MN Social Studies Curriculum Emphasizes American ‘Racism,’ Removes ‘Patriotism’

Tony Lee, Breitbart, December 23, 2012

Last Thursday, the Minnesota Department of Education held public hearings to approve its new social studies education curriculum that leaves out "patriotism" as a civic virtue and teaches that America's rise as a global power from its agrarian roots led to "institutionalized racism."

History Standard 20 for the period 1870–1920, in the new social studies/history standards, says:

“The student will understand that as the United States shifted from its agrarian roots into an industrial and global power, the rise of big business, urbanization, and immigration led to institutionalized racism, ethnic and class conflict, and new efforts at reform.”

John Fonte, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, wrote that "nine years ago a group of history professors from the University of Minnesota sent a letter to the state’s education department" complaining that Minnesota's social studies standards "presented American history too positively."

These academics wanted Minnesota's children to learn that the story of American "primarily meant slavery for African Americans, genocide for American Indians, subjugation for women, xenophobia for immigrants, and exploitation for poor people."

The 2012 standards also include "no references to 9/11, the Taliban, Osama bin Laden, the Iraq War, the war in Afghanistan, the Gulf War of 1991, or terrorism itself."

In addition, the Minnesota education standards no longer list “patriotism” in the list of “civic values." As Fonte notes, Loyola University, Baltimore Professor Diana Schaub has described this deemphasizing of "patriotism" in the schools as “civics without a country."

 

Texas curriculum: "Allah is the Almighty God"

Arabic-speaking Christians generally use the word "Allah" for the God of the Bible, but this curriculum doesn't seem to be talking about Arabic-speaking Christians: it seems fairly clear that it is trying to portray Islam in a benign and positive light, without any reference to the violent texts and teachings that jihadis and Islamic supremacists point to in order to justify their actions.

What a coincidence that this curriculum would be in use in Texas, where Governor Rick Perry partnered with the Aga Khan Foundation to develop a severely whitewashed, Islam-friendly curriculum. When Pamela Geller and I broke the story of that curriculum in 2011, the reaction was furious: one blogger demanded I stop linking him; another claimed that the curriculum material we had uncovered was not really the curriculum at all, and tried to pass off one teacher's private notes as the real curriculum; and former friends and associates denounced us with a cult-like fervor that I still find hard to believe that a compromised nonentity like Rick Perry could have inspired.

Now, lo and behold, we find that Texas has a severely whitewashed Islam curriculum, just as we said. Today one of the bloggers who was most furiously and frenziedly denouncing us last year for daring to suggest that Perry was opening Texas schools to a biased and whitewashed presentation of Islam posted this WND story without the slightest reference to the Perry controversy, about which he was so spectacularly wrong. That's chutzpah.

"Texas teaching 'Allah is the Almighty God,'" by John Griffing for WND, December 13 (thanks to all who sent this in):

In the 70 percent of Texas public schools where a private curriculum has been installed, students are learning the “fact” that “Allah is the Almighty God,” charge critics of a new online curriculum that already is facing condemnation for its secrecy and restrictions on oversight.

The program, called CSCOPE, is a private venture operating under the umbrella of the Texas Education Service Center Curriculum Collaborative, whose incorporation documents state its independence from the State Board of Education of the Texas Education Agency.

Other reports previously have raised alarm over the curriculum’s depiction of the Boston Tea Party as a terrorist act on par with the 9/11 attack.

According to documentation that has leaked out, the program describes the Boston Tea Party this way: “A local militia, believed to be a terrorist organization, attacked the property of private citizens today at our nation’s busiest port. Although no one was injured in the attack, a large quantity of merchandise, considered to be valuable to its owners and loathsome to the perpetrators, was destroyed. The terrorists, dressed in disguise and apparently intoxicated, were able to escape into the night with the help of local citizens who harbor these fugitives and conceal their identities from the authorities. It is believed that the terrorist attack was a response to the policies enacted by the occupying country’s government. Even stronger policies are anticipated by the local citizens.”

There also have been reports that the curriculum – contrary to recent Supreme Court rulings – says the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the right to bear arms, is limited to state-run organizations.

