Right Under Our Noses: EIMAC   16 comments

My heart was pounding with indignation when I read today that the CCSSO (–that’s the State Superintendents’ Club– a private group, not accountable to the public and in no way under voters’ influence– the same group that created and copyrighted Common Core–) this CCSSO has a division called EIMAC. It stands for Education Information Management Advisory Consortium.

Why was my heart pounding? 2 reasons:

1) EIMAC’s formation is even more proof that America is being led into a system of nonrepresentative governance, an un-American, nonvoting system.

2) U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is a liar, a deliberate, conscious liar. (I only dare make such an awful accusation because it’s obvious to anyone who does even a small amount of fact checking on his statements.)

So let me explain. EIMAC declares, out loud, that its purpose is to network state education agency officials tasked with data collection and reporting; EIMAC advocates to improve the overall quality of the data collected at the NATIONAL level – See the rest at: http://www.ccsso.org/What_We_Do/Education_Data_and_Information_Systems.html#sthash.UZIBs53C.dpuf


Does anyone remember that earlier this summer, U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan made a speech to the American Society of News Editors, in which he claimed that there is NO NATIONAL COLLECTION OF STUDENT DATA?

Secretary Duncan’s exact words were these:

“Critics… make even more outlandish claims. They say that the Common Core calls for federal collection of student data. For the record, we are not allowed to, and we won’t.”

FACT: Duncan collects student level data directly from the Common Core testing consortia, as mandated in his Cooperative Agreement with these testing groups.

FACT: Duncan collects K-12 state school data directly at the federal EdFacts Exchange.

FACT: Duncan collects personally identifiable information indirectly via the 50 federally paid-for, fully interoperable State Longitudinal Database Systems (SLDS) that could be called a separated, but interlocking, national database in matchable segments.

FACT: Duncan has direct access to personally identifiable information indirectly via the National Data Collection Model, Data Quality Campaign, and Common Educational Data Statistics.

FACT: Most angering of all, Duncan circumvented Congress to destroy the power of the longstanding federal privacy law called FERPA. His damages there mean that parents have no guarantee, no legal stand, no rule saying that they MUST be asked for consent, before their child’s personally identifiable information will be accessed by governmental and corporate “stakeholders” who have been redefined as “authorized representatives.”

The longitudinal databases don’t just track students; they track people throughout their careers. This is lifelong citizen tracking, without our vote, without our consent, and without most people’s knowledge.

Secretary Duncan has made the unconscienable, legal.

He’s done what he’s done with the blessing of President Obama, whose four pillars of education reform are stated to alter these four things: COMMON STANDARDS, GREATER CONTROL OF TEACHERS, and ALTERING OR CLOSING OF SCHOOLS, and DATA COLLECTION.

Right Under Our Noses.

16 responses to “Right Under Our Noses: EIMAC

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Look what they are touting as pre-AP: http://springboardprogram.collegeboard.org/ What’s in it? Look here: http://t.co/NgtRwSBCpn

  2. So what can be done about this?? Obama and his administration just do whatever they want, lie about it then just continue on with business as usual. Nothing happens. I really think it is time we filed legal charges against them for violating federal law. Maybe we see if Pacific Legal Fund will help us. But it is time to ramp up the fight. Maybe we should go to DC and start talking to legislators. Sen. Grassley, Sen. Rand Paul, Rep. Luetkemeyer. I can be packed and ready to go at anytime.

    • The silent majority needs to stand up and be heard. They need to quit having their heads stuck in the sand and waiting for someone else to do something. Everyone that disagrees with this needs to bring it up to their local press, demand it be reported and call all of your local, state and federal representatives!

  3. And clearly also with the blessing of the CCSSO and, by all appearances, the National Governors Association.

  4. After reading through “Cooperative Agreement with these testing groups” finally came across the line that you were raving about… on page 11… a minor line with a minor note.

