Pre-Crime Claim: Student Grades Can Predict Future Life Of Crime
If you think racial profiling is problematic, just wait until you understand criminal profiling… of school children based on grades plus psychographic and demographic factors. Meddling with school records is apparently OK because it is done by Technocrats who, after all, think that all answers to society’s problems can be solved by them. ⁃ TN Editor
Imagine a world where police can foretell a child’s future simply by looking at their school grades. Welcome to the unbelievable world of predictive policing American style.
Apparently the Pasco Sheriff’s Office (PSO) considers a student with low grades and poor discipline records to be a future criminal.
According to a recent Tampa Bay Timesarticle that is exactly what is happening in Florida.
“The Pasco Sheriff’s Office keeps a secret list of kids it thinks could fall into a life of crime based on factors like whether they’ve been abused or gotten a D or an F in school, according to the agency’s internal intelligence manual.”
The Sheriff’s office is secretly keeping records of 420 middle and high school students who they think could become future criminals based on predictive grading!
“School district data shows which children are struggling academically, miss too many classes or are sent to the office for discipline. Records from the state Department of Children and Families flag kids who have witnessed household violence or experienced it themselves.”
“According to the manual, any one of those factors makes a child more likely to become a criminal. Four hundred and twenty kids are on the list, the Sheriff’s Office said.”
As the article explained, the Sheriff’s Office does not tell the kids or their parents about their secret designation.
The PSO’s 50 page attempt at justifying why they are predicting which students will commit future crimes is worrisome.
Page 4 of the PSO’s response claims that “adjustments to the law over the years have leaned towards improving necessary information-sharing practices, due to a school shooting at Marjory Stoneham Douglas.” Which does not even come close to justifying how bogus their prediction program really is.
The PSO claims that a Memorandum of Understanding allows law enforcement to create ‘work ups’ or research on students but admits that they could also create separate ‘Intel reports’ on individual students.
The PSO’s outrageous justification for invading students privacy borders on the absurd.
“Having the ability to see grades, including grade drops, attendance, including several unexplained absences, and disciplinary records facilitates this mentorship.” (page 6)
An article in the Major County Sheriffs of America contradicts how the Pasco Sheriff’s Office uses their Mental Health and Threat Assessment Team to determine if a person [student] could become a future criminal.
“Understanding that everybody has a baseline, and when people dip below that baseline, we can provide some intervention strategies, connect them with a case manager, or other behavioral health resources within the community that can help them stabilize before they get to a crisis,” Pasco Sheriff Lt. Toni Roach said.
What the PSO is really saying is at least 420 students are in need of police intervention strategies.
The PSO has been secretly predicting how schoolkids could become criminals for at least twenty years.
“The Sheriff’s Office said its data sharing practices with the school district date back 20 years and are crucial to keeping campuses safe.”
An “Intelligence-Led Policing” document reveals how they use Compstat to help “identify at-risk-youth who are destined to a life of crime and prevent them from becoming prolific offenders.” (pages 6 & 13)
It also goes so far as to claim that kids as young as 10 years old can and will become life-long criminals, if they have bad school grades.
Page 14, reveals how the PSO has created a secret student “Early Warning System” which can allegedly identify which juveniles are at-risk of becoming prolific offenders.
Some of the things Florida law enforcement uses to determine whether or not a student will become a future criminal are mind-boggling. Things like, “adverse childhood experiences”, a student’s social network and whether of not a student has run away from home, are all factors.
As the above screenshot shows, most of the things that would put a student on the future criminal list are unbelievable:
Are a schoolkids’ parents, brothers or sisters antisocial?
Does a schoolkid[s] exhibit signs of antisocial behavior?
Did a schoolkid[s] receive poor rearing?
Did a schoolkid[s] get poor grades?
Has the schoolkid[s] been a victim of a personal crime?
And perhaps the most shocking reason to put a schoolkid[s] on a future criminals list is…
Does a schoolkid[s] hang around in public?
I don’t know about you, but almost every adult over the age of 30 years old played and hung around outside. According to their reasoning, that would make nearly every American over the age of 30 a potential criminal.
“Elementary students make more threats compared to students in middle and high schools. Behavioral plans, supports, plans, and level of risk will continued to be monitored by the school-based threat assessment, as needed.”
Classifying elementary school kids as potential threats should tell you everything you need to know about predictive policing and threat assessments. I mean what’s next? Will they predict which toddlers might become future criminals?
Letting law enforcement decide who will or will not become a future criminal is about as absurd as it gets.
This is a perfect example of why we need to take police out of our schools.