“The collective right’s advocates believed that the Second Amendment did not apply to individuals; rather it recognized the right of a state to arm its militia. It recognized limited individual rights only when it was exercised by members of a functioning, organized militia while actively participating in the militia’s activities.”

Now come concerns about what critics describe as a definitively pro-Islam bias.

The critics say the studies border on proselytizing.

In one scenario, students are asked to study the tenets of Islam, and critics say the materials provided exceed impartial review of another faith, extending into requirements of conversion and moral imperatives.

A computer presentation utilized as part of a study of Islam includes information on how to convert, as well as verses denigrating other faiths.

According to excerpts, under the heading, “Who Is Allah?,” students are told:

“Allah is the Almighty God.”

“Allah alone is the Creator. He alone deserves our devout love and worship.”

Muhammad is described as having become “disillusioned with the corruption in the city and the growing gap between the urban dwellers and the Bedouins (nomadic herders).”

But there is no mention of his documented sex activities with a child or his penchant for beheading entire indigenous people groups....

Posted by Robert on December 14, 2012

NAEP results: students’ history knowledge in need of improvement

June 16, 2011

Earlier this week, the 2010 NAEP U.S. History results were released for our 4^th, 8^th, and 12^th graders. Overall, the results were not very encouraging especially at the 12^th grade level. Our 8^th graders have made some progress over the past decade but overall scores at the 4^th and 12^th grade levels remained relatively unchanged. However, as Jim Hull over at The Edifier points out, Black and Hispanic students have made tremendous progress since the mid-90’s at both the 4^th and 8^th grade levels.

Yet, besides these bright spots yesterday’s report point out our students are lacking in their knowledge of this nation’s history. That, as the New York Times argues, there needs to be a renewed focus on history. The first step in doing so is for Congress to reauthorize ESEA so schools aren’t judged on math and reading alone. BoardBuzz is excited to hear Secretary Duncan signal there is regulatory relief for school districts if Congress doesn’t act this summer. Hopefully this will push Congress to develop a fair and constructive federal accountability system that values the importance of all subjects.

 For a full summary of the NEAP results check out NSBA’s Center for Public Education’s blog The Edifier. Also, for more information on what NAEP results really mean check out The Center’s The Proficiency Debate: A guide to NAEP Achievement Levels.
From: http://schoolboardnews.nsba.org/2011/06/naep-results-students-history-knowledge-in-need-of-improvement/

Posted at 12:36 PM ET, 05/05/2011

Many students lack civics knowledge, study shows
By Education Week

Many high school seniors may be old enough to vote, but just one-quarter of them demonstrate at least a "proficient" level of civics knowledge and skills, based on the latest results from a prominent national exam.

That statistic, 24 percent, represents a slight dip from the proportion of 12th-graders scoring proficient or "advanced" in the subject four years earlier. (This was also reported by Answer Sheet blogger Valerie Strauss Wednesday.)

Meanwhile, the average fourth grade score rose in the latest administration of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, compared with both 2006 and 1998, the first time "the nation's report card" in civics was given. Twenty-seven percent were proficient or better in 2010, compared with 24 percent in 2006, according to the NAEP data issued Wednesday.

No significant change was seen for eighth graders, who have remained stuck at the 22 percent proficient-or-higher mark since 1998.

"Knowledge of our system of government is not handed down through the gene pool," retired U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said in a statement. "The habits of citizenship must be learned. ... But we have neglected civic education for the past several decades, and the results are predictably dismal," said Justice O'Connor, who has been promoting civics instruction in the United States.

One area of growth highlighted in the new report is the improvement over time for Hispanic students. At all three grade levels, the Hispanic test-takers had higher scores than in 1998, and scores have climbed for eighth graders since 2006, as well. In 1998, 44 percent of Hispanic eighth graders scored at "basic" or above, compared with 50 percent in 2006 and 56 percent in 2010.

In fact, the achievement gap between Hispanic and non-Hispanic whites was narrower than in both 2006 and 1998, though it was still sizable, at 23 points on the NAEP scale, which runs from zero to 300.

