Say NO to COMMON CORE! HOW IT HAPPENED Common Core Table of Contents Introduction How it happened Who is behind Common Core? UNESCO Agenda 21/Sustainable Development The Usual Suspects Bill Gates Maurice Strong London Conference on Eugenics Experts say ... Parents are saying Data Mining Videos In their own words! Take Action Links & Resources News & Updates How did this happen?           How much did your state get in the "competition" for funding?   CC in Washington state? When did your school apply?     Trying to make more available data - references students carrying around "Data Backpacks" and portfolios.       Electronic Aids Lie Detectors?                        Top of Page

←  Back Common Core Introduction Education without Representation Who is behind Common Core? Next  → Common Core How did this happen? Pay attention to the dates and reoccurance of names, organizations ... Gallup polls say 62% of parents haven't even heard of Common Core. If it's such a good idea then why does the government need to hide then force it upon us? January 2009 - President Obama sworn into office. February 2009 - $4.5B was slid into the Stimulus Bill to use to coerce states into implementing CC. It worked;    states took it but, now, the cost for a state to get CC working in the system is much more. it will take nearly 16B to fully implement it. February 2009 - Stimulus Bill (Obama’s piggy bank/bypass congress) $4.35 Billion to federal Dept. of Ed. (CNN Interview – Arne Duncan states he wants to be a catalyst for CC) Federal Dept. of Ed created “race to the Top” Competition (RTTT Phase 1 Nov. 2009 Apps due Jan. 2010) as an incentive to submit applications for Common Core funding. To successfully apply, a state had to agree to the terms "sight unseen". (They may deny this) but, the 200 page long applications were due Jan 2010. The draft was not even released until the middle of March 2010. In the section where they talk about new standards it does not say “Common Core” by name, it just says “New Standards” and says you will agree to adopt [those] new standards. BLUE: Didn't take CC RED: have legislation to repeal or suspend CC Blue States didn’t take CC. Hawaii, Texas, Nebraska, Minnesota, and Virginia.  The bad news about TX is that in 85% of their schools are currently dealing with CSCOPE, which is every bit, as bad, or worse, than CC. Red states have legislation to repeal or to suspend it … Idaho, Utah, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Kansas,  Misouri, Michigan, Indiana, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, Florida.    The rest are still asleep. There are a lot of people that are waking up, fighting CC.  Legislation is needed to rid of CC. In this case, a lot of voices would wake them up. Do our legislators have a clue about CC as it was slipped in under the radar? Interesting fact about the application process:  45 states + DC applies. Only 11 states + DC won money. All states committed to a new standard just by applying whether they won the money or not. Tennessee was awarded $500 million in phase 1 of RTTT (apps due by Jan. 2010, draft of standards not released until March 2010) TN scored 444.2 points and came in 2nd out of 16 states that applied in Phase 1. (485 = 15 for STEM=5000 possible points). Accepting new standards (70 pts/14%) and the database (47 pts/9.4%) to track children, their family and teachers was worth 117 pts (23.4%). While Improving Poor Performing Schools earned 50 pts (10%) *Database/Collection/"Datamining" The section on the application for  Implementing CC and the database that goes along is more important than “Improving Core Performing Schools”. Technology Proposed to Track Your Kids in Schools Electronic Aids - Lie Detectors? The link shown was disabled the day after this photo was posted. It is still on the Dept. of Ed. Website, burried deep. The document which includes this infomation (page 44/62) was retrieved (from the Dept. of Ed site) and posted at: "Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance: Critical Factors for Success in the 21st Century" A state got 14% of the total points just for accepting the new standards.The section for the database was (47 pts/9.4%) of the total score.  When the two of them come together, (the database where they’re going to track your children and their families from Pre-K until workforce) is a matched set. Total 117 pts., or 23.4% of the total score, just because you agree to accept the standards and the database that went along with it. But if you look at the section on the application called “Improving Core Performing Schools” that sect earned 50 pts/10%. What that tells you is implementing CC and the database that goes along is more important than improving poor performing schools. Some states changed laws in order to increase their chances of winning RTTT money. In 2009, Tennessee passed a law to increase the number of Charter Schools from 50 to 90. General (Charter Schools) =55 pts. (11%) again worth more than Improving Poor Performing Schools. “Education First” assisted in all facets of the RTTT applicaton process in TN. They list Achieve, Bill & Melinda Gates and Wm. & Flora Hewlett Fountation (supports Open Society [George Soros], Nature Conservancy, Joyce Foundation, and are deeply embedded in Agenda21 projects as clients). "EF" also supports the goals of the UN Education First Initiative (Goal #3 fostering global citizenship through education) but stated they were not affiliated. There is a UN initiative that has a list of goals. Personally contact them. Will they say they support the goals? Are they affiliated? In Phase 1 RTTT in MA (who had an “A” rating in math and language arts) did not agree to adopt CCSI. They ranked 13 out of 16. In Phase 2, they changed nothing about their applicaton except they agreet to adopt CCSE and they were rated #1 in phase 2 This drives home how significant and how much weight agreeing those standards played in winning RRTT top competiton. ←  Back Common Core Introduction Education without Representation Who is behind Common Core? Next  →