Almost ninety percent of college students freak out if they are separated from their smart phones. Psychologists have standardized and profiled the condition as “nomophobia”, or No Mobile Phone Phobia”. Adults and younger children are just as addicted to smart phones as students, however. ⁃ TN Editor
Previously, active phone use at bedtime has been implicated in disrupted sleep and related complaints. To improve sleep, a recommendation following such findings is limiting phone use before and during bedtime. However, for those with the characteristic of “nomophobia”, fear of being out of mobile phone contact, this recommendation could exacerbate anxiety at and around bedtime and disrupt, rather than improve, sleep. In 2012, an estimated 77% of 18-24-year-olds could be identified as nomophobic. Because of the prevalence of nomophobia and its possible interaction with sleep, we explored the existence of nomophobia in a college-age population and its relationship to sleep, sleepiness, and sleep hygiene behaviors.
327 university students (age: M=19.7 years, SD=3.78) recruited from introductory psychology courses and campus newsletters were given extra credit or a chance to win $25 gift cards for participation. Participants completed demographic information, the Nomophobia Questionnaire (NMP-Q), the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, questions regarding associated features of inadequate sleep hygiene, and the Sleep Hygiene Index. Additional sleep hygiene questions assessed frequency of active and passive technology use during sleep time.
89.4% of the participants had moderate or severe nomophobia. Greater nomophobia was significantly related to greater daytime sleepiness (ESS) (r(293)=.150, p<.05), associated features of poor sleep (daytime sleepiness: r(297)=.097, p<.05, and avolition: r(297)=.100, p<.05), more maladaptive sleep hygiene behaviors including active technology use during sleep time (r(298)=.249, p<.05), long daytime naps, inconsistent wake and bed times, using bed for non-sleep purposes, uncomfortable bed, and bedtime cognitive rumination (r’s=0.097 to 0.182).
Most participants experienced moderate to severe nomophobia with greater nomophobia associated with greater sleepiness, avolition, and poorer sleep hygiene. Nomophobia is likely to be an important consideration when treating sleep disorders and/or making any sleep hygiene recommendations.
Big Bro: Michigan College To Track Students At All Times
Digital tyranny is more contagious than COVID-19 as Albion College announces that all students will be tracked digitally, confined to the campus and subject to specimen collection at any time. Students can be expelled for violations. ⁃ TN Editor
A Michigan college is requiring students to download a phone application that tracks their location and private health data at all times in an attempt to protect them from the coronavirus.
Albion College, located in Albion, Mich., is one of the first schools in the country to tackle contact tracing. The school is working to create a “COVID-bubble” on campus, and asking students stay within the school’s 4.5-mile perimeter for the entire semester; if a student leaves campus, the app will notify the administration, and the student could be temporarily suspended.
The move comes as universities grapple with how to reopen safely amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. Several schools including Harvard University have shut down their campuses entirely, while the University of California system will provide the majority of classes online with a selection of hybrid options. Other schools, such as Boston University, are resuming in-person learning with masks and social distancing guidelines alongside virtual learning supplements for those who don’t feel comfortable returning.
Albion’s reopening plan has sparked blowback from students and parents who are expressing concern about what they view as an invasion of privacy. A father of an Albion student said that he is upset that he must choose between keeping his daughter home from school or signing off on a university-sanctioned “invasion of privacy.”
“The school wants my daughter to sign a form consenting to specimen collection and lab testing,” he told the Washington Free Beacon on condition of anonymity. “I have a ton of concern with that…. Why is the state of Michigan’s contact tracing not enough?”
Though students are required to remain on campus, professors and administrators are not. When asked about this potential loophole in its “COVID-bubble,” the school declined to comment.
Rising senior Andrew Arszulowicz said that he is upset with both the mandatory use of the app and the manner in which students are being treated. “I feel like I am being treated like a five-year-old that cannot be trusted to follow rules,” Arszulowicz told the Free Beacon. “If the school believes masks work … why are we not allowed to leave if they work? It does not make sense to me.”
Albion is planning to offer in-person learning only, and students who refuse to comply with the contact-tracing program will be forced to defer for a semester or a full school year.
Coronavirus testing will be required upon arrival to campus. It’s unclear how many follow-up tests the university will mandate throughout the 14-week semester, but the results be stored on Albion’s tracking app.
Returning students must also sign a form authorizing the disclosure of their test results to the county, state, or “any other governmental entity as may be required by law”—though the school told the Free Beacon that state and county officials are not collecting information from the app.
Chaos Ensued After Algorithm Determined UK Students’ Grades
In the wake of schools being shut down over COVID-19, Technocrats in the UK decided to use AI to grade students for the annual “results day.” Wired reports that “teachers are aghast at the mess that’s been allowed to unfold.” ⁃ TN Editor
Results Day has a time-worn rhythm, full of annual tropes: local newspaper pictures of envelope-clutching girls jumping in the air in threes and fours, columnists complaining that exams have gotten far too easy, and the same five or six celebrities posting worthy Twitter threads about why exam results don’t matter because everything worked out alright for them.
But this year, it’s very different. The coronavirus pandemic means exams were canceled and replaced with teacher assessments and algorithms. It has created chaos.
