The Constitution of the United States of America. Bill of Rights ARTICLES IN ADDITION TO, AND AMENDMENTS OF, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PROPOSED BY CONGRESS, AND ...
Posted by Dottie MacQueen
Posted by Dottie MacQueen
From news service reports via EAG news.org
CHEYENNE, Wy. – Perhaps one of the most disturbing – and unexplained – facets of Common Core national standards is the government’s push to obtain highly personal information on young students. Why does the government need to know a student’s height and weight, along with the time the bus picks him or her up in the morning? Or their religious affiliation or blood sugar levels? No one seems to be explaining, but that’s not stopping parents and taxpayers from asking questions. Here’s a letter from one parent, via the Casper Star-Tribune:
My intent is to inform you about “P20.” P stands for preschool and 20 stands for 20 years of age. Those are the years that our children will be monitored without parental consent. Nearly all of us have heard of HIPAA – the health information privacy act, but how many of us are familiar with FERPA – the educational equivalent? Only it’s not so equivalent.
On Jan. 12, 2012, the laws changed so that there are 11 ways personal identifiable information can be shared without a parent’s consent. Some of this information includes, but is not limited to: blood type, weight, family’s base wage, religious affiliation, blood sugar levels. When you are filling out information on your child for school and include his or her Social Security number, your rights are taken. In fact, the Social Security Administration does not want you to give away their Social Security Number. The National Center for Primary Education does. Why? It is part of the Core Curriculum Standards. They want to be able to track students from state to state and to improve student academic achievement and close achievement gaps. So? Except that FERPA supersedes HIPAA and can share health information with anyone who has “legitimate educational interests.” Legitimate is not defined.
The new buzzword for sharing information is “interoperability.” Also look for the terms “human capital” and “stakeholders.” Human capital means your child. Dehumanizing isn’t it? Stakeholders are those that have any interest in your child’s information – any interest. One of these stakeholders is Google. You may have heard that they mine data to make your searches easier and to produce ads that will appeal to you based on your searches.
The Oklahoma P20 report from 2009 states in part: “Create linkages between and among data systems so data can be transferred across systems and among interested parties to address questions that cut across levels of educational system and agencies.” It does not address who the interested parties are or what agencies.
Posted by Dottie MacQueen
Substitutes a worship of the Earth, Gaia, for the worship of God, creator of the universe and the instructor of moral behavior for mankind
It is no accident that April 22, Earth Day, is also the birth date of Vladimir Lenin, an acolyte of Karl Marx, the lunatic who invented communism as an alternative to capitalism.
Earth Day is naked communism.
To begin, it substitutes a worship of the Earth, Gaia, for the worship of God, creator of the universe and the instructor of moral behavior for mankind.
The Earth does not demand a moral code of personal behavior. Indeed, the lesson it teaches is “the survival of the fittest “and an indifference to suffering. The “natural events” mankind fears most all involve the potential for significant loss of life and for injury.
The Earth is a beautiful place, but it is utterly merciless. Man has learned to adapt to it and, by adapt, I mean to use its resources to build shelter and protection from it, to plant and harvest crops from it, and to domesticate some of its species while hunting and fishing for others for food.
Earth Day postulates that man is the cause of harm to Earth by virtue of his cities, his highways, his use of its sources of energy, and even the garbage that results from the normal course of maintaining life. For centuries mankind routinely burned and buried garbage. Now we are told we must separate and recycle it. We are told that everything plastic is bad even though it is one of the great inventions of modern times.
Communism is a litany of murder and oppression
Communism reached its zenith in the last century. Its imposition in the former Soviet Union, in China, and elsewhere is a litany of murder and oppression. In the 20th century, a minimum 110 million people died as a result. It enslaves mankind wherever it can.
Environmentalism has been built on the foundation laid by communism because both exist to control everyone’s life. They are opposite sides of the same coin, both are opposed to the ownership of private property and both regard man as state property to be drained of his earnings through taxation.
Environmentalism’s preferred method is coercion and the mechanism for this is government.
While America was established to ensure “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”, environmentalism exists to exert more and more control over our lives by limiting our choices, our liberty. Environmentalism redefines happiness as doing without the advances of science and commerce that protects and prolongs our lives.
There is nothing voluntary about environmentalism.
There is nothing voluntary about having to recycle. There is nothing voluntary about having to fill your tank with a mixture of gasoline and ethanol. There is nothing voluntary about the imposition of mileage standards for cars. There is nothing voluntary about losing access to beneficial chemicals that control countless insect and rodent pests that spread disease and destroy property.