"We are encouraged by the gains in civics achievement being made by our nation's Hispanic students, who are an increasingly important voice in our democracy," David P. Driscoll, the chairman of the National Assessment Governing Board, which sets policy for NAEP, said in a press release.

That said, even with the progress for Hispanic students, only 11 percent of eighth graders scored at the proficient level or above.

Further, relatively few students of all races and ethnicities reached the highest level which represents what the report calls "superior performance."

Only four percent of all 12th graders, for example, scored advanced, "a level we would hope our future leaders would attain," Charles N. Quigley, the executive director of the nonprofit Center for Civic Education, said in a statement.

Five percent of white seniors scored at the advanced level, compared with 2 percent of Hispanics and 1 percent of African-Americans.

The NAEP test in civics contains a blend of multiple-choice and constructed-response questions at each grade level. The questions tackle three interrelated components: civic knowledge, intellectual and participatory skills, and civic dispositions. The focus on civic knowledge tests, among other topics, students' understanding of civic life, politics, and government; the foundations of the American political system; and the role of citizens in American democracy.

Quigley said he was especially alarmed to see so many seniors performing poorly on the national exam.

"Many of our high school seniors are already eligible to vote, or they very soon will be," said Mr. Quigley, whose organization is based in Woodland Hills, Calif. "We would expect them to be better prepared to exercise the rights and assume the responsibilities of American citizenship."

It appears that the overall 3-point drop in civics achievement among seniors was largely the result of a decline among girls. The average scale score for girls dropped from 152 to 148, which was statistically significant. For boys, it declined from 150 to 148, but that change was not deemed statistically significant.

On the flip side, 4th grade girls scored higher in 2010 than four years earlier, posting an average score that was 7 points higher than the performance of 4th grade boys. Put another way, 30 percent of girls scored as at least proficient in 2010, compared with 24 percent of that population in 2006. Meanwhile, for 4th grade boys, the proportion scoring proficient or higher remained unchanged between 2006 and 2010, at 24 percent.

As part of the NAEP report, both teachers and students were surveyed to learn more about the extent to which civics instruction is delivered in schools. That instruction, however, didn't necessarily benefit the students, the data suggest.

At the 8th grade, 85 percent of students reported learning about civics in school, but there was no significant difference in the average scores of those who did or did not report receiving such instruction.

There also was no measurable change in the particular topics 8th graders reported studying. For example, 82 percent said they covered the U.S. Constitution, 78 percent Congress, and just 40 percent other countries' governments.

Nearly all 12th graders, 97 percent, reported studying civics or government during their high school years.

When asked more specifically about particular topics they had studied during the current school year, fewer said they had been taught about the Constitution than previously. Sixty-seven percent reported studying the document in 2010, compared with 72 percent in 2006. That, however, was the only content area out of nine specific civics topics students were asked about in which the difference between 2010 and 2006 was statistically significant.

The survey data for seniors also show that:

-68 percent said they had studied political parties, elections, and voting;

-66 percent studied Congress;

-61 percent studied how laws were made; and

-59 percent studied the president and Cabinet.

By far, studying other nations' governments (47 percent) and international organizations such as the United Nations (43 percent) were the two content areas that the smallest proportion of seniors said they studied.

Mr. Quigley said he was deeply troubled that so many seniors are apparently not spending time on those content areas.

"Ignoring those topics," he said, "is difficult to defend in an era in which our country is ever more deeply involved in the world — politically, economically, militarily, and in humanitarian efforts."

By Education Week  |  12:36 PM ET, 05/05/2011

Mexicans Say SW U.S. Belongs to Mexico!

For Immediate Release June 11, 2002 New Zogby Poll Mexicans Say Southwest U.S. Belongs to Them;   Shouldn't Need Permission to Enter U.S.

Download Full Report (160 KB MSword doc)

    Americans and Mexicans have widely divergent views of border issues, according to a new poll by Zogby International.   Zogby found that a large majority of the Mexican population believes the southwest territory of the U.S. rightfully belongs to Mexico, and that Mexicans should have the right to enter the U.S. without first obtaining U.S. permission. By contrast, Zogby's survey of Americans conducted within a few days of the Mexican poll shows a large majority supports reducing immigration levels and wants the military deployed along the border to protect the U.S. from illegal immigration.

