-nsfaaas-education-conference

A video from the NSF’s YouTube Channel that you might find interesting, where you’ll hear the “PreK to Gray” education phrase. You’ll also be pleased to know that the grants NSF gives use YOUR taxpayer money!

Here’s another one from 2011, where the First Lady pushes STEM. However, listen to the gentleman who speaks before her. Listen for his shared vision between NSF and the current administration’s goal for education.