In Scotland, the government was forced to completely change tack after tens of thousands of students were downgraded by an algorithm that changed grades based on a school’s previous performance and other factors. Anticipating similar scenes for today’s A-level results, the government in England has introduced what it’s calling a ‘triple lock’—whereby, via stages of appeals, students will effectively get to choose their grade from a teacher assessment, their mock exam results, or a resit to be taken in the autumn.
While that should help reduce some injustices, the results day mess could still have a disproportionate effect on students from disadvantaged backgrounds, with knock-on effects on their university applications and careers. The mess shines a light on huge, long-term flaws in the assessment, exams, and university admissions systems that systematically disadvantage pupils from certain groups.
Forget the triple lock, ethnic minority students from poorer backgrounds could be hit with a triple whammy. First, their teacher assessments may be lower than white students because of unconscious bias, argues Pran Patel, a former assistant head teacher and an equity activist at Decolonise the Curriculum. He points to a 2009 study into predictions and results in Key Stage 2 English which found that Pakistani pupils were 62.9 percent more likely than white pupils to be predicted a lower score than they actually achieved, for example. There’s also an upwards spike in results for boys from black and Caribbean background at age 16, which Patel says corresponds to the first time in their school careers that they’re assessed anonymously.
Not everyone agrees on this point. Research led by Kaili Rimfeld at King’s College London, based on data from more than 10,000 pupils, has found that teacher assessments are generally good predictors of future exam performance, although the best predictor of success in exams is previous success in exams.
But because of fears over grade inflation caused by teachers assessing their own students, those marks aren’t being used in isolation. This year, because of coronavirus, those potentially biased teacher assessments were modified—taking into account the school’s historical performance and other factors that may have had little to do with the individual student. In fact, according to TES, 60 percent of this year’s A-Level grades have been determined via statistical modeling, not teacher assessment.
Excessive Screen Time For Toddlers Can Stunt Development
When schools are closed, children at home increasingly turn to electronic screens to be entertained. The risk to younger children is well documented as it stunts mental development. Even the WHO recommends only 30 minutes per day of screen time for toddlers. ⁃ TN Editor
As the world continues to advance, technology is becoming a bigger part of every child’s development. Playing on various digital devices for too long, however, can be just as bad for kids as it is for adults. A recent study says excessive screen time may stunt a child’s growth, especially if they start using devices around age two or three.
Researchers in Singapore examined over 500 children. Their findings lead them to recommend parents follow World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines, which advise limiting a child’s screen time to one hour per day. This amount should be even less for children younger than five.
Tracking the many forms of screen time
Study authors say screen time tends to replace time children usually spend sleeping or engaging in physical activity. This can lead to a variety of health problems, including high risk of obesity and lower mental development.
Until this report, researchers say most studies focus on school-aged children and adolescents, producing mixed results.
“We sought to determine whether screen viewing habits at age two to three affected how children spent their time at age five. In particular we were interested in whether screen viewing affected sleep patterns and activity levels later in childhood,” researcher Falk Müller-Riemenschneider explains in a media release.
Parents were asked to report on their children’s screen time at age two and again one year later. Activities like playing video games, watching TV, and using a tablet or phone were all included in the results.
When the children turned five, they continuously wore an activity tracker for seven days. That tracker monitors sleep, time spent sitting, and how much light-to-strenuous physical activity the youngsters get.
In 1934, the Technocracy movement categorized education as a “continental system of human conditioning.” Today’s Technocrats think in exactly the same way as they mold young brains into the predetermined image of model workers. ⁃ TN Editor
Ultra-creepy technology that George Orwell could not have imagined in his most terrifying nightmares is invading government-school classrooms — and children’s minds — all around the world. While many of the Big Brother innovations are coming out of Communist China, they are making their way into American schools quickly as well. Parents, beware.
In a video report by the Wall Street Journal on artificial intelligence in Communist Chinese schools, children in a communist indoctrination camp masquerading as a school are shown wearing bands around their heads. The devices feature colored lights on the front that indicate for the “teacher” whether the child is paying attention or distracted. Red is for “deeply focused.” Blue means “distracted.” White is offline.
The technology is supposedly aimed at helping the indoctrination facilitators (misleadingly described as “teachers” by the WSJ and the regime) and authorities determine whether the young victim is concentrating and absorbing the regime’s propaganda. Basically, the headbands use what are known as “electroencephalography” (EEG) sensors to monitor the brain activity and signals of the user. The data is then collected and shared with parents and government agents.
As this writer reported in February for The Epoch Times, a U.S. company called BrainCo developed a headband that purports to measure and collects data on students’ “brainwaves.” The company is funded in part by the mass-murdering regime in Beijing via its state-run “companies,” with the devices being deployed against thousands of Chinese children at schools.