    Zogby's poll found that 58 percent of Mexicans agree with the statement, "the territory of the United States' Southwest rightfully belongs to Mexico." Only 28 percent disagree, and 14 percent are unsure.  

    A similar majority, 57 percent, agree with the statement, "Mexicans should have the right to enter the U.S. without U.S. permission," while 35 percent disagree. Seven percent are unsure.

    The survey has a margin of error of 3.5 percent. The Mexico portion of the survey was conducted in Spanish between May 25 and May 26 among 801 adults chosen at random throughout Mexico. The poll was commissioned by Americans for Immigration Control, Inc. (AIC), which advocates increased restrictions on immigration.

    "There is obviously a large and significant gap between the attitudes of Americans and Mexicans," said Robert Goldsborough, AIC president. "While most Americans want immigration reduced, most Mexicans think they don't even need permission to enter our country. The poll clearly shows there is less common ground for immigration negotiations between Mexico and the U.S. than the leaders think. Support for a porous border and a loose migration policy occurs only on the Mexican side, not in the U.S."

    Zogby's survey of American attitudes found wide majorities of Americans also oppose amnesty for illegal aliens. The U.S. portion of the survey was conducted of 1,015 likely voters in the U.S. from May 28 to May 30. It found that 65 percent disagree with the statement, "foreigners residing illegally in the U.S. should be given amnesty." Just 26 percent of likely voters support amnesty for illegals, while 9 percent are unsure.

    A large majority, 58 percent, agree that the U.S. should "admit fewer immigrants each year." Only 6 percent want "more immigrants each year," and 30 percent want to "keep immigration at the current annual levels."

    The single largest majority in the entire poll was found among Americans supporting use of the military to guard the border. Fully 68 percent of those surveyed agree with the statement, "the U.S. should deploy military troops on the border as a temporary measure to help the U.S. Border Patrol curb illegal immigration." Only 28 percent disagree, and 3 percent are unsure. 

The wrong lesson on national standards

Posted by Jim Stergios May 21, 2012 04:49 PM

Dear David,

Congratulations on becoming the new head of the College Board. I know, as a Founding Father of the national standards effort, I may have written things that you do not agree with. While I haven’t met you personally yet, I look forward to it. I have heard universally that you are a smart guy and reputed by all to be a nice person.

I hope you and the Coleman family are well, and I am writing to say I’m sorry.

In addition to writing about school innovations, charter schools, vocational technical schools, school choice, accountability to results, and teacher quality issues, I’ve written with some frequency about academic standards and curricula—and especially recently about the effort to advance national (Common Core) standards.

I’m sorry because I think I may have gotten some of the intentions of Common Core's supporters wrong. Considering the heavy hand of the Gates Foundation and DC-based trade groups and their support of an effort that violates three federal laws; the imposition of $16 billion in new unfunded mandates on states and localities; and the feds’ shoehorning of states into adopting mediocre/community college readiness academic standards; I thought there may have been a well-thought-through plan at work. I thought the fact that many of the same players were involved in the 1990s in similar efforts meant that they had learned from past mistakes and decided to bypass congressional scrutiny and state legislative processes.

I thought they (and by association perhaps you) were consciously flouting the rule of law, the Constitutional Framers, and 220-plus years of American constitutional history. After all, supporters of national standards know their history and what is legal and illegal, and why all this was a bad idea.

Well, I just watched this national standards promo video by a couple of Gates Foundation clients—the Council of Chief States School Officers (CCSSO) and the Jim Hunt Institute, what I have affectionately in the past termed the EduBlob (perhaps too often uploaded with cheesy 60s’ movie posters). The video features you and it illustrates to me how I was wrong on the question of intention.

The video (see especially 2:07 to 2:49) does not dissuade me from my view that the national standards are a mediocre race to the middle, or that they are illegal, or needless centralizing and expensive.

