The US Supreme Court upheld a parent’s right to guide their child’s education. So why since No child left behind and now common core, is the Federal Government is going to step in? The truth is clear in this article which admits that Federal funds would be redirected, not lost.
But what about this?
“The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children…”
In the 1925 decision of Pierce v. Society of Sisters, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a compulsory attendance act that required all parents to send their students to public schools, instead of private or religious schools. The court concluded that the act was unconstitutional because it “unreasonably interferes with the liberty of parents and guardians to direct the upbringing and education of children under their control.”
“…is a fundamental right.”
In 2000, the Supreme Court cited a long train of previous cases which showed that the right of parents to direct the education and upbringing of their children is a fundamental right.”
This is where it went wrong.
“And, if we thought the debate regarding the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, was acrimonious, we haven’t seen anything yet!
The upcoming battleground is the larger issue of education–what role should the federal government play versus the states. Historically, education has been a local matter; however, the federal government has found a persuasive way to become involved, namely, by offering large amounts of money to those states and school districts which implement federal initiatives. As always, money is a great motivator.
The fed’s role increased markedly beginning in the late 1980s as business and political leaders became concerned regarding the United States’ economy falling behind that of other nations; at that time it was Japan. The role of the federal government increased even more in the 1990s as the debate focused upon accountability through standardized student testing–should there be national tests or state tests? That question was resolved in favor of individual state testing, then.
The Bush-era 2001 No Child Left Behind (NCLB) law propelled the debate back into center stage. Both political parties joined in passing NCLB requiring yearly testing in mathematics and language arts in grades three through eight, setting the year 2014 as the target for all students having reached proficiency in these two subject areas, and creating stiff penalties for those schools that fail to do so.
Ten years later, as the debate regarding larger or smaller federal government involvement pervaded national elections–the economy, health care, Medicaid, among others–became the defining issue between Republicans and Democrats, important constituencies of both parties began to question whether the federal government had become too involved in education.
Federal involvement in education has increased geometrically under President Obama as his Secretary of Education Arnie Duncan used 2009 anti-recession Congressionally-approved stimulus money to fund state and local school district grant programs that were focused upon student accountability through standardized testing and teacher evaluation based upon those student test results.
These strongly-pushed initiatives resulted in major push-backs by teacher unions who opposed having teacher evaluations based upon student test scores, and parents and educators who asserted that standardized testing had resulted in the narrowing of curriculum and too much time being spent on test preparation.
The most recent rallying cry for those opposed to federal involvement in education has been the Common Core standards for mathematics and language arts. Though not developed by the federal government, but adopted by 45 states, these common curricula objectives are seen as leading to a national curriculum. Some states are now reconsidering their participation.
Teacher unions, parents, small government advocates are critical constituencies for both Democrats and Republicans. How could Congress do anything but consider limiting the federal role in education?
Earlier this month, both parties in the Senate and the House Republicans released their bills which would reauthorize funding for elementary and secondary education by modifying the 2001 No Child Left Behind law.
The political winds point to moving decision-making to the individual states regarding how much testing should occur, what should be included in the tests, should the newly-developed Common Core standard be implemented nationally, how teachers should be evaluated, and what are the consequences for those schools with large numbers of failing students.”
Now they’re busy arguing about the federal role in education. Which is supposed to be essentially none.
And racist? Desperate much? Shame on you.
“Worse, Duncan wasn’t simply threatening parents who choose to opt out their children in general, but rather, a specific group of parents. A group he has maligned before. White parents.
The Secretary of Education, you see, played the race card once again, insinuating that opposition to Common Core testing is somehow racially motivated.
Via Ed Week:
What’s more, the goal of testing is really about ensuring about equity of opportunity. In the past, English Language Learners, students in special education, and racial minorities were “swept under the rug,” Duncan said. “Folks in the civil rights community, folks in the disability community, they want their kids being assessed. They want to know if they are making progress or growth.”
You heard that right – Opposition to Common Core means we’re trying to continue an alleged pattern of sweeping racial minorities under the rug. Minorities want their children taking these Common Core tests.”
