I'd never even heard about the Common Core Initiative, until tonight. I've been doing some reading on it, and I think it's something people need to be aware of. I found this blog entry (pasted below) about it, that I think explains it pretty well, as well as explaining why it's scary. I am not a big fan of the federal government, and prefer that it have as little control over me as possible. I signed the petition to get Utah out of the Common Core asap. But you can read below and see what you think.
April 15, 2012
Dear Teachers and Schools,
I'm
a Utah teacher. I've taught 3rd grade for two years, high school
English for five years, and college English at Utah Valley University
for two years. Teachers often stay neutral on political issues. But the
Common Core Initiative affects what millions of children will be taught
and what future educators will be able to teach for many years to come,
not only in Utah but in a majority of U.S. states.
I'm
concerned about Utah educators' sustained freedom under the rules of
the Common Core Initiative (CCI) and its testing arm, the SBAC. The
experimental educational ideas of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS
standards) --not identical to Utah's current version of Common Core--
come with few benefits and CCI has many long term liabilities to local
freedom and values.
As
an English teacher, I dislike the way the CCSS standards dramatically
slash the percentage of classic literature permitted to be taught (to be
replaced with info-texts). You might be thinking: "but Utah uses the
Utah Common Core, not the CCSS standards; so who cares?" Hold on; I will
explain below how Utah's standards won't matter by 2015 in the "WestEd"
paragraph below.
We Can Keep What We Like About CCI:
Many
teachers do not realize that all the new standards that Utah started to
implement this year were available in public domain; we did not need
Common Core. If we choose to sever ties with the Common Core Initiative
and its testing arm to ensure freedom from federal or consortia
controls, we are still free to use anything that's in the public domain,
including the standards of Common Core. But we should write standards
under our own sovereign state power, as the Constitution requires. (If
you are thinking: "But this is a state-led initiative, not a federal
initiative," hold on. I will explain below, how the state-led claim
is technically true but not functionally true.)
The
marketing of Common Core has been so excellent that very few people
question it. I attended last week's State School Board meeting and
realized that even at the administrative and state level, very few
people have taken time to read the legally binding documents of Common
Core and its accompanying testing and data collection arm, that I have
studied. These documents testify that Utah has given up her freedom
over education, yet I feel alone in my sense of urgency to investigate
this issue. (Documents attached if you care to read them)
Common versus Sovereign:
As
a high school English teacher, I loved "Harrison Bergeron" by Kurt
Vonnegut, a short story that begins as if it were introducing 2012 and
the Common Core Initiative:
"THE
YEAR WAS 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren't only equal
before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was
smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else.
Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was
due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and
to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper
General."
Like
the society in "Harrison Bergeron," Utah has volunteered to be bound to
in-commonness at the expense of freedom and innovation. Utah has
agreed to a system of nationalized standards and assessments in which
Utah has little or no voice. Utah must submit to the consensus of a
consortium of states on key educational decisions. There are many ways
in which Common Core impacts Utah's sovereignty over educational
decisions.
There's
ample proof that Utah has given away her own freedom over education to
federal and consortium control. There is evidence (see "WestEd" below)
that the current "Utah Common Core" will be swapped for the
non-amendable CCSS. The federal CCSS will rule, bringing with it the
already determined slashes to the percentage of allowable classic
literature (in favor of info texts) and other yet-to-be-determined
changes, not amendable by us. There is no way for Utah or any state to
control what is contained in, or will change in, the CCSS.
Federal Control:
The
Common Core Initiative is a movement that claims to be completely free
of federal controls, claims to be a "state-led" raising of educational
standards, and claims to promote college readiness.
As
you know, Utah joined CCI in 2009 and implementation will be complete
in 2015. But did you know that Utah did not seek out CCI? We joined
both CCI and SBAC because the federal government incentivized it.
Joining meant we got more points toward winning a competitive grant
called Race to the Top. We didn't win that grant-- not a penny-- but we
are still bound to CCI and SBAC. South Carolina Senator Mike Fair
calls this error that South Carolina, Utah and other states made, a
selling of our educational birthright without even getting the mess of
pottage. It's hard to sever ties. In fact, you need (among many other
things) federal approval to withdraw.
Common
Core requires states to accept common standards, to which states may
only add 15% more. (But that 15% will never be tested by the common
test).
The
U.S. Dept. of Education funded (and works closely with) each group that
played a role in developing the national standards and both consortia
contracted to write tests to CCSS standards. The U.S. DOE closely
supervises data collected by the tests. The groups who did this
educational work (that the federal government was not
constitutionally allowed to do) were groups paid by federal grants.
They include West Ed, Achieve, Inc., The National Governors'
Association, and the Council of Chief State School Officers. The U.S.
DOE holds tight control over the tests and has requirements for each
group of states to coordinate tests "across consortia," to give status
updates and to provide access to information about the tests to the U.S.
DOE on "an ongoing basis." (See "SBAC Cooperative Agreement.")
The
standards themselves are not unquestionably high across
disciplines. Texas opted out of Common Core because it had higher math
standards already and didn't want the 3 billion dollar implementation
cost of adding Common Core. Massachusetts actually lowered state math
standards by joining Common Core. Professor Sandra Stotsky, who served
on the Common Core Validation Committee, refused to sign off that the
English standards were authentic for college prep. Stanford Professor
Michael Kirst said: "the standards for college and career readiness are
essentially the same. This implies the answer is yes to the question of
whether the same standards are appropriate for 4 year universities, 2
year colleges, and technical colleges. The burden of proof for this
assertion rests with CCSSO/NGA, and the case is not proven".
