(North Kansas City, MO) Jill Carter, a mother of two young children in a small rural community in Southwest Missouri, was successful in getting her local school board (East Newton School District in Granby, MO) to approve a resolution opposing the Common Core State Standards on September 19, 2013.
She recently spoke Saturday at the Take Back Our Schools conference held in North Kansas City, MO to share her story and encourage other grassroots activists to do the same (video below):
She said she knew something was not right with the Common Core State Standards. “I wasn’t willing to go to bed thinking that my silence would be promoting something that would be damaging to my children.”
She said, “I’m just a mom who lives on a farm.”
Anne Gassel, co-founder of Missouri Coalition Against Common Core, encouraged parents in attendance that Common Core advocates want to get parents to stop asking questions. “So we need to keep asking questions,” Gassel said.
You can read the East Newton School Board resolution below:
Resolution of the School District of East Newton, R- 6 to stop and re-evaluate the Implementation of Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) 2013
This RESOLUTION was made and adopted by the Board of Education of the School District of East Newton, R- 6, on the date set forth after the signature of each of the board members set forth below.
1. CCSSI was never approved by Congress but was included in the “four assurances” required of governors to sign to apply for of the State Fiscal Stabilization and Reinvestment Act and the Race to the Top grants funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
2. CCSSI was never evaluated by Missouri State Legislators, they were bypassed.
3. CCSSI was presented as an enticement for the waiver of “No Child Left Behind” and “Race to the Top” funds. Since “No Child Left Behind” required an unrealistic goal of 100% proficiency by 2014, a waiver was a must or suffer disaccreditation.
4. CCSSI are copyrighted to non-government trade organizations. We have concerns regarding access to additional information and the cost of such information.
5. Individual school districts are committed to paying unknown costs associated with implementing Common Core assessment plans, and purchase of materials, of which tax payers and their elected representatives never had any input. This would imply taxation without representation.
6. An apparent conflict of interest by our Governor sitting on the Board of Directors for National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, which holds the copyright to the CCSSI English and math standards when the standards were developed. He also sits on the Board of Directors of Achieve Inc. which holds the copyright to the Next Generation Science Standards.
7. CCSSI, which requires a large amount of data collection on students as well as teachers, could lead to unauthorized sale or sharing of personal data to commercial sources. Although, it hasn’t presented a problem to date, MO has no formal restrictions on DESE from populating data systems designed according to the National Data Model of over 400 data points including non-education related information such as religion, voting history, biometric data, etc.
8. The Department of Education Organizational Act of 1979; the General Education Provision Act and the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965 that was amended by No Child Left Behind of 2001 each prohibits the Federal Department of Education from involvement in developing, supervising, or controlling instructional materials or curriculum (Federal Law 20 USC 1232a-Sec. 1232a. and The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Pub.L. 89-10, 79 Stat. 27, 20 US.C. ch. 70), CCSSI and the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium assessment tests coming in 2014 were funded, incentivized, and will be controlled under the direction of the Federal Department of Education. This seems to be an overreach of the Federal Government into the state’s educational system.
9. There is no evidence that Missouri State Statute 160.526 2.was followed. The statute states, The state board of education shall, by contract enlist the assistance of such national experts, as approved by the commission established pursuant to section 160.510, to receive reports, advice and counsel on a regular basis pertaining to the validity and reliability of the statewide assessment system. The reports from such experts shall be received by the commission, which shall make a final determination concerning the reliability and validity of the statewide assessment system. Within six months prior to implementation of the statewide assessment system, the commissioner of education shall inform the president pro tempore of the senate and the speaker of the house about the procedures to implement the assessment system, including a report related to the reliability and validity of the assessment instruments, and the general assembly may, within the next sixty legislative days, veto such implementation by concurrent resolution adopted by majority vote of both the senate and the house of representatives.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE EAST NEWTON R6 SCHOOL DISTRICT
1. Recognizes the CCSS for what it is – a component of the four assurances that are designed to manipulate states and facilitate unconstitutional federal overreach to standardize and control the education of our children for the purposes of workforce planning, agreed to by Governor Nixon outside of due process while on the Board of Directors of the National Governors Association,
2. Recognizes that, as per Missouri Revised Statute 160.514 of the Missouri Outstanding School Act, curriculum frameworks adopted by the state board of education may be used by school districts, and we have great concerns regarding the adoption of the Missouri Core Standards/Common Core State Standards curricular framework for the East Newton School District,
3. Recognizes that, as per Missouri Revised Statute 160.514 of the same Act, the state board of education shall develop a statewide assessment system that provides maximum flexibility for local school districts to determine the degree to which students in the public schools of the state are proficient in the knowledge, skills, and competencies adopted by such board, and we exercise our right to insist on that flexibility. We have great concerns in participating in the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium assessments,
4. Rejects the collection of student assessment data outside of the limits specified in Missouri Revised Statute 160.518; and rejects the collection of personal student data for any non-educational purpose without the prior written consent of an adult student or a child student’s parent and rejects the sharing of such personal data, without the prior written consent of an adult student or a child student’s parent, with any person or entity other than schools or education agencies within the state
5. Insist that the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education shall adopt academic standards and a statewide assessment system as required by Missouri Revised Statute 160.526 of the same Act, that is, as appropriated by the legislature,
6. That any amending of Missouri’s Learning standards must be done through a transparent public rulemaking process that allows Missouri people ample time and opportunity to review proposed changes and provide feedback. Specifically, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) shall ensure that any amendment to the Learning Results be posted for public review and comment for at least 60 days. Any comments received during this notice period shall be made public prior to final adoption of any changes.
7. Call on the Governor and the Missouri State Board of Education to re-evaluate Missouri’s participation in the Common Core State Standards Initiative, and we ask the Missouri State Legislature to discontinue funding programs in association with Common Core State Standards Initiative/Missouri’s Core and any other alliance that promotes standards and assessments aligned to them until such re-evaluation can be completed.
THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution shall be delivered to the Governor and the State Legislature for executive and legislative action
Latest posts by Shane Vander Hart (see all)
- The Supreme Court Priorities: Abortion Before Religious Liberty - June 29, 2016
- Is Donald Trump Saved? James Dobson Clarifies - June 29, 2016
- Dump the Death Penalty, but Fight for Taxpayer-Funded Abortions? - June 29, 2016