Tag Archives: Council of Chief State School Officers

Pearson’s Creepy Vision For the Future of Education Confirms Common Core Fears


PearsonSchoolofThought

By Danette Clark

Pearson Education, an official partner in the development of resources and tests for the Common Core State Standards, released a video series last week to share their ‘vision for the future of learning’.

Although the technology shown by Pearson is impressive, these videos confirm the fears of many teachers about what will be expected of them and many parents regarding intrusive data mining of their children’s personal information.

In these videos, educators’ teaching styles are monitored by real-time cameras in every classroom and evaluated on the use of specific points of instruction. It goes without saying that dictating specific teaching strategies makes for big problems, especially if those strategies are used for indoctrination purposes. Just look to Texas for testimony of teachers that say they were reprimanded and threatened with dismissal if they failed to teach in the exact manner directed by CSCOPE.

Pearson also confirms (again) Common Core’s global agenda as students are shown participating in ‘global learning’ activities much like the Model United Nations program I wrote about here (which Pearson actively supports).

This vision of the future also entails teachers and school administrators having instant access to an individualized schedule on each student — not just an in-school/class schedule, but a schedule of the student’s activities and whereabouts outside of school.

In the video, Victoria’s Story: School of Thought–A Vision for the Future of Learning, Pearson demonstrates ease of access to students’ personal lives by showing a teacher instantaneously pulling Victoria’s schedule and sharing with another teacher that Victoria has soccer practice after school that time of year.

While it’s not clear from the video whether Victoria’s soccer practice is a school activity or part of an athletic organization not affiliated with the school, Pearson has shown that they believe educators should have knowledge of all extra-curricular activities students participate in.

For example, Pearson documents like this one (Creating a Classroom Environment That Promotes Positive Behavior) discuss the importance of evaluating data on a student’s after-school activities and other factors of the child’s life at home and in the community.

While this may be necessary for  students with severe behavior problems or a criminal record, the student with the ‘behavior problem’ referred to in Creating a Classroom Environment That Promotes Positive Behavior is a child who simply cannot keep still and talks out of turn.

Although Pearson apparently believes the more information the better, many parents would rightfully view this as a threat to their children’s privacy and safety, especially considering that student data is now being shared and sold all over the country.

FERPA laws that were put in place long ago to protect the privacy of student information were recently revised by the Obama administration to allow access to student data by third parties without parental consent.

The U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics provides a data model (the National Education Data Model (NEDM)) listing hundreds of very specific individual data points of information on children that they believe “all education stakeholders” need for “effective instruction of students and superior leadership of schools”.

The list of data points currently includes bus stop times, bus stop description, nickname, letters of commendation from any employer or community organization, any medals/awards for athletic or academic achievement, place of residence after the student graduates or withdraws from school, and a detailed reason for absences (family activities or vacation, family emergency, religious observance, etc.).

Data points that were recently scrubbed from the National Education Data Model due to public outcry over their level of intrusiveness included blood type, eye and hair color, birth marks, and whether or not the student was born premature.

The National Education Data Model was created through a partnership between the U.S. Department of Education (as funder) and the Common Core State Standards’ very-own Council of Chief State School Officers (as coordinator).

According to Pearson, the School of Thought videos present “a vision of the future that integrates technology, neuroscience, and educational psychology into everyday life to make anytime, anywhere learning possible”.

Take notice of those words — ‘neuroscience’ and ‘psychology’.

The narrator of Victoria’s Story, Pearson’s own Jeff Borden, eerily appears around the corner to Victoria’s bedroom in the video and explains that students’ learning styles and needs will be constantly analyzed so educators will know “the time of day, part of the week, and the season of the year when each student is most productive”.

So what kind of neuroscience and educational psychology is Pearson referring to for use in the constant analyzing of student learning and to know the time of day a student is most productive?

The Department of Education document, Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance: Critical Factors for Success in the 21st Century, recommends evaluating students’ emotions, anxiety levels, and physiological traits using neuroscience devices like computers or tablets that record facial expression. Other devices recommended will monitor students’ brain wave patterns, skin conductance, heart rate variability, posture, and eye movement.

Get ready tax payers — if Common Core isn’t stopped, you will foot the bill for highly advanced devices that will be used to spy on America’s children 24 hours a day.

Advertisements

CSCOPE Curriculum Designer Employed by CCSSO Partner to Aid in Implementing Common Core


grantwiggins

By Danette Clark

An update and correction to this post can be found below.