However, despite criticism from all angles, the Orwellian technology is already in America, too. According to the U.K. Daily Mail, the Massachusetts-based company also deployed the devices at a high school in Boston. The scheme was supposed to offer “focus and relaxation neurofeedback training” so that the students could “enhance their learning efficiency and education outcomes.”
The privacy implications are huge. According to the CEO of the company, the plan is to build the “world’s largest database” using the brain-activity data compiled from students. That information will then be analyzed by “artificial intelligence” to help gain insights into detecting individuals’ emotional states. Chinese communists also boast that the data will feed their AI algorithms.
And that is just the start. Another technological nightmare being deployed in schools in both Communist China and the United States: facial recognition cameras and data-gathering robots. According to the Journal’s video report, the cameras spy on students and monitor their activities, while the robots in Chinese classrooms analyze student “health and engagement levels.”
In America, as The Newman Report documented in 2017, the federal government spent large amounts of tax money to create a robot named “EMAR.” Investigators figured out that children would be more likely to share their private mental health data with a robot than a human, and so, EMAR was born. The robots are basically gathering massive amounts of “mental-health” information on children — data that may follow them around for life.
Combined with other techno-tracking tools, it is clear that a monstrous machine is being created for humanity that will eliminate privacy, liberty, and even independent thought if this is not stopped. A big part of the reason for the technology is to ensure that the children are absorbing the “social” and “emotional” goals demanded by the government, including attitudes and values.
To global-minded Technocrats, children are the window into the homes of citizens. Government schools are vulnerable to a massive wave of contact tracing that could affect millions of parents forced into quarantine or isolation. ⁃ TN Editor
We seem to be divided as a country when it comes to privacy, civil liberties, and the tracking and tracing of citizens. Some are willing to submit to a surveillance state in order to track the spread of the coronavirus. Others see the pandemic as a weapon used to infringe on our privacy and freedoms. As an active member of the national advocacy group Parent Coalition for Student Privacy
I have been researching and tracking violations of pupil privacy in Texas for several years. I maintain two education-related Facebook pages called Educray and my old school board campaign page. I use LinkedIn to publish articles on data privacy, smart cities, and privatization agendas attacking our public schools. I’m a conservative public school parent who believes we should preserve Article VII in the Texas Constitution which makes provision for public free education.
Our elected representatives in both parties have sold out to special interests and abandoned their oath to uphold the Constitution and defend our rights as taxpayers and citizens.
Last month Governor Greg Abbott appointed a “Strike Force” to assess the pandemic and devise a strategy to get Texans back to work. More than half of the panel on reopening Texas are his campaign donors. The Dallas Morning News reported, “Since 2015, 25 of the 39 members of his Special Advisory Council have given Abbott’s political arm at least $5.8 million, a Dallas Morning News analysis found.”
Abbott’s business advisers include proponents of education technology, for-profit charter schools, school choice vouchers, K12 Inc., and policy insiders working to collapse our traditional public school in favor of privatization, including his appointment of software entrepreneur Mike Morath as commissioner of the Texas Education Agency. For more information about Morath and Texas-Moscow oil money ties to education technology read here:
The Super Lobby
The strike force advisor that concerns me most is Abbott’s Chief Operating Officer Mike Toomey, a BigPharma superlobbyist and former chief of staff for Governor Rick Perry. He is known for his controversial work with Perry when they attempted to mandate the Gardasil HPV vaccine for all girls in Texas. Before you even think about labeling me as an anti-vaxxer, just stop right there. My kids are vaccinated. However, I believe in parental choice and the right to decide which vaccines are safe for our kids. Period.
Why do we need a “strike force” anyway? Isn’t that why we have legislators; you know, the elected representatives? There may be some good patriots on the force but I haven’t seen any of them stand up to this blatant power grab by local politicians like Dallas County Judge Clay Jenkins or Abbott’s vague promises. I gave Judge Jenkins a piece of my mind a few weeks ago when he tried to hire his former campaign manager and another buddy of his for $76K each using federal CARES relief funds. Fortunately it was voted down 4-1.
Flush With Power
In the February 2017, Texas Monthly’s Flush With Power issue featured The Lobbyist: Andrea McWilliams. They wrote, “Of course, another way to exert political influence is with money, and the McWilliamses have gone that route too. Though not among the Austin lobby’s top political donors, they have served as bundlers, pooling money from others to give to candidates. Dean was a “Pioneer” bundler for George W. Bush’s presidential campaign, meaning he raised at least $100,000. In October of last year, Dean made a personal donation of $50,000 to Lieutenant Governor Patrick’s political committee. And in 2016 Andrea supported Texas Republican U.S. senator Ted Cruz for president.”
Texas Monthly underscored her lobbying efforts for K12 Inc, “While the McWilliamses might be described as a power couple, there’s no doubt it’s Andrea who dazzles at the Capitol and in the world of Austin society and philanthropy. She goes into this session with as much as $2.6 million in client contracts with the likes of Citibank, Verizon, Ryan tax consultants, and K12 Inc., an online education company. She has become an influential figure, “a consigliere to the powerful and political,” as a friend once described her.”
K12 Inc. is a for-profit education management organization founded by former banker Ronald J. Packard in 2000 and became publicly traded in 2007. Initial investors in the company included Michael R. Milken and Lowell Milken of education company Knowledge Universe. Andrew Tisch of the Loews Corporation and Larry Ellison of Oracle also contributed venture capital. The more kids on devices at home, the more cashflow.
The Texas Tribune featured them in their 2013 article titled A-List Lobbyists Disclosed Little After Swanky Parties. Jay Root wrote, “Among those represented by either Andrea or Dean McWillliams are the city of Laredo; K-12, Inc., the company that helps run online schools in numerous states, including Texas; Career Education Company, which offers online education services; and Ryan Inc., the tax preparation company headed by mega-contributor Brint Ryan.”
MTX Tracker Jackers and the K12 Inc. Lobbyists
The Houston Chronicle featured a story where Texas health officials awarded up to $295 million to MTX Group, an Albany-based contact tracing technology company with a second headquarters in Frisco, Texas.
According to the article, “The deal appears to have been put together within just a few days. On Wednesday, MTX hired Austin-based lobbyists Andrea and Dean McWilliams for up to $50,000 each, according to public disclosure documents.”
You may recall, in response to Trump’s executive order beginning on Sunday, February 2, 2020, the MTX Disease Monitoring and Control Appconnected all incoming flight passengers into the system in order to adhere to the 14-day mandatory virtual quarantine process.
MTX is also donating its newly launched tracking application to all public school districts in the U.S. That’s right. When it’s free, YOU are the product. The Dallas Morning News reporter Brandi Addison featured MTX here in March saying the donation was valued at $500,000 and is designed for use by health officials, airports and government officials. Addison wrote, “Users who are arriving from affected global regions are asked to check in through a process called a “digital quarantine,” which will track the development of their symptoms.”
They are setting our kids up for a future on blockchain. Think of a supply chain model, only it’s the kids and their outcomes to be traded. Handing out FREE apps is their access point. Data has been proven to be as good as gold.
Last week I featured an article on the national and statewide bipartisan efforts to “Reimagine Education” for our public school children. Governor Greg Abbott is teaming up with Dallas ISD, TEA Commissioner Morath to push “distance learning” for all kids in Texas in response to the coronavirus. Many of the people on Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick’s Task Force and Governor Abbott’s Strike Force have deep ties in education technology, the Texas Virtual Schools Network (TxVSN), charter schools, and the unconstitutional school choice voucher movement. They view this virus as the perfect opportunity to kill public education and get every kid on a device for at-home learning. They seek to pervert Milton Friedman’s free-market approach by using it on schoolchildren. He said, “Only a crisis – actual or perceived – produces real change.”
Manufactured Unemployment and an Army of Contact Tracers
For ten years I have served as a career coach for unemployed people. I got a message yesterday from one of my jobseekers. Doesn’t it seem a little coincidental that we have a tidal wave of unemployment as they are now ushering in the need for an army of contact tracers? The lockdowns have had a devastating impact on our country and the worst is yet to come with 1.9 million unemployment claims in Texas. Governor Abbott said Wednesday that more than 2,000 tracers have been deployed and the state in ramping up to meet his goal of hiring an army of 4,000.
Big GERM and The TRACE Act from Hell (HR 6666)
Anyone following the Global Education Reform Movement (GERM) knows that Bill Gates is one of the most notorious philanthrocapitalists of them all. His Common Core (CCSS) experiment on America’s children has been documented and exposed by Lynne Taylor, Common Core Diva.
Her recent magnum opus regarding HR 6666 might be her most important to date. It’s not much of a leap to see the intersection of education and the pandemic as an access point. Lynne wrote, “As we know, Gates is also behind the CCSS Machine.”
She documented the The $100 Billion ‘Rushing’ Test Schemecoming through HR 6666, the TRACE Act. She explained, “Warriors, the full name of HR 6666 is “Testing, Reaching, and, Contacting Everyone Act“. In the image below, it’s one I created to illustrate ESSA’s hamster wheel for communities. TRACE will use this hamster wheel concept to address COVID-19 in your town. Because the cradle to grave alignment in education exists, the extension of the concept of tracking and tracing everyone just got a ‘green light’ from HR 6666’s purpose!”
She said, “From the Press Release on Rep. Rush’s website, you can see that not only will schools be used as testing sites, but college/university based hospitals and health care centers, too. However, since ESSA turned all public schools into quasi hospitals, they qualify as federally certified health care centers.”
So, what’s the big deal with contact tracing? I can think of one guy in history who would have loved to have had access to tracking software. It seems we are so afraid of dying, we are willing to stop living and protecting our freedoms. There’s no question the threat of the virus is real, but the projections and the extreme measures to mitigate it have gone beyond reason. Regardless of your stance on the risks, please consider the implications of allowing tech giants to control us through tracking, machine learning, blockchain, and artificial intelligence (AI). The Constitution doesn’t have an exemption for COVID-19.
Wrench in the Gears writer Alison McDowell featured a computer scientist “discussing plans to leverage” small data,” digital traces, from smart phones to influence “personal health management.” She wrote, “It is important to recognize that the move into contract tracing is an extension of this work. Once the state normalizes the practice of tracking people and their networks within the context of pandemic they can move into using these apps to influence health-related behaviors in subtle and overt ways. All of this will be linked to human capital markets, and all of it will be used to train AI.”
In closing, let’s think about the slippery slope of allowing MTX Group to have access to our public school children, as well as our citizens when they have been very clear about where they are headed. MTX founder and chairman Das Nobel said, “MTX is currently working on a new artificial intelligence platform to cater to the medical industry. There is a need to disrupt the industry with the use of genome sequencing and other technologies to get insights that will help in predicting appropriate healthcare models and analyzing symptoms to tackle diseases early. We want patients to take control on decision making. We not only want to serve the US market but also India.”
Study: Common Core Behind Historic Drop In Student Scores
Common Core State Standards curriculum were created and owned by two private non-profit organizations, both of which were heavily funded and influenced by Bill Gates of vaccine fame. CCSS has failed miserably and an entire generation has been mentally crippled. ⁃ TN Editor
As we approach the 40th anniversary of the establishment of the United States Department of Education in May, shocking trends in student performance should lead us to reconsider the federal role in education and whether the initiative for policymaking should be returned to local schools, communities, and states.
Breaking with decades of slow improvement, U.S. reading and math scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and other assessments have seen historic declines since most states implemented national Common Core English and math curriculum standards six years ago, according to a new study published by Pioneer Institute.
While Common Core was promoted as improving the international competitiveness of U.S. students in math, our international standing has remained low while the skills of average and lower performing American students have dropped in both math and reading.
Nationally, fourth- and eighth-grade NAEP math scores were rising gradually in the years before Common Core was implemented (2003-2013). Post-Common Core, scores at both grades have fallen, eighth grade at nearly the same rate as it was previously increasing.
The declines are most acute for the lowest-achieving students, increasing inequality. Scores for students at the 90th percentile have mostly continued their pre-Common Core trend of gradual improvement. But the farther behind students were, the more substantial the declines, with the biggest drops occurring for those at the 25th and 10th percentiles.
“The sustained decline we’re now seeing, especially among our most vulnerable students, simply cannot be allowed to continue,” said Theodor Rebarber, author of “The Common Core Debacle.”
U.S. students fare better in reading than they do in math when compared to international competitors, but U.S. reading trends are similar to those seen in math, with gradual pre-Common Core improvement replaced by declines after Common Core was implemented.
From 2003 to 2013, national fourth- and eighth-grade reading scores were increasing at an average of about half of a point each year. Since 2013, fourth-grade reading scores have been falling by less than half of a point each year, while eighth-grade scores have dropped by nearly a full point a year.
Rebarber also finds that Common Core is a product of the misguided progressive pedagogies and biases of the education establishment that developed it. “Several of us allied with Pioneer Institute have been pointing out, ever since it was introduced, the deeply flawed educational assumptions that permeate the Common Core and the many ways in which it is at odds with curriculum standards in top-achieving countries.” Unfortunately, the disappointing results of Common Core—particularly for lower performing students—were predicted in 2010.
“Nearly a decade after states adopted Common Core, the empirical evidence makes it clear that these national standards have yielded underwhelming results for students,” said Pioneer Executive Director Jim Stergios. “The proponents of this expensive, legally questionable policy initiative have much to answer for.”
“It’s time for federal law to change to allow states as well as local school districts to try a broader range of approaches to reform,” added Rebarber. “With a more bottom-up approach, more school systems will have the opportunity to choose curricula consistent with our international competitors and many decades of research on effective classroom teaching.”
CFR Pushes Central Planning to Fuse Education With Economy
The CFR’s education policies are virtually identical to historic Technocracy that wanted to develop education as a “continental system of human conditioning.” This is the same mentality that produced Alphas, Betas and Deltas in Huxley’s Brave New World. ⁃ TN Editor
The globalist-minded Council on Foreign Relations is urging state and local officials, as well as other leaders, to transform the education system, claiming that looming changes in the economy and the workplace will require workers who are properly “educated” and “trained” for the new paradigm. The effort seeks to “reverse-engineer” every part of the education and workforce training system, and ensure that components are “all walking in lockstep.” In interviews with The New American, two of the CFR task force members involved in developing the recommendations warned of major problems ahead for America if the organization’s ideas were not acted upon — and soon.