And yet, simultaneously in Albany, while DUNCAN threatens and bullies us that we MUST TEST OR DIE, here is the alternate view. Does DUNCAN know that this is even happening?
“ALBANY—Both houses of the state Legislature are considering legislation that would guarantee parents’ right to refuse federally mandated standardized testing for their children.
So far, the State Senate and Assembly are weighing two different bills that support the so-called “opt out” movement, so neither is likely to pass in its current form. According to unofficial tallies by parent activists, more than 100,000 children have boycotted state English language arts and math exams this month in protest of the Common Core standards and what some see as an overemphasis on testing.
Upon returning from a two-week break, the Senate Republican majority met behind closed doors on Wednesday to discuss the “barrage of e-mails, visits [and] phone calls” members have gotten from constituents regarding education policy changes that were included in the state budget, education committee chair John Flanagan said.
The conference began having “extensive conversations” about a bill dubbed the “Common Core parental refusal act,” sponsored by Senator Terrence Murphy, a new Republican member from the lower Hudson Valley. The bill would require school districts to notify parents of their right to refuse Common Core-aligned tests.”
Why do we as a nation have to submit to the will of DUNCAN? He has no right to this office. Playing basketball with the president does not give him any qualifications whatsoever.
Research his classroom experience. Report back.
“Does Duncan respect the limited role of the federal government in education, which all previous secretaries have recognized?
No. Duncan has expanded the role of the federal government in unprecedented ways. He seems not to know that education is the responsibility of state and local governments, as defined by the Tenth amendment to our Constitution. States and local school districts now look to Washington to tell them how to reform their schools and must seek permission to deviate from the regulations written by the U.S. Department of Education. George W. Bush’s No Child Left Behind (NCLB) created the template for this growing federal control of education, but Arne Duncan’s Race to the Top has made it possible for Washington to dictate education policy across the nation. Grade: F.
Has Duncan followed the law in his education policies?
No. Duncan has issued waivers to states that want to be relieved from NCLB’s impossible mandate of reaching 100 percent proficiency by 2014, but replaced that law’s demands with those of his own devising. Duncan says his waivers allow “flexibility,” but they serve simply to impose his own ideas about evaluating teachers, “transforming” low-performing schools (by firing staff or closing the schools), and adopting national standards in reading and mathematics. While very few people defend NCLB, which will write off almost every public school in the United States as a failure by 2014, it is still the law. Duncan has no authority to replace it with his own rules; cabinet members are not allowed to change the laws. Under our Constitution, Congress writes the laws, and the executive branch must enforce them, even as it seeks to change those that are onerous and misguided. Grade: F.
Has Duncan obeyed the clear prohibitions in law against federal involvement in creating a national curriculum?
No. The law that governs the U.S. Department of Education clearly states that no officer of the federal government may “exercise any direction, supervision, or control” over the curriculum or program of instruction of any school or school system. Yet Duncan has insisted that states eager for race to the top funding or for NCLB waivers must adopt “college and career-ready standards,” widely understood as the Common Core State Standards in mathematics and reading developed by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers, funded in large part by the Gates Foundation. Prodded by Duncan, 45 states have endorsed this national curriculum—despite the fact that it has never been field-tested. No one knows whether these standards are good or bad, whether they will improve academic achievement or widen the achievement gap. A report from the Brookings Institution recently predicted that the Common Core standards would have “little to no effect on student achievement.” Grade: F.
Have the policies promulgated by Duncan been good for the children of the United States?
No. Most parents and teachers and even President Obama (and sometimes Duncan himself) agree that “teaching to the test” makes school boring and robs classrooms of time for the imaginative instruction and activities that enliven learning. The standardized tests that are now ubiquitous are inherently boring. As President Obama said in his State of the Union address, teachers should teach with “creativity and passion,” but they can’t do that when tests matter so much. Spending hours preparing to take pick-the-bubble tests depresses student interest and motivation. This is not good for children. Yet Duncan’s policies—which use test scores to evaluate teachers and to decide which schools to close and which teachers to pay bonuses to—intensively promote teaching to the test. This is not good for students. Grade: F.