Grant Wiggins, one of eight designers of curriculum, standards and instruction of the pro-communist Texas CSCOPE curriculum, also provides professional development to aid educators in implementing the national Common Core State Standards.

Pearson, the education service company widely known for publishing textbooks, has partnered with the Council of Chief State School Officers in providing training and other resources to states implementing Common Core.

Through the ‘Pearson Common Core Institute’, Wiggins provides instruction via several Pearson Common Core webinar videos.

In one such webinar, Wiggins discusses “how issues of backward transfer relate to the Common Core”.

‘Backward transfer’ (also commonly referred to as ‘backward design’ or  ‘planning backwards’) is part of the Understanding by Design® framework for curriculum, assessment, and learning created by Wiggins and co-author, Jay McTighe, also a designer of CSCOPE.

As explained here and here, the Coalition of Essential Schools (CES) is the Bill Ayers backed progressive education reform movement behind both CSCOPE and Common Core. Linda Darling Hammond, developer of both CSCOPE and Common Core, has worked to implement CES reform for many years.

Grant Wiggins has worked with the Coalition of Essential Schools for many years, studying CES method and pedagogy, and incorporating them into the creation of his own curriculum and instruction design for use in CES schools.

A staple of the CES reform model has long been the use of ‘essential questions’ in identifying desired results of teacher instruction. Stage one of Wiggins and McTighe’s backward design process is identifying essential questions.

In 2011 and 2012, the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) partnered with ASCD (the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development) to hold statewide summits in several states on the implementation of Common Core.

Wiggins and McTighe’s Understanding by Design® was originally published by ASCD. Read about Texas ASCD’s involvement with the Coalition of Essential Schools and CSCOPE here and here.

Also, read more about Wiggins and others behind the Coalition of Essential Schools at Name Names — The People Behind the Largest Progressive Indoctrination Movement in the U.S.

Update / Correction — CSCOPE Curriculum Designer Employed by CCSSO Partner to Aid in Implementing Common Core.

In response to a couple of inquiries and comments as to whether Grant Wiggins is actually a ‘designer’ of CSCOPE, I decided to look further into Wiggins’ involvement to be certain that I’m not misleading or providing false information.

Although the link I provided in the original post names Wiggins and several others under the title “Beginning and Background of CSCOPE”, it does also say “Research Base” directly above the list of ‘designer’ and ‘developer’ names.

Someone pointed out that they believe this means the CSCOPE development team, after researching ‘best practice’ designs and strategies, chose to use those of Wiggins, McTighe, and others listed in the linked document, for the creation of CSCOPE — not that Wiggins directly contributed to CSCOPE by writing curriculum or designing lesson plans.

That makes perfect sense, and I admit that the document I chose to link to doesn’t effectively back up my claim that Wiggins is ‘one of eight designers… of CSCOPE’.

However, in light of information evidencing Wiggins’ involvement in professional development training for Texas educators both before and after CSCOPE was implemented, coupled with the fact that Wiggins and McTighe’s Understanding by Design® framework for curriculum, assessment, and learning was directly incorporated into the design of CSCOPE, I think it would be safe to say that Wiggins had a hand in the design of CSCOPE, and further add that it appears he had a hand in its implementation as well.

With over 1,600 lesson plans at any given time (some conveniently disappearing) and rumors of plagiarism, who can say for certain whose lesson plans or content is being provided through CSCOPE?

If CSCOPE was created using Wiggins’ design framework and he provides professional development to Texas educators that use his design framework, why would it be out of the question for CSCOPE to contain lesson plans created by Wiggins?

The sample lesson below uses ‘questions as curriculum’ and was created by Wiggins and McTighe. Compare this to the CSCOPE lesson that referred to the Boston Tea Party as an act of terrorism.

WigginsBostonTeaParty

This lesson plan looks like something that could have been used to teach students at Flour Bluff Intermediate School in Texas that the U.S. may have been a target for terrorism on 9/11 because we hurt other countries by making bad decisions.

WigginsHistoryLesson

More ‘essential questions‘ from Wiggins and McTighe:

• Was George Washington any different from Palestinian terrorists trying to protect their country?

• Was Jefferson a hypocrite? Did he really think of a slave as a sub-human while writing the Declaration of Independence?

Here’s an essential question — With Wiggins acting on behalf of the CCSSO and Pearson to aid educators in implementing Common Core, how can we not expect lessons like these to become the national standard?