While the vast majority of Americans clamor for the government to permit access to our nation’s vast natural resources of coal, oil, and natural gas it stands in the way, claiming always that drilling and mining pose a threat to the environment. At the same time it acquires more and more of the nation’s landmass to deter access and economic growth.
Greatest hoax of the modern era, “global warming.”
In the name of the environment, the U.S. government is set to impose a Cap-and-Trade law on Americans that has no basis whatever in science and is, in fact, based on the greatest hoax of the modern era, “global warming.”
Cap-and-Trade will tax energy use and directly control how much energy individual Americans can use to heat or cool their homes through “smart grid” technology controlled by the utilities, not the consumer.
Environmentalism is the reason the U.S. has not had a single new refinery or nuclear plant built since the 1970s. Think about that every time you drive your car or turn on the lights.
The spread of endless environmental propaganda has been taken up by the nation’s mainstream media and has infiltrated the nation’s schools through its textbooks and other means of instruction. Earth Day will be the occasion for an orgy of media coverage.
Just as communism failed the former Soviet Union and just as Red China abandoned communism as the model for its economy, environmentalism continues its relentless quest to deter economic growth and security in America. It is the infrastructure of a New World Order.
Do not celebrate Earth Day. Denounce it.
Posted by Dottie MacQueen
On her site, Defining Conservative, Cherilyn Eagar connects the dots by linking Common Core State Standards to anti-Christian, redistribution of wealth, pantheistic, and environmentally extreme Marxists. These Marxists have saturated the United Nations. As a side note, this should be of no surprise to anyone since known Communist, Alger Hiss, was the founder of the United Nations.
The education arm of the United Nations, UNESCO, has its fingerprints all over Common Core.
Anyone who has studied the insidious Agenda 21, which is the brainchild of the United Nations, immediately recognized the Common Core, as another step of Agenda 21 – capturing our children’s minds and souls by dumbing them down to make it so much easier for totalitarians to control our country.
Make no mistake – the Common Core State Standards has nothing to do with improving school curriculum for American students. It is all about dumbing down and controlling young minds!
Ms. Eagar’s excellent article follows:
UNESCO – Common Core
In 1984 the Leftist UNESCO published a document on developing instruction in a common core. Here it is:
From the Grandfather of Common Core, Robert Muller, founder of the “World Core Curriculum”
The goal is to bring all educational standards under one common roof of compliance and global academic, philosophical and religious sameness. That requires removing the “extremes” of fundamentalist and evangelical religion, including those religions that have strong missionary outreaches to non-Christians and that teach the biblical principles of marriage and the sanctity of Life. In order to do that, certain compromises must be made, and this is the essence of the Common Core curriculum.
The curriculum must be strictly secular and equitable in its teaching of the nations and the world. Redistribution of the wealth is the standard because there is no private property, only collective ownership of the planet. Therefore, the common core curriculum must take a pantheistic approach and while excluding one form of extremism (e.g. radical Islam) it embraces another: extremist environmental policy. It’s been a very sneaky, and all too compelling, approach by leading marxists in this movement, Maurice Strong and Mikhail Gorbechev. Muller is a fellow traveler, a spiritual marxist who has re-written the Book of Genesis positioning the UN as the savior of the world in his book The New Genesis, featured at the right on my recommended books list. He blends the social gospel with the New Testament and entirely misinterprets the teachings of Christianity, a popular trend in some of today’s churches. Read a portion of Robert Muller’s letter describing his vision of a global common core:
Robert Muller, Former UN Assistant Secretary General
“In the middle of my life I discovered that the only true, objective education I had received was from the United Nations where the earth, humanity, our place in time and the worth of the human being were the overriding concerns.
So at the request of educators I wrote the World Core Curriculum, the product of the United Nations, the meta-organism of human and planetary evolution….
Posted by Dottie MacQueen
Charlotte Iserbyte, author of The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America
Author of The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America, Charlotte Iserbyte, served as Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education during Ronald Reagan’s first Administration. It was during this time that Ms. Iserbyte discovered the major technology initiative that would control the curriculum in America’s classrooms. Ms. Iserbyte became a whistleblower on this initiative and ultimately lost her job because of this.
Charlotte Iserbyte has been warning people for the past almost 3 decades about the major problems in American education brought on by the Department of Education. Now she is warning people about the Common Core State Standards. If Americans had heeded her warnings before now, perhaps our schools would not be in the dire straits they are in today.
