Tech Thursday: Breaking News Update

Hi Warriors,

Two days ago, I broke the news via my blog that 5 states had been fast tracked by the Federal government to renew ESEA/NCLB waivers (which means renewing Common Core, Career Tech Ed, College/Career Ready Standards and all the other portions of ‘fed led ed’, the P3 (Public, private partnership) CCSS Machine we’ve become saddled with. For today’s “Tech Thursday”, we’ll be looking much further into exactly what each of the 5 states (NC, NM, KY, VA, and MN) are in for. All this just a few days before the massive HR5 (Student Success Act) is supposed to be voted on. I must point out, this is an extremely detailed article. Much information the states not chosen need to use as tools. 

In Case You Missed It:

 Here’s the published article link from a couple of days ago: https://www.commoncorediva.com/2015/03/31/breaking-news-feds-re-up-5-states-for-esea-waivers/

The Technical Details:

Knowing there are 5 states which were chosen because of their diligence in jumping through the CCSS laden hoops, is certainly bad enough. However, just WHAT did each of the states promise the feds in order to be chosen? Below you’ll see NC’s promises (click to enlarge it).

Technical Detail #1: December 2014 is when the ball got rolling on this ‘request’. To be precise, using the NC DPI (North Carolina Dept. of Public Instruction) information, Dec. 18th, 2014. Notice was posted on the NC Public Schools Public Comments page, as well as sent on to principals, teachers, education partners, and others.

Technical Detail #2: January 2015’s meeting is where the information from previous ESEA face-to-face meetings of Title One COPs (Committee of Practitioners) was taken into consideration for the ‘request to renew’ ESEA/NCLB waivers. Not surprisingly, the vote was unanimous to proceed with renewing NC’s commitment to CCSS/CTE/CCR.

Techncial Detail #3: Of all the information spread across NC to announce public comment was needed (Dec. 2014) only 3 responses were received! One disgusted assistant principal over high-stakes assessments and 2 from a superintendent’s office questioning the process wasn’t including enough people.

Technical Detail #4: At  several educational meetings spread out across the state and involving all sort of ‘stakeholders’, ‘various aspects of renewal’ were discussed. One NC State Board of meeting (12/4/14); one NC Superintendent’s Quarterly meeting (12/5/14); one Northwest (NC) Principals’ Advisory Council meeting (12/9/14); one AIG(Academically and/or Gifted Intelligence) Regional Leadership meeting (involved school districts leaders from all 8 regions of the SBE {meaning NC’s State Board of Education}. This meeting was held 12/16 and 17/14; one P-20W(Preschool to Grade 20/ Workforce) Policy Council  meeting on 1/6/15 {the Council contains the following members: early education, K-12 education, higher education institutions {meaning community colleges/universities}, independent colleges/universities, AND the NC Dept. of Commerce}; another Title One COPs meeting (1/12/15); one conference call meeting with two members of the NC Governor’s Education staff (1/12/15); one meeting with several members of the Executive Committee of the NCSSA (NC School Superintendent’s Association) held 1/13/15; another meeting of the Northwest PAC (see above), 1/14/15; and one meeting between 20 school superintendents with the Executive Director of the NCSSA (see above) at the Next Generation Superintendent Development Program, held 1/15/15. The feedback from all these meetings helped shape the ‘request’ NC submitted to renew the ESEA/NCLB waivers. More assessments are in store for NC students, or so it appears. (you’ll need to see page 64 of the pdf)

Technical Detail #5: Should any new legislation impact the conditions of the renewal ESEA/NCLB waivers, we’re not to worry, the U.S. Dept. of Education has a process for that.

Technical Detail #6: To be thoroughly compliant with the ESEA/NCLB renewal request, NC granted its SPAC (Superintendent’s Parent Council) the opportunity for feedback, 1/22/15. (The SPAC was formed in 2013 as a sort of watchdog group) The only discussion or feedback was the topic of schools receiving letter grades (A-F) and if this is a federal condition or state led. According to the application request, staff members clarified it was a state requirement.

Technical Detail #7: The NCAE (NC Association of Educators) met to discuss the renewal request and (no surprise here) in full support. (*Note: you can see that letter in one of the attachments to the renewal request NC submitted, in the pdf provided)

The ‘smoking gun’ in all this?  NC requested the renewal in exchange for continued rigor!

To see the entire multi-page renewal request (where you can access all kinds of information connected to NC’s Educational realm): nc3reqatt32015

NC Related sites: The NW NC Regional ESA: http://www.nwresa.org/NWRESA_News%202014-15.htm
The NC AIG: http://ncaig.ncdpi.wikispaces.net/Home
The NC P20W Council: http://www.ncpublicschools.org/data/ncp-20w/

Up Next: MN

Why would I go here, after all the buzz is MN doesn’t have CCSS. Well, that’s not exactly true. According to one of my warrior followers, I’ve been told what really is happening there. CCSS is in the state, just not like it is in the others (gee, didn’t TX and VA have similar ‘songs’?) Let’s also keep in mind the U.S. Dept. of Ed picked these 5 states due to their exemplary work in College/Career Readiness, etc. Back to my warrior’s words about CC in MN, “We are the ONLY state that has never had any hearing on CC. We can’t get our Dems or Repubs to talk about it openly/ Our legislators need a wake up call/We’ve (those opposed to CCSS) have been working hard.” My friend went on to share that while the exchanges thus far between citizens/legislature have been friendly, there’s been zero action. So, with that let’s see the Technical Details to their ESEA/NCLB ‘request’:

