Texans Let Your Voices Be Heard~ New Performance Standards for Education Service Centers Proposed

Photo Courtesy of Education Blog Dallas Morning News

Photo Courtesy of Education Blog Dallas Morning News

You have between now and February 3rd for your voices to be heard Texas.

One thing that has become abundantly clear is the Texas Educational Service Centers that brought CSCOPE to Texas have had absolutely no oversight by the TEA. To rectify that Commissioner of Education Michael Williams has proposed new rule in the Texas Register regarding Regional Education Service Centers (ESCs) – 

If you go to the Texas Register by clicking the link below.  Once at this website, click on Texas Education Agency.  In the body of the text, there is a reference to Figure: 19 TAC §53.1021(b) (.pdf).  http://www.sos.state.tx.us/texreg/archive/January32014/index.html.

Commissioner Williams has proposed an ESC (Education Service Center) Performance Standards and Indicators Manual.  The manual is intended to provide clear expectations to ESCs and executive directors for programs, products, and services developed and provided to school districts and charter schools. The public comment period on the proposed rule goes through February 3rd. 

 

“Agency legal counsel has determined that the commissioner should take formal rule making action to place into the Texas Administrative Code procedures related to the regional education service center performance standards and indicators. The intent is to update, as needed, 19 TAC §53.1021 to refer to the most recently published Regional Education Service Center Performance Standards and Indicators Manual, which would be updated to remain current with applicable statutes and procedures.

Proposed new 19 TAC §53.1021 would adopt the Regional Education Service Center Performance Standards and Indicators Manual in rule as Figure: 19 TAC §53.1021(b), which would establish performance standards and indicators used in the evaluation of regional education service centers and executive directors. The manual would provide clear expectations to regional education service centers and executive directors for programs, products, and services developed and provided to school districts and charter schools. The manual would also provide clear expectations for ensuring compliance with statutory requirements.

The proposed new section would establish in rule the performance standards and indicators by which regional education service centers will be annually evaluated. The proposed new section would have no locally maintained paperwork requirements.

Julie Beisert-Smith, director of regional education service centers, has determined that for the first five-year period the new section is in effect there will be no additional costs for state or local government as a result of enforcing or administering the new section.

Ms. Beisert-Smith has determined that for each year of the first five years the new section is in effect the public benefit anticipated as a result of enforcing the new section would be to inform the public of the existence of annual manuals specifying regional education service center performance standards and indicators by including this rule in the Texas Administrative Code. There is no anticipated economic cost to persons who are required to comply with the proposed new section.

There is no direct adverse economic impact for small businesses and microbusinesses; therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis, specified in Texas Government Code, §2006.002, is required.

The public comment period on the proposal begins January 3, 2014, and ends February 3, 2014. Comments on the proposal may be submitted to Cristina De La Fuente-Valadez, Rulemaking, Texas Education Agency, 1701 North Congress Avenue, Austin, Texas 78701, (512) 475-1497. Comments may also be submitted electronically to rules@tea.state.tx.us or faxed to (512) 463-5337. A request for a public hearing on the proposal submitted under the Administrative Procedure Act must be received by the commissioner of education not more than 14 calendar days after notice of the proposal has been published in the Texas Register on January 3, 2014.

The new section is proposed under the Texas Education Code (TEC), §8.101, which authorizes the commissioner to establish performance standards and indicators for regional education service centers.

The new section implements the TEC, §8.101.ESC Manual

§53.1021.Regional Education Service Center Performance Standards and Indicators.

(a) In accordance with the Texas Education Code, §8.101, the commissioner of education shall establish performance standards and indicators for regional education service centers to be used in the annual evaluation of each regional education service center and executive director.

(b) The specific performance standards and indicators by which the commissioner shall evaluate each regional education service center and executive director are described in the Regional Education Service Center Performance Standards and Indicators Manual provided in this subsection.

Figure: 19 TAC §53.1021(b) (.pdf)

(c) The specific criteria used in the Regional Education Service Center Performance Standards and Indicators Manual are established by the commissioner and communicated to all regional education service centers and executive directors.

The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the proposal and found it to be within the state agency’s legal authority to adopt.”

 

 Time is of the Essence to stop the “Fundamental Transformation” of education in America. It is time for parents and grandparents to give the “Gift of American Exceptionalism” back to their child or grandchild. To do this we must go into our children’s school and say…..

 

Can I see Photo cover

#CanISee WHAT you are teaching my child, #CanISee HOW you are teaching my child and #CanISee WHO is financially benefiting from the curriculum products my child’s teacher is being evaluated on.

To follow the movement building a coalition of parents and teacher to give the gift of ”American Exceptionalism” to the next generation follow the hashtag #CanISee on Twitter.

