Archive for the ‘education politics’ Tag

Pastor Speaks Out in Maryland: This Must Become Our Alamo   5 comments

Thank you, Pastor John of Maryland, for your words:

“We need more teachers to speak out.

As a Pastor I have joined the fight in Maryland to get the word out about Common Core. Today 6 of us spoke at a School Board meeting and were told by the Board President that they are going to put Common Core on the agenda for the next meeting so more time can be spent on it.

Pray for our efforts in Maryland.

Keep up the fight to expose U.S. Dept. of Ed’s agenda to control and indoctrinate our children with an amoral, progressive, globalist agenda at the expense of our liberties and our tax dollars.

This must be stopped. This must become our Alamo!”

— — — —

Note:  there is a group in Maryland called Marylanders Against Common Core.  Meet them here:  https://www.facebook.com/MDStopCommonCore?fref=pb

Two Utahns and a Man From Massachusetts: Why Michael Sentance Should Be Utah’s New State Superintendent of Schools   Leave a comment

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/55017971-78/state-education-superintendent-board.html.csp

The Salt Lake Tribune reports that the three finalists vying for Utah’s honored position of State Superintendent of Education are two Utahns and a man from Massachusetts.

If I had a vote, I’d vote for Michael Sentance of Massachusetts.  Why?

Why would an out-of-state candidate even be considered?

Easy:

Massachusetts’ K-12 education makes Massachusetts the best-performing state in the nation and  internationally competitive: no other state can make that claim.

If Sentance was an integral part of Massachusetts’ rise to the very top, would it not make sense to hire him to make that happen in Utah?

In a City Journal article entitled “The Massachusetts Exception” we learn:

“It’s common knowledge that in 1983, a federal report called A Nation at Risk indicted the “rising tide of mediocrity” in American public education and called for a school system that would be among the best in the world. Far less well known is that only one state effectively responded to that challenge: Massachusetts. By passing the landmark Education Reform Act of 1993, which pushed content and high standards above all else, the state became an outpost of success in a landscape of academic failure…”

–That’s huge.

(full article: http://www.city-journal.org/2012/22_3_massachusetts-education.html  )

So, Michael Sentance has served as the chief education advisor to two Massachusetts governors. In 1991, he was appointed as the Undersecretary of Education for Policy & Planning then as the Secretary of Education in 1995. Sentance joined the Governor’s staff in 1996 with the formal designation as the Senior Education Advisor to the Governor. Sentance chaired commissions on school finance, regulatory relief and accountability, and served on other boards and commissions including the Board of Education, the Board of Higher Education, the Governor’s Commission on School Finance, the Governor’s Commission on School Safety as well as the Education Commission of the States.

He was appointed by President George W. Bush to his position as the Secretary’s Regional Representative in October 2001. Sentance holds degrees from Georgetown University, Duquesne University and Boston University.

State School Board Meeting Today: To Bare Or Not To Bare Private Student And Family Data For Feds?   1 comment

 

 

Sent today–

TO: Board@schools.utah.gov

Dear Board,

I am writing to second Renee Braddy’s attached email.  As you are aware, a lawsuit is in full gear right now between the Department of Education and the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which alleges that the Department of Education overstepped statutory authority by redefining terms and loosening parental consent law in the federal FERPA regulations; remember, federal FERPA laws have not been altered by Congress.  Nor has state FERPA law been altered.  These oversteps by the Dept. of Education are illegal under GEPA law and under the U.S. Constitution.

If the Utah board supports this illegality, they will be held accountable under the Utah Constitution as well.

More importantly, the core issue here is that student privacy, a civil right, is being shoved aside to further empower federal and corporate forces in the nonconsensual access to private academic and nonacademic data.  Let’s do the right thing.