In it, you articulate how you would use Madison’s Federalist #51 to teach students and teachers about carefully reading primary sources like Madison’s work and how to understand concepts like “faction” as the authors themselves understood these terms. The video comes with a nice-looking pictorial text of Federalist #51 on the screen. Listening for a few minutes, I thought it sounded good, especially where you note:

I want to say a little more about what we mean by building knowledge through reading and writing. It doesn’t mean simply that students can refer to a text they’ve read in history and social studies and mention that in Federalist Paper 51 someone named Madison had some ideas about faction. To be able to read and gain knowledge to analyze that document would be as the [national] standards require to examine precisely what Madison said or didn’t say about faction and from reading that document carefully having a rich and deep understanding about precisely what Madison thought about faction. It’s about the close study of primary documents to understand from whence they come and what they might mean and not mean.

David, I think at this point it would be helpful to introduce you to James Madison. Another Founding Father—but he was a key drafter of the United States Constitution. He drafted the 10 initial constitutional amendments, which we call the Bill of Rights.

He was the co-founder of a major political party. Author of the Virginia Resolution. Secretary of State (1801-1809). Fourth President of the United States of America (1809-1817). Unlike a president before him (John Adams) and many after, even in times of existential crisis for the nation (the War of 1812, when Washington, D.C. was being burned by the British), Madison didn’t abuse executive power to abridge the US Constitution or the Bill of Rights. He knew better than most the power of the Constitution and was its faithful implementer.

Despite almost incomparable Founding accomplishments, Madison is best known for essays he, along with Alexander Hamilton and John Jay, wrote called the Federalist Papers, the most enduring articulation of American constitutional principles ever committed to paper. It’s the kind of stuff our kids (and we) need to know.

I’m not sure if Yale and Oxford, while you were there as a Rhodes scholar, forgot to tell you this, but Madison’s Federalist #51 isn’t about “faction.” I know you repeat this point over and over in the video tutorial. But, as any well-educated 10th-grader knows (at least in Massachusetts before we switched to the national standards), Federalist #51 is actually about checks and balances. Here’s the title and most famous lines from Federalist #51:

The Structure of the Government Must Furnish the Proper Checks and Balances Between the Different Departments

In order to lay a due foundation for that separate and distinct exercise of the different powers of government, which to a certain extent is admitted on all hands to be essential to the preservation of liberty, it is evident that each department should have a will of its own; and consequently should be so constituted that the members of each should have as little agency as possible in the appointment of the members of the others...

But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition...

But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

In fact, David, I hope you and the Council of Chief State School Officers, the Hunt Institute, and the whole swarm of national standards proponents will take the time to read Federalist #10, which, incidentally is the most famous of all of Madison’s works. The term “faction” is mentioned 18 times (including the title) and is the major topic of Federalist #10. Madison’s views on “faction” are thoughtful and far-sighted. Let me share a section with you:

The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection (continued)

AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. The friend of popular governments never finds himself so much alarmed for their character and fate, as when he contemplates their propensity to this dangerous vice. He will not fail, therefore, to set a due value on any plan which, without violating the principles to which he is attached, provides a proper cure for it...

By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community...

No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. With equal, nay with greater reason, a body of men are unfit to be both judges and parties at the same time...

David, I truly hope you and other supporters of the Common Core will come to read the Federalist Papers and demonstrate the skills to understand James Madison’s original intent. I further hope you will gain the ability to reflect on the premises of the American constitutional republic. Perhaps close attention to the section of Federalist #10 regarding not serving as judge in your own case would help you and the Gates Foundation understand that advancing a policy with hundreds of millions of dollars and then paying others to support that view is a no-no. I am convinced that, with this reading and study complete, you will understand why national education standards are anti-constitutional, illegal, and violate the public trust.

In truth, when crafting the Constitution and the Federalist Papers Madison and the Framers very much had in mind the reckless ambitions of the recklessly ambitious. The drive to advance the Common Core outside the boundaries of the Constitution and legal restrictions is just what Madison had in mind. And the EduBlob represents exactly the types of dangerous “factions” whose “common impulse of passion, or of interest” were contrary to the public good and the “aggregate interests of the community.”