If you think it is important I do urge you to support Women On the Wall and our efforts to educate people. 

Screen Shot 2014-01-10 at 9.32.45 AM

Stand with Texas Parents and Teachers who are fighting against the Federal Take Over of Education across our country.

Please sign the petition linked below and then pass it onto your friends and neighbors.
Ask them to Join the Movement! 

 Impeach Thomas Ratliff

 

“Lesson Learned” – CSCOPE

by Barbara Cargill

photo (3)Chair of Texas State Board of Education

Now is the time to ride the wave of public concern and outrage about CSCOPE. Although many past lessons may have been corrected or changed, why was there poorly written, biased content in the first place? (I read the lessons myself, using my own assigned password.) This issue is only the tip of a huge iceberg. There are other instructional materials that contain questionable content, and they are not being reviewed for the quality of their content.

 

In 1995 the legislature voted to limit the State Board of Education’s authority over the review of textbook content. Since that time, there has been no public, transparent, citizen-led process for vetting the quality of content in our children’s textbooks. Now that almost all textbooks are online, this becomes an even greater issue of concern because content can be changed with a few strokes on a keyboard. 

 

How were textbook reviews done in the past? Before 1995, the board could instruct review panels (consisting of volunteer parents, teachers, industry leaders, and other citizens) to check for factual errors and also to review thequality of the content.

 

Here are a few things panel members could review prior to 1995:

·        Does the textbook content present positive aspects of U.S. heritage?

·        Does it contain balanced, factual treatment of political and social movements?

·        Does the textbook promote respect for citizenship, patriotism, recognized authority, individual rights, the free enterprise, and respect for the work ethic? 

·        Does it reflect an awareness of various ethnic groups?

·        Does the book reflect the positive contributions of individuals and groups on American life? 

 

What changed? In the board’s current textbook review process, panelists are instructed to check for factual errors and for TEKS coverage, period. Checking for TEKS coverage is NOT checking for the quality with which the TEKS are covered. For example, George Washington is required to be covered in American history, since he is listed several times in the TEKS. How he is covered in the content, however, is not part of the review.

  

It is time for the citizens of Texas to demand change and to regain the right to vet the quality of content in our children’s textbooks! The same public passion that resulted in content changes in CSCOPE lessons must be harnessed and directed toward state policy-makers who can reinstate the vetting of content quality to the board’s adoption process.

 

What can you do?

I highly encourage you to ask your child’s teachers what curriculum and textbooks they use.  Parents must stay informed about what is being taught in the classroom; it is your right. According to the Texas Education Code 26.006, parents are “entitled to review all teaching materials, instructional materials, and other teaching aids used in the classroom of the parent’s child; and review each test administered to the parent’s child after the test is administered.” As we approach the 2014 election season, ask elected officials and candidates their position on this issue. We must be advocates on behalf of our schoolchildren; let’s show them that we have learned our lesson about what can happen when quality of content goes unchecked.

 ____________________________________________________

If you are not going to allow your child, grandchild, niece or nephew to be used start by signing a petition to remove paid Microsoft lobbyist Thomas Ratliff from the Texas SBOE (State Board of Education) 

 

Screen Shot 2013-08-19 at 9.53.19 PM

What Kate Forgot to Mention: “CSCOPE Assessments Now Posted on Public Website”

Donna Garner

Education writer Donna Garner

By Donna Garner

Kate Alexander, liberal and biased reporter for the Austin American-Statesman, has written an article in today’s paper entitled “Activists publish CSCOPE tests online.” I have posted excerpts further on down the page.

 

WHAT KATE “FORGOT” TO MENTION

Kate mentions nothing in this article about the fact that the TESCCC (made up of all 20 Education Service Center directors) was the corporate owner of CSCOPE (and all its parts).  TESCCC announced on May 20, 2013, that TESCCC would cease to exist.

From what has been widely publicized, the TESCCC

decided to shut itself down because it was set up originally as a “shell corporation” without the appropriate business mechanisms having been put in place; millions of taxpayers’ dollars are still unaccounted for; and lawsuits may be in the offing because of plagiarism found in the CSCOPE lessons. The Texas State Auditor, John Keel, is presently doing a formal audit of TESCCC/ESC/CSCOPE; and shortly a formal complaint may be filed with the IRS.

The TESCCC directors signed a letter saying that the CSCOPE lessons would be taken off the website on Aug. 31, 2013, when the yearly school contracts expired.  In the same 5.20.13 letter, the TESCCC also announced that the ESC’s would produce and sell no more lesson plans to Texas schools.