Technical Detail #1: This 2015 ESEA/NCLB waiver is considered a progress step in the state’s 7 pronged plan. While you can see the 7 points in the entire document, it’s the group of folks which were involved in making this request from the U. S. Dept. of Ed:

Technical Detail #1 for MN: all that college/career readiness will be the line in the sand for which all connected accountabality to proceed. (see page 19)

Technical Detail #2 for MN: federal funds via the ESEA/NCLB means more access to data collection. (see page 19)

Technical Detail #3 for MN: The acceptance of CCR standards (in at least ELA or Math) is clearly marked. (see page 21)

Technical Detail #4 for MN: The academic standards for Math are on the bubble for being updated. Watch to see how CCSS is (or isn’t) factored in. (see page 23)

Technical Detail #5 for MN: Working with the ADP Alignment Institutes, MN’s P-16 system for prepping students for work ready or college attendance. (see page 24)

Technical Detail #6 for MN: CCR (College/Career Readiness) Standards were created in MN (see page 24)

Technical Detail #7 for MN: MN’s a member of a global group, WIDA (World-Class Instructional and Assessments). See page 25.

To see MN’s entire waiver: mnreq32015 (1)
To learn more about ADP Institutes (American Diploma Project): http://www.achieve.org/adp-network
To see MN’s P20 (preschool to grade 20) efforts, which encompass P16 work, too: http://www.mnp20.org/

Then, There’s VA:

Here’s another state that has been reported as not having CCSS/CCR/CTE. However, look at the screen shot of their recently approved renewal request:

The Technical Details:

Technical Detail #1 for VA: Their revisions for ESEA/NCLB waivers began back in 2013. Then, 2014 brought an extension of the waivers. In the first 3 months of 2015, VA sought out to renew their waivers.

Technical Detail #2 for VA: College/Career Readiness and Career Tech Ed have been in place in VA since the early 80s; however when any state or school receives Perkins Funding in these modern times, you’re getting funding that aligns you to CCSS’ version. Same can be said for IDEA funding, Titles 1, 1b, 4, 9, and any other one. One quick look at VA’s CTE page and you’ll see the 16 Career Clusters.

Technical Detail #3 for VA: Bring on the 21st Century Community Learning Centers! (Condition #10 on page 5)

Technical Detail #4 for VA: “Next Generation Assessments”, page 17

Technical Detail #5 for VA: Step up the data mining, page 17

Technical Detail #6 for VA: All the College Board, ACT, Inc., IB, AP, early college strappings the rest of America is experiencing, VA is embracing or about to. See pages 19-51.

VA’s Smoking Gun? By accepting renewed waivers and the alignment that goes with it the ‘implementation’ factor grows!

To see VA’s full ESEA/NCLB document: va4req32015

To see VA’s CTE website: http://www.cteresource.org/about/ (*Note: be sure to see the brightly colored CTE logos at the bottom right. If you’ve followed my blog long, you’ll recognize these as CCSS aligned all the way)

To see VA’s Student Longitudinal Data Mining: http://research.schev.edu/apps/info/Articles.The-Virginia-Longitudinal-Data-System.ashx

Heads Up, KY!:

It’s widely known that KY was the first state saddled with CCSS. So, why are the folks in charge of education going back for more?!

Technical Detail #1 for KY: In 2014, those in charge looked at the previous 3 years data to see where extension of the ESEA/NCLB needed to continue ‘validity, reliability, and fairness’. (see page 16)

Technical Detail #2 for KY: After announcing plans for renewal went state-wide, only 390 responses were recorded. (see page 25)

Technical Detail #3 for KY: ‘UnBridled Learning’ will continue on and make more changes via the waiver.

Technical Detail #4 for KY: The entire goal for the 2015 approved waiver from KY is ‘career/college ready for ALL students’. The graphic on page 33 explains in much better than I can.

To see KY’s entire waiver request (which is extremely worthy as an anti CCSS tool): ky3req32015

New Mexico!:

The final state is New Mexico. Oddly enough, NM hasn’t updated their ESEA/NCLB waiver request since 2011.

Technical Detail #1 for NM: In the waiver request an acknowledgement to a private philanthropic foundation in helping fund the implementation of CCSS (see page 28) with a grant to the Public Education Dept. of NM is made.

Technical Detail #2 for NM: Using the letter grades to reward or punish entire schools (see page 18 for a short description).

Technical Detail #3 for NM: Full implementation means full CCSS assessment for all students. (see page 20)

Technical Detail #4 for NM: see the legislative moves made to entrench CCSS/CTE/CCR:

To see NM’s full waiver request: nmreq32015
To see NM’s PED: http://ped.state.nm.us/ped/index.html (*Note: the smiling face of the official you see was at one time an underling for Jeb Bush)

Closing:

While this has been a long article, I hope you’ve been able to see the similarities from each of the 5, after all, they were chosen as leaders. You need to know (if you haven’t read each of their waiver requests), that the number 1 priority was College/Career Readiness. Each state also pledged to up the ante for 21st Century Community Learning Centers. All of them agreed to more AP courses, more College Board, and more indoctrination!