We don’t want Common Core even if it teaches the Ten Commandments. The reason is this: Common Core is a product of the federal government and no matter what kind of curriculum/assessment it imposes on us, it can be changed at the whim of the federal government (The United States Department of Education in bed with OECD and UNESCO).
If one wants to stop Common Core, one MUST abolish the U.S. Dept. of Education and probably all the state depts. of education which are funded by the federal Department and which take their orders from the federal Department of Education.
This is what I called for on the back of my little “Back to Basics Reform or OBE, Skinnerian International Curriculum, 1985, boycotted by ALL major conservative groups.
When I blew the whistle on Project BEST, Better Education Skills through Technology” grant which put computer software into all the states (all subjects) I was fired from my position as Senior Policy Advisor, U.S. Dept. of Education.
Changing the Common Core is like ripping all the tentacles off an octopus, but leaving the head.
Ronald Reagan did us in when he did not fulfill his promise to abolish the U.S. Dept. of Education.
Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt
Former Senior Policy Advisor
U.S. Department of Education
Posted by Dottie MacQueen
While one of the two Chechen suspects in the Boston marathon bombings dead and the other on the loose, Glenn Beck issued the U.S. Government an ultimatum – come clean or we’ll expose the truth. Beck hinted at what he is prepared to reveal when he referred to Saudi national Abdul Rahman Ali Issa Al-Salimi Al-Harbi as a ‘bad, bad, bad man’.
Here at Shoebat.com, Walid has confirmed Alharbi’s unequivocal and undeniable familial ties to Al-Qaeda. As leftist Americans scream, ‘guilt by association’, they prove themselves clueless about the Saudi clan mentality.
Beck also claimed to know of six U.S. congressmen who can corroborate his claims and says that unless the Feds tell the truth, he will expose it on Monday, April 22nd.
Incidentally, in the clip above, Beck said that ICE attempted to say that Alharbi wasn’t even a witness to the bombing. If that’s true, then who are these three Saudis who were?
If the one on the far right in the photo below is not Alharbi, does that mean there were four Saudis at the scene (that’s if you don’t count the female Saudi doctor named Nura Khalid Saleh al-Ajaji – that would make five):
If the man on the far right is Alharbi, it would mean that he got a shave before this photo was taken. Again, if it’s not him (and if Beck is right about him being ‘bad, bad, bad’), who are the three men above?
Posted by Dottie MacQueen
Mary Grabar posted this article on her site, Dissident Prof, on April 3, 2013 regarding an upcoming panel discussion that took place on April 10.
The topic of the discussion was Trade Books and the Common Core. One of the panelists was Stanford radical history professor, Marc Aronson.
Ms. Grabar connects the dots by tying Marc Aronson and other leftist players to the Common Core gravy train.
As usual, it’s all about the money and indoctrinating children with the politically radical viewpoint.
Common Core: “Foundational Texts”
Why is Marc Aronson, radical history professor and liar about communism, J. Edgar Hoover, and the Cold War presented as a panelist at the April 10 Publishers Weekly Discussion Series, Trade Books and the Common Core: Where Do They Meet?
He is one of the many radical Common Core entrepreneurs that I wrote about in my Accuracy in Media report, “Terrorist Professor Bill Ayers and Obama’s Federal School Curriculum.” Aronson is part of Stanford University’s “Reading Like a Historian Project,” supposedly intended to make students more excited about history, but really intended to make them radically skeptical of our nation’s history of exceptionalism. Stanford University, of course, is the academic home of Linda Darling-Hammond, close associate of Bill Ayers.
Stanford seems to be producing a lot of material for Common Core (which is also promoted by the PBS Education site), like Reading Like a Historian published by Teachers College Press, also publisher of many of Ayers’s so-called “education” books. The catalogue description includes a promotional blurb by Darling-Hammond.
To see what “Teaching Like a Historian” is supposed to look like watch this video from The Teaching Channel, which is promoted by the Department of Education. See for yourself if this is an objective presentation of source materials. Are Malcolm X’s speeches the “foundational documents of American history” as presented by promoters? Yes, students are exposed to “foundational documents,” but those documents are chosen by the textbook writers. They are also determined by the test writers, like radical Stanford professor Linda Darling-Hammond.
Theory conflicts with reality in the talk about Common Core. Or more accurately, the official line sounds good in theory. So did “No Child Left Behind.”