The
CCSS are common, one-size-fits-all standards that restrict local
innovation, and the ability to further raise standards, regardless of
whether the standards are currently higher or lower. The tests that go
with the standards don't allow local innovating either. Since
educational standards and decisions are meaningless without political
freedom, there is little sense in analyzing whether the Utah Common Core
standards are now better or worse; Utah can't control any aspect of
the CCSS.
There
are two sets of standards (Utah Common Core & Common Core State
Standards) that Utah will need to choose between and only the first has
an amendment process. See "WestEd" below.
SBAC is
the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. Utah belongs to this
group, but the state in charge (and the fiscal agent) is Washington
State. Although Utah received no money from the Race to the Top grant,
collectively the SBAC did win a grant to develop a testing system. Utah
is bound to obey the terms of the SBAC's grant which include many
freedom-closing mandates and expensive requirements. As a condition of
the grant, all member states must adopt the Common Core (CCSS federal
standards) No analysis has been done by Utah on CCI/SBAC implementation
costs.
USOE, the
Utah State Office of Education, is a powerful office. Yet the USOE did
not legally analyze Common Core; it was flatly accepted as true
doctrine. A USOE lawyer told me a few days ago that she thought that
the "Cooperative Agreement" I referred her to didn't exist or was a
hoax. After I sent her the PDF, she then changed her response and said
she disagreed with my interpretation of it.
The
same USOE lawyer answered my question: "Why is there no amendment
process for the CCSS standards?" by saying: "The whole point is to get
to a place where there is a 'common core' - that would mean the same
standards for all the states that adopt it. If the states had the
freedom to 'disagree' and 'change' them, I guess they would no longer be
'common'." So freedom is not a priority to the USOE legal team.
The
day after she wrote me that email, a directive went out at the USOE
that no one (the legal department included) was allowed to answer
further questions from me, a Utah teacher asking appropriate
questions. They were told to direct me to the Public Relations
department. So then I wrote to the Utah Attorney General for help and am
still waiting for his response.
Another
teacher, a friend, and I visited the Governor in his office two weeks
ago to plead with him to reject Common Core. We talked, gave him a
binder and a jump drive containing evidence that federal control and
consortia-control of Common Core jeopardized Utah's educational
freedoms, and asked him to sever ties with CCI and SBAC. He said we
were confusing him and promised to have us back in three weeks with
Superintendent Shumway and his lawyer in the room. (I can keep you
posted.)
WestEd -
As the project manager/test writer for the SBAC, WestEd holds an
important role in the CCI. I wrote a letter to WestEd in which I
inquired, "Please help me understand how the individual standards of a
member state of SBAC will still be relevant in light of the fact that
all the SBAC states take the same test. For example, if Colorado added
15% more calculus to their math standards than the federal standards
had, while Utah added 15% more geometry, how will those individual
state standards be addressed by the test? If the WestEd's test contains
neither Colorado's calculus nor Utah's geometry, because their
standards were actually higher than those of the federal government's,
how will the test benefit the SBAC states?"
WestEd
replied, " If a state chooses to add their state-specific 15% to the
Consortium test, then that additional information can be included in
their local reporting, but is not considered the Smarter Balanced
test. In order for this system to have a real impact within a state the
state will need to adopt the Common Core State Standards (i.e., not
have two sets of standards). As a condition of the grant, all member
states participating in the assessment must adopt the Common Core."
Did
you catch that? "…Not have two sets of standards". What happens when
states want to compete for high scores on a common test? They will need
to teach to the same set of standards that the test uses.
Why haven't we been told more about Common Core? Hypothesis: Superintendent
Larry Shumway sits on the board of WestEd. He also sits on two of the
boards that contracted the development of the CCSS standards. It's not
strange that he has not provided transparency for Utahns about Common
Core's mandates and costs.
A Spiral of Silence
Marketing
of Common Core has been target-specific. The national PTA received a
two million dollar donation to actively promote Common Core. But CCI
proponents didn't promote it outside the school system and CCI was never
up for public vote or legislative input. It slid under taxpayer,
parental, and legislative radar. The Governor told my friend he did not
recall having signed it. He probably trusted those around him to do
their homework.
Even
though CCI was funded by, and is largely controlled by, the federal
government, it was labeled a "state-led initiative." The federal
government paid groups to do what it was not constitutionally permitted
to do. The Congressional Budget Office never could do a cost analysis
and the taxpaying public was kept in the dark. Remember, the
Constitution and G.E.P.A. laws clearly forbid the federal government
from controlling or making decisions related to states' education.
If
teachers or administrators don't like CCI, they don't dare speak
against it because it's been handed down as an unassailable doctrine of
raising school standards. They fear losing their jobs by speaking out.
There
is a survey that must be taken by anyone hoping to apply as a candidate
for the Utah State School Board. The very first question is: "Do you
support Common Core?" Can anyone who does not agree with Common Core be
elected to the State School Board?
Fight for Educational Freedom
The
Common Core question comes down to this: would Utah rather have
education in common with a majority of other states, under the partial
or full control of others' ideas about what is good for our kids, or
would Utah prefer to have sovereignty to make educational decisions?
A
great American, Ezra Benson, said: "I say to you with all the fervor of
my soul that God intended men to be free. Rebellion against tyranny is a
righteous cause. It is an enormous evil for any man to be enslaved to
any system contrary to his own will… once freedom is lost, only blood
–human blood – will win it back."
Please
consider the long term impacts of Common Core and let your Utah School
Board, Superintendent Shumway, and Governor Herbert know how you
feel. Now is our window of opportunity. If we wait, we'll be too
financially and in other ways invested to withdraw from Common Core.
Thank you for your time.
Christel Swasey
Utah Teacher