Do Duncan’s policies encourage teachers and inspire good teaching?
No. Duncan’s policies demean the teaching profession by treating student test scores as a proxy for teacher quality. A test that a student takes on one day of the year cannot possibly measure the quality of a teacher. (Officially, the administration suggests that test scores are supposed to be only one of multiple measures of teacher quality, but invariably the scores outweigh every other component of any evaluation program, as they did in New York City’s recent release of the teacher ratings.) Nor do most teachers want to compete with one another for merit pay.”
DUNCAN is the master of myth.
“That’s the moment of epiphany: Secretary Arne Duncan is a master and all criticism melts away before this great master, master of myth because all critics are told what they want to hear.
Duncan has been promoting the myth that he respects teachers, values a well-rounded education, and respects diversity and use the myth to hide the truth that all he promotes is more testing, more standards, narrower curriculum, and his lack of faith in public schools and educators.
More of examples of Duncan’s myth promotion record:
Duncan: And the biggest thing is, we have to give everyone of you a well rounded education. So reading and math, English and math are hugely important, but so is science, so is social studies, so is foreign languages, so is financial literacy, so is environmental literacy. We have to get back to a well rounded curriculum. (NPR Talk of the Nation)
Question: how much money has he and the federal government invested in subjects other than English and STEM?
Duncan: Today in our country, 99 percent of our teachers are above average. (New York Times story)
Question: If so, why do we need such drastic, expensive, and unproven measures such as tie teacher evaluation to student test scores to deal with the 1% of below-average teachers? I have to believe he does not believe his Lake Wobegon inspired statement himself.
Duncan: And one thing I’m always conscious of is that the best ideas in education are always going to come at the local level, never from me, never from Washington. (NPR Talk of the Nation)
Question: If the best ideas never come from him, never from Washington, why has he been dangling money to lure the states to change laws to allow more charter schools, accept national standards, develop common assessments, and base teacher evaluation to test scores?
Secretary Duncan has also been promoting the myth about how bad American education is….” See more below.
Some excellent bathroom reading material here:
Why do we refuse? Two superintendents need Arne’s ear for a bit.
“Those who support testing contend that facing tests, and the concomitant adversity that one might experience (even if the test is developmentally inappropriate) are a part of life. To do otherwise is considered weak, and represents a failure to develop the “grit” necessary to fully engage in life’s challenges. For these people, it is inconceivable that locally developed assessments — perhaps even more purposeful and useful assessments — could accomplish that very same goal. Living in a culture of fear as we do, many people believe that it is necessary to impose carefully guarded secret tests from above to make sure that we hold incompetent adults — untrustworthy teachers and administrators — accountable for the abject failure of some children who graduate from our public schools….
They write that the so-called reformers, like Governor Cuomo and the Legislature, are fixated on basic skills and compliance with the demands of the state. What they care very little about is the broader, civic and humane purposes of education.”
“How would you feel if your kids toiled in a factory run by a British company whose overlords were faceless bureaucrats in Albany?
LIBN’s Claude Solnik’s in-depth probe of British testing giant Pearson reveals that, over the past few weeks, your children – ages 8-14 – were asked to labor long hours during a six-day span without pay or tangible reward. In the process, they contributed to the testing factory’s windfall profits.
Meanwhile the state, which forced this down the throats of our children, took federal money to do the company’s bidding. Pearson not only produces the tests but the preparatory and remedial materials necessary to implement them. We pay for this through our taxes and parental angst.”
Tired of punitive reaction? Bullies are often stunted people with limited emotional reaction. Instead of introspectively considering his role in this nightmare of a mess, he lashes out with threats and fear tactics. A discussion isn’t even on his radar. Instead he will punish is and put us in our place of subservience.
Will the American people allow this? Or have we finally reached our limit? DUNCAN needs to go, and the laws that he touts with him.
Some satire to brighten your day.