When you ignore who the players are (Bill Ayers speaking at a Washington, D.C., conference with Arne Duncan and a representative of the non-profit, Achieve, the developer of Common Core), and when you ignore the fact that curriculum follows testing (which will be national), and when you ignore the money trail (Leftist Bill Gates’s foundation), you are ignoring reality.
As evidence we need nothing more than those who are jumping on board the Common Core-compliant gravy train, far-left historians like Marc Aronson, who write lie-filled, salacious books that officially meet Common Core standards. As I noted in my report, Aronson’s book intended for middle school and high school students is filled with salacious conjectures about J. Edgar’s sexuality that are not only age-inappropriate, but historically false. This is established by one of the world’s foremost authorities on American communism, Emory professor Harvey Klehr, in a paper he delivered at the Raleigh Spy Conference in 2005.
Since, like witches, Communist spies were largely regarded as figments of the imagination, it is little wonder that the first version of the National History Standards for High School, released several years ago, devoted an inordinate amount of time to McCarthyism as the most frightening and detestable era in modern American history. For much of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990, there was a steady outpouring of books and articles arguing that the Communist Party of the United States was a small, inoffensive group of idealists committed to democracy, civil rights and labor organizing that was demonized and persecuted by an American inquisition, headed not only by McCarthy, but also by J. Edgar Hoover, head of the FBI, and Richard Nixon, persecutor of Alger Hiss. During the 1970s revelations of FBI excesses and breaches of the law led to denunciations of Hoover, who was also smeared in an expose as someone blackmailed by organized crime because they had pictures of him dressed as a woman. (That, incidentally, is a charge we now know to have been fabricated by the Soviet KGB and disseminated by a gullible press.)
Recently, Michael Kirst, professor emeritus of education at Stanford testified on behalf of Common Core. According to the Graduate School of Education website,
California is one of 45 states, as well as the District of Columbia, to have embraced the Common Core. In general, Kirst said, the new standards will dovetail more closely with the demands of post-secondary study: They will emphasize deeper understanding of increasingly complex material, with particular emphasis on math problem solving and analyzing nonfiction text, he noted.
This post repeats commonplaces about “deeper understanding,” a term that Bill Ayers uses in his ramblings about education. It serves to disguise a free-for-all when it comes to reading and actually learning anything. The “deeper understanding” is an understanding of the teacher’s agenda, and for those who promote Common Core, it seems to be an agenda that is anti-American, global, and critical of capitalism. “Deeper understanding” gives textbook writers and teachers more leeway in determining which “foundational documents” students will learn. This gives the lie to the notion that Common Core actually fulfills E.D. Hirsch’s objective of providing students with “core knowledge” about their historical and literary heritage. The sample test questions developed by Linda Darling-Hammond expose the lies about Common Core. It’s federal control of education that radically changes how materials (developed by politically connected radicals) are taught and who determines whether students pass.
Left-wing historical revisionists like Aronson have no problems with profiting from Common Core through their inaccurate “Common Core-compliant” curriculum materials. And taxpayers will be paying for them.
What Common Core promoters ignore is the fact that states and localities will cease to have control over their curricula. Books will be aligned to tests. The test questions may be open-ended and “creative” (as promised), but you know that they will be asking seventh-graders about J. Edgar Hoover’s sexuality, and more about Malcolm X than James Madison.
Posted by Dottie MacQueen
Again, parents, please wake-up.
When my 9th grader told me she wasn’t learning anything in math this year, I didn’t understand why. I didn’t have enough information to even begin asking administrators or teachers why. But when the school year was almost over, because of a friend, I found out what “Common Core” education was and I started to research it for myself. And then I got it– like a kick in the head.
After you read the detailed review of the math standards (below, by mathematician Ze’ev Wurman) you’ll understand, too.
Before Common Core came to our town, teachers used to teach Algebra I in 8th grade. That’s when my daughter learned Algebra I: last year. Now Common Core has come, claiming to provide rigor and to raise standards while placing Algebra I in 9th grade; she’s learned nothing. A wasted year. A review year.
How I wish I had somehow known earlier.
Our school district website and the Utah State Office of Education’s website continues to post and promote the claims of increased rigor boasted by Common Core Standaristas.
They must surely know this is worse, not better, math: why else are they working so hard to add honors classes and extra advanced math that make up for the deficiencies of Common Core? My 9th grader is currently enrolled in an extra before-school math class now, in addition to her regular 9th grade Common Core math class. Parents each had to pay $20 tuition for this extra class.