The next time you would like to opine about why you and others should set national standards, curricula, and testing for America’s 50 million schoolchildren, I would ask you to reflect on you and your peers lack of even the most basic understanding of our Founding principles.

Respectfully,

Jim

http://boston.com/community/blogs/rock_the_schoolhouse/

More Florida High Schools Earn A's While FCATs Fade

By: KENRIC WARD
Sunshine State News January 14, 2012
More Florida high schools are earning A's and B's while only 39 percent of 10th-graders are reading at or above proficiency levels on the state's FCAT exam, Department of Education records show. Some 78 percent of high schools scored either an A or B grade in 2011, up from 71 percent last year. A-rated schools receive financial awards from the state of up to $150,000 per campus.

Yet high school students' academic competence is flat or falling. The 39 percent of students reading at or above Level 3 "proficiency" was the same as it was in 2010. Though math scores were better -- 71 percent of 10th-graders were "proficient" -- that was down 2 points from 2010.

The 2011 high school grades were boosted by a new formula that factors in more than scores on the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test. Graduation rates, as well as participation and performance in advanced-placement courses, now count toward a school's grade.

The FCAT writing battery, where 90 percent of students score at or above the "proficient" level, helps pad the scores.

"Reading and math scores may not improve. In fact, they can decline, but a school can still improve its score by achieving growth in the other benchmarks," said Jason Caros, president of the Florida Council of the Social Studies.

Amid indications of campus grade inflation, the state Board of Education last month voted to raise the "cut scores" that determine which pupils are passing and which are failing. It was the first time in a decade that the state approved tougher standards.

The state expects that many more students will be required to take remedial lessons as a result of the higher score requirement, which first applies to the class of 2014. The new system will kick in with exams taken this coming spring.

Amber Winkler, a senior researcher for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, said, "Florida should be lauded for raising its cut scores. Too many states are content to rest on their laurels, but Florida keeps raising the bar.

"Raising expectations now becomes even more important since Florida plans to implement new Common Core standards in 2015 -- which will require even more of students. There has to be continued pressure on the system to improve," Winkler said.

Meantime, the state Board of Education took another step to thin the herd of A-rated schools. Currently, a school must earn 525 points or more (on an 800-point scale) to earn an A grade. A final level hasn't been determined yet, but beginning in 2012-2013, if, for example, 75 percent of Florida’s high schools earn an A, an "automatic trigger" would raise the minimum threshold to 560 points the next year.

Jaryn Emhof, spokeswoman at Jeb Bush's education-reform think tank, Foundation for Florida's Future, hailed the state's moves. "The foundation has said standards need to be raised across the board," Emhof said.

Caros, an educator in Volusia County, says poor reading skills at middle schools and high schools are "a byproduct of the failure to teach core knowledge" in early grades. "Much of the reading elementary students engage in at school is fiction. While fiction is certainly important, a 2006 Stanford University study found that Florida’s failure to emphasize 'the acquisition of appropriate knowledge at each grade level' made comprehension of nonfiction texts very difficult for middle and high school students," Caros writes in a forthcoming issue of the Journal of the James Madison Institute.

Citing one example, Caros asks: "Why would it be bad for someone to meet their Waterloo?" Without broad background knowledge, readers will find it difficult to make sense of the many historical and literary allusions that appear in readings," Caros says in his article, "Why Johnny Can't Understand What He Reads."

Still, many teachers and administrators bridle at the tougher, upcoming cut scores. Maintaining that academic deficiencies begin at the lower grade levels, high schools are particularly concerned.

Orange County School District Superintendent Ron Blocker told the Orlando Sentinel, "There will be blood on the table."

"Adding more focus to an already flawed assessment process will not result in real learning gains in reading," Caros predicted in an article written for the Daytona Beach News-Journal.

But DOE Commissioner Gerard Robinson says the new standards will put high school students "on a pathway for colleges and careers in a far better way than we've ever seen before."

State officials say the whole testing system is being reformed as Florida replaces FCAT math, reading and writing exams with new “common core” exams in 2015.

Developed by the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, a consortium of states that won federal Race to the Top funds, the new exams will likely include two tests per subject.

