DriveThru – Get What You Need

For years, there’s been a push among liberals for national standards. (Remember the failed attempt during the Clinton years?)

But thanks to this country’s long tradition of giving states and local communities primary control over what’s taught in our taxpayer-funded classrooms, those efforts have failed.

But now the “experts” in Washington, D.C., think they’ve found a way around that obstacle: The Obama administration and cronies have been loudly promoting “voluntary,” “common standards,” developed by a consortium of organizations (including those in the academic testing industry, the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers).

So far 48 states have joined this effort, with Texas and Alaska being the only hold outs.

But there’s some dissension in the ranks lately—as states and  school boards discover they may have signed up for more than they bargained for. The first signs of that came when the Obama administration began citing the standards as a qualifier for Race to the Top money.

And many were taken aback earlier this month when “common standards” organizers revealed that “States that adopt the proposed common academic standards must use the document word for word,” reported Education Week.

In response to that surprise announcement, school board members in several states have voiced concerns about whether they could lose Race to the Top funds if they change their minds about swallowing the standards whole—and about the fact that they haven’t seen a final version of the standards.

One Montana board member (quoted in Education Week) repeated questions he’s been getting from concerned citizens in his state: “Where will we draw the line? First it’s standards, then curriculum, then textbooks.”

In Colorado, a state that recently revised standards, a board member expressed concern that they’re not “anxious to throw out our standards and start all over again…”

Just call it the first signs of buyers’ remorse.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration continues to roll out plans that make this effort look less and less voluntary—including money budgeted for states to create “common assessments” (read tests) and yesterday’s announcement that Obama wants to require states to adopt “college and career-ready” standards in order to qualify for Title I funding for impoverished students.

President Obama and his administration have continued to ignore the loud outcry over the appointment of  a radical gay activist, Kevin Jennings, to head up the nation’s “safe schools” office.

Not only have they remained deaf to these concerns, but now they plan to give Jennings significantly more of our money to spend! President Obama’s proposed 2011 budget would allocate $410 million for programs overseen by Jennings. That’s an increase of $45 million.

So want does Jennings intend to do with this money?

For starters, he says he’s going to make “school climate” measurement a top priority—and, in fact, he’d love for “school climate” to eventually be made part of the “Common Core” national standards movement!  He plans to begin with “a new grant program coming out of this department where we’ll be providing possibly as much as $70 million for investments in school climate projects.”  (He revealed all this and much more in this month’s Phi Delta Kappan magazine. Scroll down to the “Safe at School” title.)

 So at this point, you might be wondering, What on earth does “school climate” really mean? I think it’s best to take that definition from Kevin Jennings–based on his record as the longtime founder and leader of GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network).

Under Jennings’ leadership, GLSEN has provided students with a “school climate” continuum measurement tool.  This tool reveals a lot about Jennings’ true goals: A positively rated “inclusive school,” for instance, is defined as one where “LGBT themes are fully integrated into curricula across a variety of subject areas and grade levels.”

I.e., Jennings and GLSEN want homosexual, bisexual and transgender themes taught in every subject at every grade, all the way down to the kindergarten level, maybe even preschool.

By contrast, a “hostile school,” is one where “Curricula are devoid of LGBT themes” and homosexuality is “characterized” as “sin.” Does this mean that a school that acknowledges Christian students’ free speech rights to express their opinions about things like same-sex marriage is rated as “hostile”? Does this mean that if students disagree with lessons taught in class about homosexuality and same-sex marraige that they will be in violation of “school climate” safety policies?

Is this how Kevin Jennings will use taxpayer-funded money to measure our schools and force changes?

It remains to be seen, since his plans are still in the baby stages—but parents should stay on the alert.

There’s been a growing movement afoot for states to “voluntarily” adopt national curriculum standards. So far 47 states have signed up (the holdouts are Alaska, Texas and South Carolina).

“Voluntary” is a subjective word, since it’s becoming obvious how the Obama Administration intends to use federal funding as a stick to force contrarians into line.

While this is a concerning trend, it’s not really time for flashing sirens yet—because, so far, academics are still fighting amongst themselves over who exactly should have input into the final standards and what they should look like. It remains to be seen whether the states can agree.

So I guess you could say the threat level is yellow.  In the meantime, we can look to England for some insight into where this might lead.

In 1989, England implemented a national curriculum with a call for uniformity on core subjects. But what started as core standards, now includes compulsory sex education classes that teach kids about homosexuality and same-sex unions.   Apparently, faith-based schools are not exempt—they’ll have to engage in controversial teaching, while explaining that it “runs contrary to their religious beliefs.”

Others experts have expressed concerns that politically correct agendas are edging out core subjects and that student performance on national tests has stalled in recent years.

So before we embark on another failed experiment, perhaps we should learn a lesson from our friends across the ocean.