I am grateful the extra math class exists. But why hasn’t Wasatch School District, by now, removed the now obviously false claims of Common Core’s high standards and “rigor” from their websites? Excuse me while I scream into a pillow and pull out a handful of hair.
Okay. I’m back.
How Common Core math dumbs down math: mathematician # 1: Ze’ev Wurman
Ze’ev Wurman is a great mathematician who served as Senior Policy Adviser in the U.S. Department of Education 2007-2009 and served on the California Standards Commission that evaluated Common Core math standards for that state.
Wurman reviewed the Common Core Standards in math and stated: “they fail to achieve their stated goal of improving U.S. K-12 mathematic achievement.”
Ze’ev Wurman also set forth this description of major deficiences of Common Core in math:
1. Its abandonment of the expectation that students take Algebra I in grade 8. This expectation, based on the standard of the high-achieving countries (and our international competitors), has currently pushed about half of American students to take Algebra I by grade 8, more than double that of a decade ago. The Common Core will reverse this trend by firmly relocating Algebra I back to a grade 9 high-school course. This change means that, as a practical matter, the great majority of American students will not be able to reach calculus in high school. Among other consequences, far fewer students will be able to take and excel in Advanced Placement (AP) math courses if the Common Core is implemented.
2. Related to the above-deficiency, a course of study aligned with the Common Core would provide students with poor preparation for taking Algebra in grade 8. Only private and elite schools will continue to provide sufficient preparation and, consequently, one should expect the proportion of students from challenging backgrounds taking Algebra by grade 8, or advanced mathematics in high school, to drop precipitously.
3. Common Core replaces the traditional foundations of Euclidean geometry with an experimental approach. This approach has never been successfully used in any sizable system; in fact, it failed even in the school for gifted and talented students in Moscow, where it was originally invented. Yet Common Core effectively imposes this experimental approach on the entire country, without any piloting.
4. Common Core excludes certain Algebra II and Geometry content that is currently a prerequisite at almost every four-year state college (see point 9 below). This effectively redefines “college-readiness” to mean readiness for a nonselective community college, as a member of the Common Core writing team acknowledged in his testimony before the Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education.
5. Common Core fails to teach prime factorization and consequently does not include teaching about least common denominators or greatest common factors.
6. Common Core fails to include conversions among fractions, decimals, and percents, identified as a key skill by the National Research Council, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, and the presidential National Advisory Mathematics Panel.
7. Common Core de-emphasizes algebraic manipulation, which is a prerequisite for advanced mathematics, and instead effectively redefines algebra as “functional algebra,” which does not prepare students for STEM careers.
8. More specifically, at the K-8 grade span:
8.1 Common Core does not require proficiency with addition and subtraction until grade 4, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
8.2 Common Core does not require proficiency with multiplication using the standard algorithm (step-by-step procedure for calculations) until grade 5, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
8.3 Common Core does not require proficiency with division using the standard algorithm until grade 6, a grade behind the expectations of the high-performing states and our international competitors.
8.4 Common Core starts teaching decimals only in grade 4, about two years behind the more rigorous state standards, and fails to use money as a natural introduction to this concept.
8.5 Common Core fails to teach in K-8 about key geometrical concepts such as the area of a triangle, sum of angles in a triangle, isosceles and equilateral triangles, or constructions with a straightedge and compass that good state standards include.
9. At the high school grades:
9.1 Common Core barely touches on logarithms, of great importance for chemistry, physics, and STEM in general.
9.2 Common Core fails to address mathematical induction.
9.3 Common Core fails to address parametric equations, and infinite geometric series (progressions with common ratio), and incompletely addresses conic sections.
9.4 Common Core omits in trigonometry the phase of periodic functions, half-angle formulas, and polar forms and functions.
Common Core suffers from a number of systemic defects. It groups mathematics standards into “conceptual categories,” which provide a vague structure for high school courses and makes for difficult use by teachers and textbook publishers. It provides verbose and imprecise guidance as to the level of fluency needed, omits basic skills such as factorization (reducing problems to the basic “building blocks” of the equation), and deemphasizes algebraic manipulation, leading to under-preparation for STEM disciplines. In terms of college readiness, its content is far below what is presently expected for college eligibility, which will create unreasonable expectations by parents and pressure on state universities to admit under-prepared students, with concomitant growth in remedial enrollment in college.
Posted by Dottie MacQueen
Baby talk. Really? Just how far will “big brother” go? The answer to that question is, as far as we let him. That’s why we must stop him now.
We know that data sets have been compiled on students, but in Missouri, we are told by our state agency that it is “not its intent” to compile personal information data on students.
While it might not be DESE’s stated intent to gather personal student data, it may inconsequential if mandates exist requiring state educational agencies or local school districts to track students and provide certain data. Illinois will be gathering data on children from 24 hours old to 3 years old in its Student Information System (SIS). It is not stated whether this is mandated by a federal requirement, but this information taken by the state on children less than 3 years old includes data beyond the usual information of name, address, courses taken and attendance.
The data mining set begins on page 52/92 from All Schools Meeting May 2011: Illinois State Board of of School Year 2011 and Planning for School Year 2012:
Demographics and Early Childhood (Ages 3-5) File Format
“Pre-K At Risk Classroom”
Replace with Placeholder 1
Student must be identified as one of the following when student is enrolled
Preschool for All (PFA)
Pre-K Title I
Local or Other Funding
New SIS Data Collections for School Year 2012
Birth to 3 Data Collection
Students Ages 1 day old to less than three years of age identified with Grade Level
If Student is Birth to 3, Full Time Equivalent (FTE) must be 1.0
When student is enrolled in Grade “00” a Birth to 3 record is created
All Mandatory Birth to 3 data must be entered before the student can be exited
Birth to 3
EI Number Optional
Program Model Mandatory
Service location (modality) for prevention
initiative programs Mandatory
Screening for eligibility tool Mandatory
Total number of home visits during the year Mandatory
Total number of parent groups/sessions
attended during the year Mandatory
Total number of hours of services for student
per week Mandatory
Student born with a low birth weight Mandatory
Is student living in a foster home Mandatory
Was parent married at time of student’s birth Optional
Biological mother’s date of birth Optional
Student’s family is receiving child support Mandatory
Student’s family is receiving TANF Mandatory
Student‘s family is receiving WIC Mandatory
Student’s family is receiving food stamps Mandatory
Student’s family is receiving a Housing Subsidy Mandatory
What is this program of tracking 1 day old babies to 3 years old called? It’s called “Baby Talk” (pg 65/92):
Who has access to this data and why is this data gathered? From The Illinois Longitudinal Data System Project:
The Illinois State Board of Education, along with our Education Partners, is now actively moving forward with the design and development of the state-wide Illinois Longitudinal Data System (ILDS). The system, when fully deployed, will provide data to help to track the outcomes of Illinois students as they progress from Pre-K through Postsecondary education, and as they enter the workforce. Longitudinal data supports an in-depth, comprehensive view of students’ progress and will ultimately help guide policymakers on where to invest time and energy to most effectively improve student achievement in our State.
The ILDS is defined by Public Act 96-0107 and enabled through federal funding, and instructs the State Board of Education to link student test scores, length of enrollment and graduation records over time. The system also will connect students to career planning and resources, with the potential to facilitate the application process for financial aid and records transfer for students.
ILDS will serve a large stakeholder group, including:
Illinois State Board of Education
Local Education Authorities
Regional offices of education and intermediate service centers
Parents and other members of the general public
State workforce and higher education agencies
The ILDS Project has five major components:
Establishment of a Data Advisory Committee
Development of an Enterprise-wide Data Architecture
Improved Data Quality through Data Stewardship
Development of an Education Enterprise Data Warehouse
Linking of the ISBE Unique Student Identifier with Postsecondary and Employment Data
The career/work tracking of students in Illinois now begins when a baby is at least 24 hours old. Why would Missouri or any other state with common core standards and longitudinal adata systems be any different? Like Illinois, a stated goal of the Missouri P20 longitudinal data system is to track human capital into the workforce:
These data also can be linked to external data sets on employment, labor needs across sectors, economic development, community assets, and so forth.
Why is it necessary for the government to track a mother’s marital status, federal/state assistance received, low birth weight of the baby, etc? If a baby is born with health problems into a one-parent home that depends on governmental assistance, does it put the child on a certain track? Why do you think tracking begins at 24 hours old instead of a newborn?
Finite resources must be used appropriately on the human capital most likely to reap the advantages of those resources and this particular child is not starting off as a good investment based on its data. Note that the baby is not the only person tracked. Parent(s) are also tracked as to their behavior.