It is not yet known how the "PARCC" tests will stack up against FCAT, but education observers point out that continual changes in test regimens thwart any longitudinal, apples-to-apples comparisons. Skeptics say that's exactly the intent and objective.

Whatever assessment devices and scoring systems Florida uses, Bill Mattox, resident fellow at James Madison Institute, says, "We ought to be raising the bar, not lowering it. Hold everyone -- students, teachers, parents -- to higher standards."

Contact Kenric Ward at kward@sunshinestatenews.com or at (772) 801-5341.
http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/more-florida-high-schools-earn-a-while-fcats-fade

Ruling on ethnic students program splits Arizona community

Ruling on ethnic students program splits Arizona communityBy Casey Stegall January 14, 2012

Years ago, many urban school districts around the country created ethnic studies programs in an effort to help minority students succeed in the classroom and learn about their heritage. The Tucson Unified School District in Arizona was no exception, considering about 61 percent of
the student population there is Hispanic.

The courses first started being offered a little more than ten years ago but top education officials in the state say the program has spiraled out of control in recent years because of failed oversight.

Now the issue has a community divided. John Huppenthal, Arizona’s Superintendent of Public Instruction, says somehow the district's "Mexican-American Studies Program" went rogue because the curriculum, lesson plans and textbooks stopped being approved by the school board at some point.

The state's top school chief says that makes it in violation of state law because all materials being taught in Arizona classrooms must get the local board's seal of approval. In fact, his office launched an investigation that found that erroneous facts were being taught to the students and the classes promoted "racial resentment."

"We have no problem with a history class talking about historical injustices. It becomes problematic though when you take every historic event and you interpret it in racial terms, in a radical context and you use that to inflame a low income Hispanic minority against a white Caucasian majority. Then you're not talking about injustice. You're not talking about how each of us has individual rights and responsibilities for a better future. Now you're talking about getting even," Huppenthol told Fox News.

An administrative law judge in Arizona, Lewis Kowal, agreed with the investigation findings. The judge says teachers were presenting material in a biased, political and emotionally charged manner.

Kowal's 37 page ruling went on to say the course was "designed for Latinos as a group that promoted racial resentment against 'Whites' and advocates ethnic solidarity of Latinos." After
these statements were made, state education officials threatened to suspend millions of dollars in funding to the district unless the problem was fixed.

Supporters of the program have maintained the state's findings are bogus. They argue the classes are vital in teaching children about Chicano history, literature and social and justice. Teachers say they're insulted by the mere suggestion that they're promoting racism and students tell Fox the classes actually help them excel in their other mandated courses.

"We have the right to culture, history, affinity, language and education. We want an educational system where all cultures fit. Unidos we stand, divided we fall," one student says of the program.
The issue came to a head this week when the Tucson Unified School Board voted 4-1 to halt the ethnic studies classes for the time being. TUSD's Superintendent, John Pedicone, says ethnic studies teachers are already reverting to core curriculum. The courses are gone but the epartment still remains as the district works on creating new classes that will combine core curriculum and some ethnic studies lessons, all in compliance with Arizona law.

Hundreds of students, parents and teachers are outraged over the school board's decision and there were some tense moments at the meeting. "You're an autonomous board. You can
appeal this decision… this racist decision… this ignorant decision that was made by the state. Do the right thing! Stand up for something they way I was taught. That if I go and stand for something I'm going to fall for anything.

That's what you should have to do! That's what you need to do!" one teacher yelled.

More than 100 students also staged a march this week, walking from their charter school to TUSD headquarters in protest. A legal fight is already underway because of a federal lawsuit that was filed prior to this vote. Richard Martinez is a Tucson attorney representing the plaintiffs who says the state law could very well be a violation of the teachers' First Amendment rights. The American Civil Liberties Union has also expressed interest in helping appeal the school board’s decision. Supporters of Tucson's ethnic studies program say they're not going down without a fight and the issue certainly isn’t going away anytime soon.

To be continued . . . .

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/01/14/ruling-on-ethnic-students-program-splits-arizona-community/#ixzz1jUHEdkvO