Christel Swasey

———- Forwarded message ———- From: Renee Braddy

Dear State School Board Members,

I just reviewed your agenda for today’s meeting and I amvery concerned about the action item regarding data.  On line 213 where the document is referring to studentinformation, it reads that it will be released in accordance with the FERPA, 34 CFR 99-31.  This is the new regulation that went into effect Jan. 3, 2012 and was written by the US DEPT of ED and DID NOT pass through the US congress.  This regulation is currently being challenged by EPIC in a lawsuit.  Ithink it would be wise to have our children’s data dispersed in accordance withFederal LAW 20 U.S.C. § 1232g, not the regulation.

There are LOTS of concerns with this new regulation and I believe it would be a BIG mistake to pass this rule change without further study.  Please DO NOT vote for this, but rather please table the item for further discussion.

I have extensively study the new FERPA regulation due to anincidence in Wasatch County.  This new regulation literally turns the FERPA law on its head and DOES NOT protect our children’s personal information.  This is a very serious matter.

It further states online 216 that such responses may (not SHALL) include:

1. de-identified data

2. agreements with recipients of student data where recipients agree not to report or publish students identities (the way I read this is that this is personally identifiable student data– otherwise there wouldn’t have to be an agreement to protect it, right?)

3. release  of student  data,  with  appropriate  binding agreements,  for  state  or  federal accountability or  for  the purpose  of  improving  instruction to  specific  student (this would mean that personally identifiable student data is being released with parental knowledge).

Much thanks,

Renee’ Braddy

6.    Board Committee Meetings

ACTION: R277-487 Public School Data Confidentiality and Disclosure Tab 6-L

R277-502-8 EducatorLicensing and Data Retention –

Comprehensive Administration of Credentials for Teachers in Utah

Schools (CACTUS)

R277-484-9 Data Standards – Disclosure of Data for Research

(Amendment and Continuation for all)

And when I click on the tab for more info.  Is this really what I think it is and they are changing the rules to come into compliance with the FERPA Regulation?!?!?  Someone, please help me if I’m off on this. If it’s underlined, does that mean it’s being added to the rule?

187 R277-487-6. Public Education Research Data.

188 A.  The USOE may provide limited or extensive data sets

189 for research and analysis purposes to qualified researchersor

190 organizations.

191 (1)  A  reasonable  method  shall be  used  to  qualify

192 researchers or organizations to receive data, such asevidence

193 that  a  research  proposal  has been  approved  by  a  federally

194 recognized Institutional Review Board (IRB).

195 (2)  Aggregate  student  assessment data  are  available

196 through  the  USOE website.  Individual student  data  are

197 protected.

198 (3) The USOE is not obligated to fill every request for

199 data and has procedures to determine which requests will be

6200 filled  or  to assign  priorities  to multiple  requests.  The

201 USOE/Board understands that it will respond in a timelymanner

202 to  all  requests  submitted  under Section  63G-2-101  et  seq.,

203 Government Records Access and Management Act.  Infilling data

204 requests, higher priority may be given to requests that will

205 help improve instruction in Utah’s public schools.

206 (4) A fee may be charged to prepare data or to deliver

207 data, particularly if the preparation requires originalwork.

208 The  USOE  shall  comply  with Section  63G-2-203  in  assessing

209 fees.

210 (5) The researcher or organization shall provide a copy

211 of the report or publication produced using USOE data to the

212 USOE at least 10 business days prior to the public release.

213 B.  Student information:  Requests for data thatdisclose

214 student information shall be provided in accordance with the

215 Family  Educational  Rights and  Privacy Act  (FERPA),  34  CFR

216 99-31(a)(6); such responses may include:

217 (1)  individual  student  data  that are  de-identified,

218 meaning it is not  possible to trace  the data to individual

219 students;

220 (2)  agreements  with  recipients  of student  data  where

221 recipients agree  not  to report  or publishdata in a manner

222 that discloses  students’ identities.  For example, reporting

223 test scores for a race subgroup that has a count, also known

224 as n-size, of less than 10 could enable someone to identify

225 the actual students and shall not be published;

226 (3)  release  of  student  data, with  appropriate  binding

227 agreements,  for  state  or  federal accountability  or  for  the

228 purpose  of  improving  instruction  to specific  student

229 subgroups.

%d bloggers like this: