The Tension - Passion and Logic

The Tension. . . (from July 5, 2010)

I was listening to a financial show yesterday, while waiting in the car...
One of the guys talking said something that I think may be a common misperception. 
He said,

Democrats are a party of PASSION
and
the Republicans are a party of LOGIC

It was such a revelation for me, I had to write it down because I didn't want to forget exactly what he said and the visceral reaction I felt at the time.

It's apropos that it happened on Independence day, too! 

It explains exactly why I haven't been able to identify with either party (and their misperceptions) exclusively, and why I consider myself independent. 

I reject this overgeneralization as an idea used to disparage individuals and minimize their opinions and concerns.  Passion and logic are not mutually exclusive in my life - politics included.  Any good decision that I have been able to make along the way has been a confluence of both logic and passion, rarely in equal parts.

I believe each of us has our own synergism of passion and logic.  Our unique way of interpreting and utilizing the information gathered from the world around us. 

See people as individuals... address issues as issues we all face...
Don't lazily rely on partisan rhetoric...

These are reminders to self.   

Princeton Study Concludes that American is Basically an Oligarchy

Princeton Concludes What Kind of Government America Really Has, and It's Not a Democracy   
April 16, 2014

A new scientific study from Princeton researchers Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page has finally put some science behind the recently popular argument that the United States isn't a democracy any more. And they've found that in fact, America is basically an oligarchy.

This is a familiar topic to those of us who oppose the Common Core Standards Initiative.  I've been scratching my head, literally for years, trying to understand how Common Core took hold, quietly and quickly, in America's representative Republic.  In Missouri, it became clear to me that the "initiative" capitalized fully on the top-down governance structure in our education policies and their implementation.  I believe that Missouri state statutes were violated in the adoption process, but unfortunately, there was no oversight mechanism in place to stop Common Core from the onset.

After researching the opposition to the Common Core Standards Initiative throughout the country for a number of years, there is no doubt in my mind that our American oligarchs were well aware that state legislatures were not equipped to investigate and address adoption of Common Core Standards in 2009-2010. 

Missouri Needs an Elected Board of Education #tlot #tcot #Liberty #Freedom

Back in July of 2009, I posted THIS about the adoption of Common Core in Missouri.  I was in the process of discovering that our governance structure regarding education in Missouri was incredibly top-down.  Missouri citizens and their representatives in the legislature were not even aware of Common Core, let alone the strangle hold it would place on the daily functions of our local schools and the lives of our students and their families. 

Changing the governance structure in Missouri's educational system is of utmost importance to ensure that any "initiative" like Common Core is publicly scrutinized and vetted by our education leaders, our legislators, and Missouri citizens.   

This is why I strongly support HJR 74 which would allow Missouri voters to decide on the November ballot if they would like to see their State Board of Education members ELECTED, with one coming from each of OUR congressional districts.  I think it's a FABULOUS idea!! 

If you agree, you can show your support for HJR 74 here:
http://www.libertytools.org/LibertyTools/witness/witness2.php?template=48

Since the hearing was schedule for TOMORROW NIGHT (AT 9PM!!) when few citizens can attend, it is very important to have as many witness forms completed in support of HJR as possible to present to the committee.

Fight the Good Fight!!
Lisa Jones

Legislation on Education in Missouri

Please take a few short minutes to look up your legislator’s email

and drop them a note with your opinions on the following:

 

(I SUPPORT THESE)

HB 1161 http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills141/biltxt/intro/HB1161I.htm

Establishes the Joint Committee on the Tenth Amendment

 

SB 514 http://www.senate.mo.gov/14info/BTS_Web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=27723569

Prohibits the State Board of Education, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, and school districts from implementing the Common Core State Standards

 

HB 1490 http://www.house.mo.gov/billtracking/bills141/biltxt/intro/HB1490I.htm

Prohibits the State Board of Education from adopting and implementing the standards for public schools developed by the Common Core Standards Initiative

 

(I OPPOSE THIS)

HB 1139 Cookson

http://www.house.mo.gov/billsummary.aspx?bill=HB1139&year=2014&code=R

167.227. 5.  A school district shall require a student who scores less than proficient on a statewide assessment to attend the summer school term immediately following the school term in which the student was assessed.

      

DESE “Thumbing Its Nose” at #MOLEG

Happy New Year Everyone!!

HB 2   Appropriates money for the expenses, grants, refunds, and distributions of the State Board of Education and Department of Elementary and Secondary Education                                                                             Effective Date: 8/28/2013

Section 2.050.  To the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

2  For the purpose of receiving and expending grants, donations, contracts,

3  and payments from private, federal, and other governmental

4  agencies which may become available between sessions of the

5  General Assembly provided that the General Assembly shall be

6  notified of the source of any new funds and the purpose for which

7  they shall be expended, in writing, prior to the use of said funds,

8  and further provided that no funds shall be used to implement the

9  Common Core Standards
From Federal and Other Funds………………….........$10,000,000

 

I wonder if DESE disseminated any information to districts on HB2’s restriction on Common Core implementation?  Are local school boards aware that their current practices may be in conflict with this legislation.

 

All of DESE’s math and science discretionary grants involve implementation of Common Core Standards and were not revised after passage of HB2.  The deadline for these was September 18, 2013.

http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/fedprog/discretionarygrants/Math-Science/

Page 6 of the K-6 Math Initiative (which is the same for the K-6 Science excepts it reads "National Educational Standards for Science" rather than Common Core, the ELL reads "Common Core")

C.  Use of Funds

(3) Provide follow-up training throughout the year to the academy mathematics science teachers that shall:  (a) Directly relate to the mathematics curriculum, and focus secondarily on pedagogy;  (b) Enhance the ability of the teacher to understand and use the Missouri Mathematics Grade-Level Expectations and the Common Core State standards for mathematics to develop and/or revise appropriate curricula;  (c) Train teachers to use curricula that are based on scientific research, aligned with the Missouri Mathematics Grade-Level Expectations and Common Core State Standards for mathematics, and are active learning-oriented, inquiry-based, differentiated to meet diverse student needs, and concept/content-based; 

 
 

I was also interested in this part of HB2 because high quality PD, focused on content, really is essential to professional growth in teaching. 

 

Section 2.115.  To the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

2  For the Instructional Improvement Grants Program pursuant to Title II

3  Improving Teacher Quality

From Federal Funds……………………...........................$59,348,890

 

So I googled:

DESE Instructional Improvement Grants Program Title II Improving Teacher Quality

and I found the second document had been revised in Aug 2013.  (The same month that HB2 had passed)  I find no mention of Common Core with respect to Professional Development at all in the revised document, however ALL of the high school math PD currently taking place in my district is on Common Core. 

 

This (again) leads me to believe that local school boards are not aware of the legislation.  

And then of course, we have the real kicker!!  DESE’s October 3, 2013 News Release announced the *New* Missouri Learning Standards website:  http://www.missourilearningstandards.com/  

Any confusion that may be caused by their re-labeling Common Core as Missouri Learning Standards can quickly be dispelled by following the content supports for teachers here: http://www.missourilearningstandards.com/teachers/ which lead straight back to CCSS.

 

 

Professor Milgram's Nov 4, 2013 Statement on Common Core Math Standards

Many parents across the country are currently expressing concerns over the content of their childrens' math lessons, many of which are said to be "common core" aligned.  The statement below is published with permission of Professor Milgram.  It may provide a little insight on math education issues brought to light recently due to the common core initiative. 

I believe that although the elementary math standards are an improvement over those of many states, unfortunately the focus on the "Standards for Mathematical Practice" - rather than math content - creates an avenue for unproductive folly. (yes, that's my opinion) The secondary content standards are too weak, a point that I've made many times before.

Best wishes to all parents, grandparents and teachers as they seek the truth on the best way forward in improving education for children.  Lisa Jones   

Statement of Jim Milgram, November 4, 2013

 

I don't endorse a blanket condemnation of the Common Core Math Standards since there are definite positives in the lower grade content standards.  They really are significantly better than the standards that were written by 90% of the states IN GRADES K-6 or K-7. But the problems with the overall math standards are huge, or even more than huge.

First, while some of the Mathematical Practices standards are ok, they provide a forum for the fuzzy math cranks and a path to re-approve most of the horrible math texts we found 15 or so years back and mostly got rid of then. They also provide a poor perspective on "what mathematics is" and should never have been at the beginning of the document where they give the superficial reader the impression that this is what mathematics is all about.  It isn't.

Second, the objectives of the 8 - 12 material are not what one might think they should be. The real intent appears to be a total focus on the "efficiency" aspect of Ed School dogma. Since most students will never "use" higher level math, it is mostly suppressed, except for the part that I more or less forced them to add covering Algebra II. But that material is horribly incomplete and only provides a pathway for most students that leads nowhere and prepares them for nothing but truly dead end jobs.

Third, the standards were put together too fast by McCallum and Zimba, with the obstructive tactics of Daro only designed to minimize content as far as I can tell. All three of them were amateurs at standards writing, and appear to have had little to no idea of what actually goes on in the curricula of the high achieving countries. As a result, there are too many errors and inconsistencies in the standards and exemplars themselves.

So, all in all, I judge that we would be better off if the standards would just go away.

Jim

In his first point, I believe that Professor Milgram is referring to the Open Letter to  U.S. Secretary of Education, Richard Riley, from 1999.  Check It Out Here

An Interesting Common Core Exchange

From Fordham

Common Core and CurriculumControversies

54min50sec

Question: Garrett Fryer American Youth Policy Forum

Was there ever a discussion, when you all were designing it, to implement it on a kindergarten level and letting it grow with the students as they aged on through each grade, as oppossed to implementing it with the entire school system nation wide?

Answer: Jason Zimba

This is something that states have each approached differently.  Some states have done something more like that, some states have done something less like that.  I seem to remember at one point I saw a MA plan where the grade level wasn’t the key parameter, but they had a Venn diagram, what we do now the Common Core doesn’t do, what the Common Core does that we don’t, and then what sort of overlap, where we want to do it better. In year one, we’re gonna focus on the overlap and do it better. In year two, we’ll drop things… and then in year three, we’ll add…  I got the details of that wrong, but…  my only point is that different states all approached it differently, and we may find out that some states were much wiser than others in this way.

Singapore has a long standing, high functioning system in which they not only revise their syllabus ever so often, but they do it actually on the basis of how kids do, so think about that, a performance-based loop, a feedback loop. Which is something we are taking halting steps toward, but can only image.  And so roughly every six years or so, they’ll put out tweaks to the thing.  This year I noticed that they’ve rolled out a new thing in kindergarten.

 

I wonder... How in the world can one "image" OR take "halting steps toward" creating a "high functioning system" based on a "performance-based feedback loop" when we are STARTING with a top-down DESIGN by the name of Common Core?