    “Work with the Department to develop a strategy to make student-level data that result from the assessment system available on an ongoing basis for research, including for prospective linking, validity, and program improvement studies;1”

    1 Eligible applicants awarded a grant under this program must comply with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and 34 CFR Part 99, as well as State and local requirements regarding privacy.

    This says “Recipients of said grant shall, at their discretion, release non-personal nor identifying information regarding the “progress of a randomly chosen sample of students” such that said sample can be used for study data.”

    This is done all the time. Read the stuff you sign, I know that it is on several doctors forms “Non-Personally Identifiable information may be exchanged.” You want to complain that HIPAA doesn’t cover you in that regards, go ahead… but don’t act as if this is something new because that makes you a terrorist, you’re misrepresenting a situation to induce fear and panic in order to further a political agenda.

    And given you’re arguing that the goal was to bypass FERPA and your first link says that the information MUST COMPLY WITH FERPA, I’d say that you didn’t read any of what you posted… or are just going to go down the “lunatic avenue” and claim “BUT HE INTENDS TO DO IT, YOU HAVE TO READ WHAT ISN’T THERE… THE GOVERNMENT… CONSPIRACY!”

    And if you want to argue you aren’t using the same formula that conspiracy theorists use; notice that you failed to actually supply any direct sources, instead you used the “This link has these words in it” type arguing that gets annoying really quickly (meh on naming the exact fallacy.) Rather, you should be explaining the meaning of the document and addressing the “issue.” The purpose of explaining the meaning is that you can easily put it out of context when you just say “this document forces schools to provide statistical data for analysis” you’re again misrepresenting why the data is being collected (as specified by said document, it appears that they’re admitting that the plan may not be ‘perfect’ and have committees being formed to examine how to improve upon said plan.

    The point is, you’re misrepresenting the truth.

    • I probably should note that I am aware that you had other sources; but if you want to use a source, you should CITE your source. 12 pages isn’t much, but as this is dense legal language it takes longer to get through it. And that what you were raving about was NOT what the condition meant by the EXISTENCE of a word pair “student **** data” makes it rather annoying to deal with.

      But meh, you are exhibiting all the signs of a conspiracy theorist (brief glance at your other links shows just “word association” again; and I really don’t feel like hunting down what is meant when you’re at the stage that posting a link to a webpage is “proof enough.” Spent enough time amoungst them to know that exposing the holes in their arguments only furthers their beliefs.


      You did have some justified points on Common Core, other issues were poorly established (i.e. slippery slope arguments)… (which is naturally how I was linked here), but this is just ignorance.

  5. I think Christel’s point is that sources as prominent and authoritative as CCSSO talk about “national data collection,” while other authoritative sources assert there is no such thing as national data collection. Tidbits like these few lines from this document provide a growing body of evidence that those who assert that national data collection doesn’t exist, know full well that it does and are in fact the drivers behind it. The national data collection system has been under construction since the 1980’s, and it’s very plain to those who’ve researched it that Common Core and the ARRA Federal stimulus grant-funded SLDS systems combine to facilitate the culmination of a fully-operational national database. This is objectionable on a number of fronts.

    While you’re right that non-personally-identifiable material information is regularly exchanged about healthcare information, these educational data systems are quite different. You’ll notice the reference to “student-level data.” There is no stipulation that said data be aggregated. In fact, every student in the system has a personal identifier, and part of the interest of those who are enthusiastic about this approach is to be able to follow individual students progression. It’s important to recognize that when a document is legally binding, there is no such thing a “minor line.” It’s all enforceable. As for FERPA, Christel didn’t say Duncan tried to bypass FERPA. She said he bypassed Congress to alter FERPA administratively, so that it does virtually the opposite of what it was originally designed to do – rather than protect student information, it makes it accessible by a long list of researchers and others without the consent of parents. Abiding by the Federal FERPA provisions is no longer any comfort to people interested in protecting privacy. States and local districts with stronger privacy policies still have some real protections, and we hope they won’t cave to the pressure which is certainly in the direction of lining up with the Federal policy.

