Disturbing testimony at hearing
reveals what is at the core of Common Core support, Posted on December
4, 2014 Written
by wisconsindailyindependent.com
Perhaps the most disturbing testimony presented to
Wisconsin’s Assembly during a recent hearing on Common Core was not about
Common Core at all. Superintendent Nick Madison, of the Brillion School District, offered the most revealing look at the thought process
behind the current popular “reforms.” Madison’s district is situated in a
farming community of about 3,000 people and is home of Ariens, a manufacturer
of bright orange removal equipment, including snow blowers and lawn mowers.
Brillion is a peaceful pastoral setting with low unemployment, little
crime, hard working innovative people growing the nation’s food and manufacturing
tools typically used by America’s middle-class families. Some would say
Brillion is the perfect symbol of American Exceptionalism.
That is why Madison’s testimony came as such a surprise
to so many. After Madison presented the business community’s scripted
defense of Common Core, and a reminder to the legislators that one of the
reasons Common Core was created was to meet the needs of industry, Madison
argued that “the policy is right because the policy is what is reflected in
the demands of business.”
Throughout his testimony, it was difficult to ascertain
whether Madison represented educators and the children they serve or the
chambers of commerce and the businesses they serve. Those two interests,
while not opposing, are not one and of the same. However, after presenting
a case for industry, remarkably Madison concluded his prepared statement
claiming that “it is time that we focus on kids and what’s in their best interests
and not on politics.”
It could have been the perfect ending for an educator; one
with which all educators could agree.
However, it was when Madison lashed out at Representative
Michael Schraa that he revealed what is at the core of Common Core. Schraa
began his questioning by noting, “American Exceptionalism was present
before Common Core, and you are kind of insinuating that we need Common
Core standards….” Madison aggressively interrupted, “You bet. That Exceptionalism
has come and gone with all due respect, Representative.” Madison continued,
“We have to be willing to innovate faster than the Chinese can copy us or
our industry is going to go away. You talk about what country standards did
you look at, here’s what country I look at when I go down to Home Depot and
see snow blowers made in China. That’s a real problem for Brillion, that’s
our standard. That is who we are competing with.”
In one flash of anger, Madison summed up what drives too
many supporters of Common Core: the belief that the unexceptional children
of the United States are nothing more than servants of industry to be educated
only to the extent that industry requires.
For years, as the teaching of basic skills has been
rejected by educators who are bored with the material or have a political
agenda, the performance of our students has been lacking. Rather than look
at their failures, educators are seeking any remedy that will lower standards
even more while offering a product for which someone is willing to pay.
Madison seemed to acknowledge that it was America’s ingenuity that must
have surely sprung from America’s educational system, which led to the
Ariens’ products being superior in design and function when compared to Chinese
ripoffs. Yet, he persisted in fighting for a set of standards which do nothing
to raise academic performance and everything to keep the cost of
labor low.
The testimony of Kirsten Lombard and Jody Lueck brought
into sharp focus the reasons for the business community’s investment in Common Core.
It turns out, the investment the chambers of commerce
make will be small when compared. As Lombard put it to the legislators,
“I’m very concerned to hear that there are people who think that the purpose
of education is to prepare people for work. Who really is the customer for
education?” Lombard asked. “Is the customer for education business or
industry? Or is it the parent and the child? I would suggest to you that
it’s not business and industry nor is it government,” said Lombard.
“It is the child and the parent,” said Lombard. “Those are
people to whom we have an obligation. Yet over and over again, I’ve heard
about needing to prepare people for work. I heard a businessman from Brillion
talk about how the world of business doesn’t have time for all we were talking
about here.”
Lombard advised the Legislature that Common Core is
nothing more than a public private partnership. “It is a very dangerous
thing. It’s very fashionable as some say it leads to very efficient government,
but the reason it’s more efficient is because we cut the public out of
the mix.”
Lombard argued that in the Common Core public-private partnership,
government brings the force and business brings the money. Then, the
investors and the special-interest groups are brought in to make it appear that
it has the support of people. “That is exactly what Common Core is: a public
private partnership which is designed to nothing more than shift private risk
to public shoulders.”
Lombard concluded, “I have seen the way this is being constructed.
I’ve done my homework, and this is very dangerous for the state and for the
people who live here. Particularly for its children, I urge you to think
about who the real customer for education should be.”
The testimony, which seemed to make the legislators
most uncomfortable was offered by Appleton businesswoman and CPA, Jody
Lueck, who related her experience with the promoters of Common Core. Lueck
described a meeting of the Appleton Chamber of Commerce in which a Common
Core promotional presentation was made this year.
The Wisconsin Regional Training Partnership’s promotional
program began with an explanation that Common Core was the centerpiece of
their effort to “match up the American educational system with the European
educational system of work-ready.”
Lueck advised the legislators that when the group
referred to career and college ready, they did not mean college “the way we
think about it. They’re discussing technical colleges.” Lueck said that
while she valued technical colleges, she became concerned when the group
was told, “We need to change to meet the job market demands in Wisconsin and
discourage our children from seeking a college degree.” She told legislators
that the intent of the proponents is to change the model from one in which we
promote thinking to one in which children are trained solely for careers to
meet the needs of industry. The chamber members were told that “only 27% of
jobs in Wisconsin required a college education, and we are doing our kids
a disservice, they said, we needed to change to meet the job market demands
in Wisconsin and discourage our children from seeking a college degree.”
Attendees were told this would be a shift in mindset.
When the attendees asked about the role of parents, they
were told, “We did not include them because we did not know how this would
work.” When the attendees persisted and asked again what the parents’ role
would be, the presenters said, ‘We are not telling the parents; their children
will bring them along.’
Lueck described a system in which kindergartners will be
given information about careers, and by the 8th grade, children will be funneled
into 16 career tracks.
Lueck said, “There’s no parental involvement at all. The
child will be tested, and the educators will offer them three tracks from
which a child can choose based upon the needs of business in Wisconsin.” Students
will then be placed in a track that best suits the student’s skill and will
feed the industry in need.
“We are going to restructure the educational system so
that all schools will work in tandem, and because you can’t have 16 career
academies in one school. Different high schools will be assigned different
academies,” Lueck testified. Under the new system a child might likely
attend one high school one day, and spend other days at another school.
Lueck told the legislators that schools will essentially
take over the role of HR departments. Teachers will determine which student
is qualified to interview for which apprenticeship. “This is not far-off,”
she warned the legislators.
“They didn’t know people were sitting in that audience
who would not necessarily agree with what they were doing,” said Lueck. She
did not to see “them hijack what education is supposed to be about. We want
thinking children who can really critically think and look at things. How
did I become a CPA before if our education system was so bad before Common Core?”
Lueck concluded, “If you thought our education system
was so bad, why on earth did we wait for a group of east coast foundations to
tell us what we should we doing here in Wisconsin?”
The “educators” of Tucson’s Mexican American Studies
classes said that they did not want “children to be cogs for the capitalist
machine.” Conservatives have made it clear that they do not want children
to become mindless cogs as well, so it leaves one to wonder if the progressives’
silence in the Common Core debate is due to the fact that they object to children
becoming mindless cogs only for the capitalist machine.
We can only hope that both conservatives and progressives
will come together on this simple principle: children should be equally
granted access to the finest education available so that someday, they
alone will determine the path they take, and the mark they make on their
world.
http://agenda21news.com/2014/12/disturbing-testimony-hearing-reveals-core-common-core-support/#more-3972
No comments:
Post a Comment