However, also in interviews with The New American, education experts, critics of technocratic governance, and leading lawmakers all sounded the alarm about the CFR’s proposed schemes. One expert argued that the educational policies advanced by the task force resemble the tools used by totalitarian regimes such as the communist dictatorships of the Soviet Union and China. Another expert condemned the ideas as moving America toward technocracy. A prominent educator expressed shock that the report made no mention of the very real and very serious problems with the current education system. And considering the CFR membership’s long history of betraying America and liberty around the world to advance globalism and tyranny, lawmakers warned that there are very good reasons to be concerned.
According to the CFR’s Task Force report, dubbed “The Work Ahead: Machines, Skills, and U.S. Leadership in the Twenty-First Century,” America will be facing massive changes in the years ahead. Especially concerning to the CFR’s panel behind the report is the growth of automation and technology, which will displace large numbers of American workers across a broad range of industries. All of that is true, of course. But any effort to sell drastic changes including even bigger Big Government and an enormous array of new unconstitutional policies must have at least a kernel of truth to sound palatable. This effort is no exception.
The plot is audacious and comprehensive. In the article entitled “CFR: U.S. Needs More Mass Migration, Bigger Welfare State,” The New American explored the enormous transformations that the powerful CFR is pursuing relating to social-welfare programs and immigration. In short, under the guise of preparing America for the future, the CFR argued that the U.S. government must massively expand the size and scope of government, ranging from healthcare and retirement to increased immigration. Sweden and Denmark, two of the nations with the most bloated governments on Earth, are praised as successful models. Interestingly, even while warning of huge looming job losses for American workers, the CFR report advocated a surge in immigration.
The other key component of the CFR’s “Work Ahead” agenda deals with “education.” Indeed, the CFR report claims America needs “dramatic” so-called transformations in the education system. Much of this must be driven by government, the globalist group argued. Simply “waiting and hoping that the market will sort out the challenges,” according to the CFR report, “is not an adequate response.” It was not made clear why. Rather, the CFR claimed only that failure to provide “the education” that apparently helpless Americans supposedly “need” for the future would be dangerous. It was also not clear why Americans could not take responsibility themselves for their education.
In a phone interview with The New American, CFR task force project director Ted Alden said the goal of the effort was to “make it a top national priority to prepare the American workforce for the changes that are coming.” According to Alden, the thing that the United States did “better than any other country” was pushing ahead with tax-funded education for everyone. “In the early 20th century, the U.S. led every country in terms of moving Americans into secondary education, then into post-secondary education with the G.I. Bill,” he said when asked why the market system could not deal with the coming changes. “A lot of this came from state and local government. This is a familiar history that we handled well in the 20th century.”
Among the various changes and recommendations that the CFR is peddling:
• Ensure that college and university are “within the reach of all Americans,” presumably by either forcing taxpayers to pay for it all or by shackling young Americans to ever-greater levels of debt they cannot pay.
• Link “education more closely to employment outcomes.” “A change in thinking is needed, from seeing education and work as distinct and separate activities to considering them as closely linked,” the report continues.
• Provide “expanded counseling for students to set them on successful education-to-work paths,” since apparently government knows best what “path” those children should be on. The government schools should also lay out “guided pathways” to direct students toward what the central planners believe will be needed in the future.
• Collect more data on students to be disseminated by government, on everything from education to career, to make all the central planning work. “Washington should expand and improve its own data gathering and dissemination,” the report says, adding that the private sector must also be conscripted into this Big Data scheme.
• Concentrate greater emphasis on “lifelong learning,” which will “require changes in behavior” by employees. This means adults need to be constantly ready and willing to go back to the government for more so-called education to keep up with changes in society and the economy.
• Insist state and local governments do a better job of central planning and incorporating their ideas about what society and the economy need into the education system. Among other policies, taking a page out of the Soviet playbook, authorities must “undertake detailed skills assessments of the population and the workforce needs of local employers,” the CFR task force argued. “Devising and implementing appropriate educational options depends on a solid assessment of the workforce needs of local employers and the education and skills level of the state workforce.” Also required: “close collaboration among state governments, educational institutions, and employers.”
• Include new “workplace readiness standards” in middle- and high-school curricula, requiring the education establishment to predict the future of the economy and prepare all children accordingly. “Skills readiness standards would be aligned with skills that are or will be in demand for quality jobs in the future or present,” the report added, noting that the standards would be continually revisited by “standard setters.” These standards should include “habits of the mind,” the CFR said cryptically, without elaborating.
• Have the federal government create “lifelong learning accounts” to provide money for everyone to pursue “lifelong learning.” This would be “a national program to help finance mid-career retraining,” the CFR said without citing any provision in the U.S. Constitution that would authorize such a program.
• Have the federal government develop a national ranking system for schools, building on the Obama administration’s efforts. While this would ostensibly help students decide which colleges offer the best value, it would also help the federal government demonize and marginalize educational institutions such as Christian colleges that resist the growing extremism that has infected higher education.
• Launch propaganda campaigns through the federal government and state governments involving public figures from sports and entertainment to “encourage young people to make the best possible educational-to-work choices.” It was not immediately clear how authorities would determine what the best possible education and work choices would be. Social media and other tools should be used, the report said.
Technocrats have long since hijacked the American education system for their own agenda. What once was a system of actual education of students has now become a system intended to produce nothing more than conditioned Technocrat workers. When this is understood, modern education programs – President George Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” policy and President Barack Obama’s Common Core Education Standards and the Trump Administration signing a UN agreement that states “We commit to facilitating the internationalization of education” – will become crystal clear.
When the Technocracy Study Course was written in 1934 by M. King Hubbert and Howard Scott, it was literally intended to be the “bible” of Technocracy. It contained all of the basic elements of societal construction along with rules and principles for living.
Hubbert and Scott names education as one of the pillar service sectors of Technocracy was education. On page 232, they listed “The end products attained by a high-energy social mechanism on the North American Continent” as:
a high physical standard of living,
a high standard of public health,
a minimum of unnecessary labor,
a minimum of wastage of nonreplaceable resources,
an educational system to train the entire younger generation indiscriminately as regards all considerations other than inherent ability—a Continental system of human conditioning. (emphasis added)
William Akin elaborated on this in his book, Technocracy and the American Dream (1978, p. 142).
A continental system of human conditioning will have to be installed to replace the existing insufficient educational methods and institutions. This continental system of general education will have to be organized as to provide the fullest possible conditioning and physical training… It must educate and train the student public so as to obtain the highest possible percentage of proficient functional capacity.
Since the basic need of society was technical expertise, their education system would abolish the liberal arts, which addressed outmoded moralistic solutions to human problems. It would essentially replace the humanities with the machine shop. In the process, members of society would be conditioned to think in terms of engineering rationality and efficiency. Man, in short, would then be conditioned to assume the character of machines, to accept “a reality understood in terms of machine-like function.”
Early Technocrats, thoroughly captivated by the vain religion of Scientism, believed that truth about man and the universe could only be discovered through science. As a result, the pioneer of behavioral psychology, B.F. Skinner, was a principal contributor to Technocrat understanding of human conditioning. It was a theory that they eagerly embraced and applied to their utopian model of Technocracy.
Skinner’s association with the Technocracy movement has been well documented in academic literature. Alexandra Rutherford, for instance, wroteB. F. Skinner and Technology’s Nation: Technocracy, Social Engineering, and the Good Life in 20th-Century America in the History of Psychology, in which she stated,
Skinner’s efforts were part of a much larger social engineering tradition that received one of its fullest expressions in the Technocracy Movement of the 1930s.
The balance of Rutherford’s paper detailed the “several philosophical and structural similarities between the Technocrats’ and Skinner’s social visions.”
The Technocracy Study Course is thoroughly dependent on this line of thinking, and every chapter stresses the importance of and need for “conditioning” of all members of society in order for Utopia to materialize. Of course, this goes well beyond just education, but early conditioning of young students was of paramount importance:
No conditioned response to a given stimulus can ever occur unless the subject has previously been through the conditioning experience involving this stimulus and the corresponding response. (p. 187)
Enter Common Core Education Standards
Although the modern drift of education toward Technocratic conditioning started in the early 1980s, it is not the purpose of this paper to present details that others have presented over the years. Rather, I will skip forward to the latest program called the Common Core Education Standards Initiative (CCESI) which has swept the American education system over the last 10 years.
CCESI was sponsored by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), both of which are non-governmental organizations. CCSSO is a progressive advocacy organization that focuses on “education workforce; information systems and research; next generation learners; and standards, assessment, and accountability.”The NGA’s membership is exclusively the Governors of each state and territory, but it presents itself as a political organization.
It is important to note that both the NGA and CCSSO are completely independent of any government authority or accountability.
Did funding for CCESI come from the federal government? No! Instead, the primary financier was the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, controlled by Microsoft pioneer Bill Gates – a Technocrat. In fact, over a 10 year period, Gates provided almost $500 million to various organizations to develop the curriculum according to his own personal vision of education.
Furthermore, according to its own website, the resulting copyright for CCESI is tightly held by these same organizations:
NGA Center/CCSSO shall be acknowledged as the sole owners and developers of the Common Core State Standards, and no claims to the contrary shall be made.
Parents today wonder why the nature and focus of education has changed so radically over the last 10 years. The simple reason is that it has been hijacked by private Technocrat-oriented organizations and funded by Technocrats like Bill Gates. To call this a monumental coup would be an understatement.
Of course, the Technocrats had help and full cooperation from the federal government which had distributed Common Core to the individual states, -proof of how deep the Technocrat influence runs within our political structures.
In sum, Akin’s observation of Technocracy’s “Continental system of human conditioning” has proven correct: “It would essentially replace the humanities with the machine shop.”