    I’m a bit puzzled by the idea that linking to the direct source is failing to supply it. Supplying the pertinent quote and then a link to the whole document is a most efficient way to provide the concise points and a means whereby to verify their accuracy. And it’s misguided to assert that Christel, who stands to gain NOTHING by reporting what she finds and connecting these dots, is misrepresenting truth. She describes the truth as she sees it. I know her well enough to know that she’d welcome evidence to the contrary, because then she could go back to her normal, pleasant life before becoming aware of all this Common Core/data collection/Ed Reform mess. The same is not true in the case of those about whom she’s reporting. They stand to gain much by misrepresenting the truth in order to facilitate these erosions of privacy, liberty and democratic principles.


  7. Although if it makes you all feel better to believe that this is an Obama undermining-of-all-that-is-American, I probably can’t convince you otherwise, but it’s not. The national student data system has been part of the No Child Left Behind law for years. In Maine, you can find it entitled the “State Longitudinal Data System”. According to the webpage, “The Department of Education is building this powerful tool that will help teachers, administrators, school counselors and others determine which programs and strategies are working for each student and which are not.”

    • You are 100% right that these reforms, including the data collection, didn’t originate with Obama’s administration. They actually started long before NCLB – NCLB just ramped it up in a big way. No matter when they were started, or by whom, or which party was in power, the student data collection systems are wrong.

  8. Reblogged this on Same Deep Water As You and commented:
    The more of this program that is revealed, the worse it sounds.

  9. Handle, some call this federal-corporate takeover of education & privacy a “conspiracy theory” but I think a term like “the exposure of a partnered agenda” is more accurate. Why? “Conspiracy” implies that it is done secretly. The Common Core education takeover is for the most part out in the open and very visible, making it less conspiratorial than just an aggressive and unwanted takeover by the partnering of federal and corporate forces that circumvented the American voter.

    You can call it a theory if you want to; but I don’t think that term applies properly, since this agenda is so well documented that it goes beyond theory to become a fact-checkable report.

    The reason I don’t provide lengthy explanations to each link, but just give links, is that very few people will ever make it to the end of an article due to the excessive length. It gets repetitive and boring. This is not a white paper; it’s a blog.

    Providing links, however, does allow the reader to research terms for himself/herself. I hope you take the time to study these things thoroughly, and then write back and let me know if there’s anything I’ve written that is not accurate. I am open to honest correction but not so excited about unwarranted name-calling.

    It sounds like you are unclear on the reality of the damages to privacy of the Dept. of Ed. Study the lawsuit between the Department of Education and the Electronic Privacy Information Center. It is all online. Please read E.P.I.C.’s legal arguments, in order to understand the actions and motivations behind why the Department of Education altered federal FERPA regulations, and how that ties in to the term “student-level data” which the Department mandated must be shared by the testing groups, with the feds. This is key to seeing the agenda for what it really is. I’m sorry it’s not good news.

    I’d like to hear back from you after you’ve taken a longer look at it.

  10. I suggest that Handle and all watch this you tube of Dr. Peg Luksik on common core. She shows the grants, documents and explains the data tracking. It is very well done! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYGZTtraKUY

  11. This will probably mean more to you but the CCSSO is nonprofit. I looked it up on http://www.guidestar.org to check out the IRS Form 990 for the financials. Here is link but if it does not work, Guidestar if free and an invaluable tool for research. http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2012/530/198/2012-530198090-08f56a08-9.pdf

    Basically, the bring in $25+ million annually and 99% is public. I cannot tell where their money comes from. Their directors and highest paid employees are listed. I am still outraged that our government is so corrupt and s trying to corrupt our children. Good work.

  12. Pingback: Right Under Our Noses: EIMAC #stopcommoncore | Stop Common Core Illinois

  13. Pingback: Obama Wants Your Children’s Data: Common Core Early Learning Initiative | Common Core Agenda

Comments are welcome here.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: