PRESS RELEASE: Stop the Reauthorization of ESEA

8/9/2019 PRESS RELEASE: Stop the Reauthorization of ESEA

1/8

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE.

Pennsylvanians Restoring Education

Pennsylvanians Against Common Core

Contacts:

Anita B Hoge 724-263-0474

Cheryl Boise 412-389-6896

Ryan Bannister 717-919-2122

Gen Yvette Sutton 610-507-911

Rich Felice 484-678-2236

February 9, 2015, Pennsylvanians Restoring Education, Pennsylvania Against

Common Core, Citizens of Pennsylvania, parents and students are asking

Senator Lamar Alexander to stop the REAUTHORIZATION of ESEA: Every Child

Ready for College or Career Act of 2015 which will amend No Child Left Behind .

This legislation violates federal law, the privacy of our children and families, our

civil rights, and states' rights.

SENATOR ALEXANDER,

• PARENTS WERE NOT INVITED TO TESTIFY.

• PARENTS DEMAND NEW HEARINGS AND AN INVESTIGATION ON THE IMPACT

OF THIS LEGISLATION.

• THE PUBLIC DESERVES TO KNOW THAT ESEA ELIMINATES TRUE CHOICE

[i.e., not taxpayer funded].

• THE REAUTHORIZATION OF ESEA MUST BE STOPPED UNTIL FURTHER

STUDY.

The Reauthorization of ESEA must be stopped because the provisions inherent in this

legislation will NATIONALIZE EDUCATION. 2 years of the ESEA Flexibility Waiver

have proven to the states that have accepted this waiver, exactly what the

Reauthorization will mean -- total federal control of education; no state authority, and no

local school board autonomy.

1


2/8

No one at the ESEA public hearings addressed the IES, Institute for Educational

Sciences of the National Center for Education Statistics, both of which have the

contracts for each state to initiate a personally identifiable longitudinal data system.

The grants in each state create a national ID for every child. This data collection will

be used to monitor EVERY CHILD IN THE UNITED STATES under Title I. InPennsylvania's NCES grant, this personally identifiable longitudinal system is called a

"womb to workplace" data system monitoring all children, adolescents, and adults.

The grant also includes wages, human capital, a person's worth or worthlessness to

society. The grant also includes babies with data collection of behaviors and

dispositions beginning at birth. References to the IES and the data collection is in the

ESEA bill. Source: http://abcsofdumbdown.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-greatest-christmas-present-

to.html

Senator Alexander, why has this not been discussed?

Why hasn't anyone testified to the fact that in effect the poverty guidelines, as now

allowed, are being manipulated to include ALL children in the ESEA Flexibility

Waiver, 2013, under the Title I blanket that mandates Common Core to EVERY

CHILD. (Source: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/ESEA%20Flexibility%20Request.pdf

" (5.) The requirement in ESEA section 1114(a)(1) that a school have a poverty percentage of 40

percent or more in order to operate a schoolwide program. The SEA requests this waiver so that

an LEA may implement interventions consistent with the turnaround principles or interventions

that are based on the needs of the students in the school and designed to enhance the entire

educational program in a school in any of its priority and focus schools that meet the definitions

of “priority schools” and “focus schools,” respectively, set forth in the document titled ESEA

Flexibility, as appropriate, even if those schools do not have a poverty percentage of 40 percent or

more." (emphasis mine)

Title I now has the authority to move and switch funds from one account to another.

Funds authorized for different fiscal areas, can now be transferred into Title I. Every

child being designated as Title I will necessitate that these funds be funneled toward the

states' budgets. And so Title I expands by quantum leaps, making states liable for

increased Medicaid expenditures for every child to have mental health wrap-around

services as explained below.


NAEP HAS MADE A CLAIM THAT THIS DATA COLLECTION, WHICH INCLUDES

ATTITUDES, VALUES, BELIEFS, AND DISPOSITIONS, IS TO BECOME THE

2

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/ESEA%20Flexibility%20Request.pdfhttp://abcsofdumbdown.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-greatest-christmas-present-to.html


3/8

CENSUS. WHY DOES YOUR LEGISLATION SAY SPECIFICALLY THAT THE IES,

NATIONAL CENTER FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS WILL MONITOR ALL TITLE I

PROGRAMS, THAT IS EVERY CHILD IN THE UNITED STATES? EVERY

INDIVIDUAL, INCLUDING TEACHERS, PRINCIPALS, AND SUPERINTENDENTS,

WILL HAVE A UNIQUE NATIONAL ID MONITORED UNDER TITLE I THAT WASIMPLEMENTED UNDER THESE NCES LONGITUDINAL GRANTS TO THE STATES.


No one at the public hearings explained INTERVENTIONS FOR "AT RISK" CHILDREN

and how that definition would apply under IDEA, Individuals With Disabilities

Education Act, to IDENTIFY ALL CHILDREN AS "AT RISK" UNDER TITLE I WITH A

MENTAL HEALTH DISORDER.


The social, emotional, and behavioral dispositions were added to the COMMON CORE,

now called College and Career Ready Standards by the Chief State School Officers,

CCSSO, under the cover of "CITIZENSHIP." What is the definition for NAEP

CITIZENSHIP? Taken from Pennsylvania "Getting Inside the EQA Inventory ,"

(Source: ED 103 488, Russell, Nolan; 1974)

" A review of literature revealed that the National Assessment of Educational Progress developed

nine general citizenship objectives. The criterion for inclusion of any one objective was its relativeimportance to society as agreed upon by a committee of scholars and lay people.

"These national objectives were used to provide a frame of reference for what was to be measured.

Objectives in the factual domain such as (a) knowing structure of government and (b)

understanding problems of international relations were not considered in developing the scale.

"To assess citizenship, a behavior-referenced model incorporating elements related to the

psychological notion of threshold is used. In reference to citizenship, threshold refers to that set

of conditions necessary to bring about the desired responses. Thus by introducing conditions of

reward and punishment we are able to determine the cutoff levels at which the student will displaypositive behavior . In this way it is possible to assess not only the students' predisposition to

behave in a manner consistent with responsible citizenship but also to provide some measure of

the intensity of that predisposition across a wide spectrum of situations." (emphasis mine)

3


4/8

These standards were scored toward "group goals," "group actions," and

"group efforts as followers" (pp 19-21) (emphasis mine), even though that particular

"positive" goal or action might very well be morally wrong.

The definition for adapting to change was explained as, "methods of coping with freedom."

(Source: Getting Inside the EQA Inventory , Cover; ED 103 488, Russell, Nolan; 1974) ( emphasis

mine)

"The inventory provided information on..........(3) Proportion of the student body

who demonstrated "minimum positive attitudes." (Source: Getting Inside the EQA

Inventory: Grade 11. Russell, Nolan; 1975, Document Resume; ED 109 199)

NAEP HAS CALLED FOR MEASURING THESE NON-COGNITIVE, 21ST CENTURY

SKILLS. (Source: May,2013, http://www.nagb.org/content/nagb/assets/documents/what-we-do/

quarterly-board-meeting-materials/2013-08/tab11-saturday-board-policy-discussion.pdf)

THIS IS COMMON CORE! (It doesn't matter which name is being used.) The individual

mandate filters down to the individual child to force conformity to these standards. This

is a power shift away from local control. These non-academic standards were

added in the ESEA Waivers. Is the testing of attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions

through the NAEP in the 12th grade, the pivotal criteria for graduation? Is this the

government diploma for college and career readiness for students "without the

need for remediation?" Has the government defined that no child will move forward

without this re-education? How does the federal government SCORE ETHICAL

JUDGEMENT? HONESTY? INTERPERSONAL SKILLS? American parents refuse to

have their children used as guinea pigs with this type of research and maltreatment

PENNSYLVANIA VIOLATED FEDERAL LAW, THE PROTECTION OF PUPIL RIGHTS

AMENDMENT, PPRA, IN THE PAST STATE ASSESSMENT, EQA, Educational

Quality Assessment, FOR MEASURING ATTITUDES, VALUES, BELIEFS, AND

DISPOSITIONS. ON October 22, 2014, former Governor Corbett withdrew these non-

academic controversial Interpersonal Skills Standards that had re-surfaced, because

the Pennsylvania Department of Education was violating federal law that was enactedto protect our children. This is the expansion of mental health into the schools

through ESEA. The ESEA Flexibility Waivers mandate that states implement these

non-academic social and emotional standards. The interventions in the ESEA

legislation mandate that mental health "disabilities" must be identified and remediated in

every child to the NAEP group "minimum positive attitude."

4

http://www.nagb.org/content/nagb/assets/documents/what-we-do/quarterly-board-meeting-materials/2013-08/tab11-saturday-board-policy-discussion.pdf


5/8

We must point out that it is illegal to re-educate and assess students in these sensitive

areas, and your legislation must provide informed written parental consent for EVERY

child in the United States. Otherwise, every state department of education would be

violating federal law, and in Pennsylvania, state policy. This non-academic mental

health agenda is blatant in ESEA legislation and therefore, in fact, it may very well beconsidered child endangerment for parents to knowingly opt their children into this

maltreatment and illegal activity. Does a helmet even yet exist that would protect our

children from "mind concussion?" ESEA legislation violates federal law.

But yet, no one testified about the expansion of mental health standards and Medicaid

to fund these interventions within our neighborhood schools. State budgets will be

crushed under this debt when SCHOOLS are able to bill Medicaid for ALL THESE

TITLE I "AT RISK CHILDREN." Remember now, that EVERY CHILD will be identified

as "at risk." No one testified about the impact of mental health wrap- around services at school by billing Medicaid, although these services are mandated in the ESEA bill.


The entire affective domain, testing and remediating values and dispositions, will be

codified under this ESEA federal legislation. This is a direct violation of the Protection

of Pupils Rights Amendment, PPRA. The resolution of the Hoge complaint, 1990, filed

against the Pennsylvania Department of Education, EQA, determined that testing and

scoring the attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions of the children in Pennsylvania

was in violation of the PPRA. The use of the test broke the law. It must be noted that

this illegal activity was underhandedly DIRECTED BY THE NAEP. THE NAEP WANTS

THE PSYCHOMETRIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ON OUR CHILDREN IN THE

UNITED STATES. This NAEP CENSUS will include all data (psychological and

demographic) on our children, and their families, their teachers, principals, and

superintendents. This is a blatant violation of privacy and Civil Rights.


The parents in Pennsylvania can prove that these mental health interventions are being

implemented through federal ESEA Title I and IDEA, Individuals with Disabilities in

Education Act guidelines. These behavioral interventions and the data system to identify

and monitor our children were exposed in our Press Release to Governor Corbett last

December. (Source: http://abcsofdumbdown.blogspot.com/2014/11/pa-citizens-ask-gov-corbett-for-

data.html) Parents will not let this child maltreatment stand. We demand that the

5

http://abcsofdumbdown.blogspot.com/2014/11/pa-citizens-ask-gov-corbett-for-data.html


6/8

tracking and trafficking of personally identifiable psychological data on our children's

attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions STOP! The exact same wording for

interventions and identifying children through anecdotal screenings throughout your bill,

are the exact words in our Press Release.

Correspondence dated December 29, 2014 from former Governor Corbett's

General Counsel, says, in effect: we (the Governor's office and the Pennsylvania

Department of Education) are collecting the personally identifiable information on

Pennsylvania children and sharing it with others, as permitted by the recent changes in

FERPA, Family Education Rights in Privacy Act and IDEA, Individuals with Disabilities

Education Act as follows:

"Please be assured that individual student data managed by PDE is in

accordance with state and federal laws, including The Family Educational Rightsand Privacy Act of 1974 (FERPA), 20 U.S.C. 1232g, and it's implementing

regulations found at 34 CFR 300.123 and 300.622, and Pennsylvania statutes,

regulations, and policies governing the confidentiality of, and access to,

students' educational records." (emphasis mine)

Now, Senator Alexander, YOU want to CODIFY this data collection and these

psychological interventions into federal law, exactly as had been foreshadowed under

the ESEA Flexibility Waiver and President Obama's Executive Order, EO 12866, that

neutered FERPA, REMOVING ALL PROTECTIONS OF PRIVACY. Your bill advocates

the collection of this personally identifiable information and allows the re-disclosure of

this personal data to 3rd party contractors -- data which continues on to be tracked and

trafficked into the National Center of Education Statistics, IES, data collection.


Has anyone explained this list of items below in the ESEA LEGISLATION or,

perhaps someone can answer, why these interventions are there? Please refer to

the hundreds of pages of "at risk interventions" which expand the definitions of a

disability. Why does ESEA legislation mandate the re-education and remediation

of our children's, including babies', attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions in

line with the NAEP "trait identifications" as described in the Gordon

Commission? (Source: http://www.gordoncommission.org/rsc/pdfs/

20958_gordon_c_msn_assmt.pdf) SENATOR ALEXANDER, you are creating financial

incentives for children, even babies, to be labeled with these definitions for a

6

http://www.gordoncommission.org/rsc/pdfs/20958_gordon_c_msn_assmt.pdf


7/8

mental health disorder -- THROUGH THE FEEDBACK CONTROL LOOP

ACCORDING TO THE RESPONSIVE/NON-RESPONSIVE intervention methods and

manipulations. This data is entered on their permanent electronic education file

that can take on a life of its own on the Internet. (Source: Data-Based Individualization: A

Framework for Intensive Intervention; http://www.intensiveintervention.org/sites/default/files/DBI%20a%20Framework%20for%20Intensive%20Intervention.pdf) Note: HIPAA protections do

not cover any educational records.

• Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, PBIS

• Functional Behavioral Assessments

• Response to Interventions, RTI

• Multi-Tiered System of Supports, MTSS

• Specialized Student Support, SSS

• Student Assistance Programs, SAP

• Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, IDEA

• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act

• Behavioral Health Rehabilitation Services

• Mental Health Wrap Around Services

• 21st Century Community Hub Schools contracted with outside mental health providers

• Promise Neighborhoods, Promise Schools, same as 21st Century Hubs

• NCES Exposure of the National ID- Alignment of ALL 50 states

• NAEP/NCES data collection creating the census- National ID identifying ALL CHILDREN as Title I

• Exposure of FERPA-allowing data trafficking our personally Identifiable information

• Title I funds "following the child"

• Choice funds (Title I) for all private and religious schools• Expansion of charter schools with no elected boards

• Destruction of local neighborhood schools and Representative government usurping our vote, our voice

through an un-elected board, and removing our taxes from the local level to a regional investment

workforce board, or to the state.

Senator Alexander, the states' rights issue has not been discussed at the hearings.

Title I funds "follow the child" going directly to every child, bypassing state

government. No one at the public hearings explained that CHOICE, TITLE I FUNDS

"FOLLOWING THE CHILD" would be used to destroy the financial base of public

schools which have elected school boards and are funded by local tax dollars.

Furthermore, Senator Alexander, there are 60 pages in your ESEA legislation that

would expand CHARTER SCHOOLS OPERATING WITHOUT BOARDS ELECTED

BY THE TAXPAYERS AS THEIR REPRESENTATIVES. THIS IS A SET UP FOR

CHARTER SCHOOL TAKEOVER OF ALL EDUCATION. Yet, no one explained HOW

7

http://www.intensiveintervention.org/sites/default/files/DBI%20a%20Framework%20for%20Intensive%20Intervention.pdf


8/8

these Title I funds "following" a CHOICE, TITLE I CHILD will impact the intrusion into

private and religious schools, which will be forced into all of the mandates that come

with Common Core implementation and EVERY CHILD identified and funded through

Title I. This has been done behind closed doors and accomplished very deceptively in

the way ESEA has been fast tracked. THIS ESEA REAUTHORIZATION willNATIONALIZE EDUCATION BYPASSING LOCAL CONTROL AND STATE CONTROL

ELIMINATING LOCAL REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT, THE HALLMARK OF A

FREE SOCIETY.

Senator Alexander, there has been no discussion of these issues at your

hearings.

The truth of this legislation must be revealed. Stop this Reauthorization of ESEA.

8

PRESS RELEASE: Stop the Reauthorization of ESEA

Documents

Transcript of PRESS RELEASE: Stop the Reauthorization of ESEA