Screen Shot 2013-08-19 at 9.53.19 PMTHOMAS RATLIFF INFLUENCES HIS CRONIES

Then up popped Thomas Ratliff who loudly began advising Texas public school administrators to let their teachers download the CSCOPE lessons and to keep using them anyway.  Ratliff is a registered lobbyist for Microsoft and gets richer each time online technology in Texas schools is utilized.  Because of his obvious conflict of interest, Ratliff is an illegal member of the Texas State Board of Education because of the monetary/business ties that the Texas Education Agency and SBOE have with Microsoft.

Grassroots citizens have generated a petition to have Ratliff impeached by the Texas House  — www. IMPEACHRATLIFF.COM.

 

CSCOPE IN PUBLIC DOMAIN

At the July 17-19, 2013 Texas State Board of Education meeting, David Anderson, legal counsel for the Texas Education Agency, verbalized his interpretation of this confusing situation, saying that after Aug. 31, 2013, the CSCOPE lessons would become a part of the public domain and could be utilized by any and all.  On 8.22.13, the Texas Tribune published the CSCOPE lessons on their website.

 

However, nothing has been decided legally about the ownership of the CSCOPE assessments. The TESCCC owned the CSCOPE lessons and the accompanying assessments; but since the TESCCC has shut itself down and its contracts with districts have ceased to exist, it seems reasonable to assume that the CSCOPE assessments should be in the public domain also.

 

MEANWHILE, TESCCC HAS MORPHED

On 8.12.13, the former TESCCC members met as a committee at ESC 13 in Austin and suddenly began calling themselves the Texas Curriculum Management Program Cooperative (TCMPC).  The name CSCOPE has been changed to the TEKS Resource System, and all of the same CSCOPE “parts” are being marketed by the ESC’s except for the CSCOPE lessons (which can now be accessed on the Texas Tribune website).

 

CSCOPE ASSESSMENTS PUBLISHED

This week a few of the CSCOPE assessments have been put into the public domain on a public website with more assessments sure to be published soon.  The question remains, “If TESCCC shut itself down, then who owns the CSCOPE assessments?”

 

Stop CSCOPETEXAS TEACHERS SPEAK OUT

Please go to this link to see how Texas teachers and students feel about the CSCOPE lessons, assessments, and scope and sequence:  http://www.voicesempower.com/voice-of-a-teacher-and-a-student-cscope-assessments/

 

SBOE REVIEW AND PUBLIC HEARING — CSCOPE SOCIAL STUDIES LESSONS

The Texas State Board of Education is supervising the review of the CSCOPE social studies lessons since many schools in Texas have decided to keep using the CSCOPE lessons which are now in the public domain.  The review teams are evaluating whether or not the CSCOPE lessons are aligned with the state-adopted-and-mandated curriculum standards (TEKS) and are free from factual errors.

As a part of the SBOE review of the CSCOPE social studies lessons, a public hearing will be held by the SBOE on Sept. 13 at 9:00 A. M. (changed from an earlier start time of 1:00 P. M.)  Here is the link to the information people need who wish to testify at that meeting: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/Communications/CSCOPE/Public_hearing_scheduled_on_CSCOPE/

 

THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM – PARENTAL ACCESS

For those school districts that insist on using CSCOPE lessons (or whatever the new name may be), the “elephant in the room” is still parental access 24/7 to the CSCOPE curriculum.

Statute established in the Texas Education Code (TEC) states that the school district must “allow the student to take home any instructional materials used by the student…The parent must be allowed to review all teaching materials, instructional materials, and other teaching aids used in the classroom of the parent’s child…A school district shall make teaching materials and tests readily available for review by parents.”  (Texas Education Code, Title 2. Public Education, Subtitle E. Students and Parents, Chapter 26. Parental Rights and Responsibilities, Sec. 26.006. Access to Teaching Materials — http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/ED/htm/ED.26.htm#26.004 )

 

Definition of “instructional materials” – “The term includes a book, supplementary materials, a combination of a book, workbook, and supplementary materials, computer software, magnetic media, DVD, CD-ROM, computer courseware, on-line services, or an electronic medium, or other means of conveying information to the student or otherwise contributing to the learning process through electronic means, including open-source instructional material. (Texas Education Code, Title 2. Public Education, Subtitle F. Curriculum, Programs, and Services, Chapter 31. Instructional Materials, Subchapter A. General Provisions, Sec. 31.002, Definitions, Instructional Material —

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/ED/htm/ED.31.htm )

 

As described by an experienced Texas teacher:

 Hypothetically, if a teacher ‘does’ a CSCOPE lesson, the parent will never be able to see it. It will be played out in the classroom. The only thing that will come home is a graphic organizer with a bunch of empty boxes — no explanation at the top, no content to review…

CSCOPE doesn’t provide the content — meaning the informational text for the student. That is why it is so dangerous.  It provides a script for the teacher, which the parent will never see. The teacher is left to scramble for material all over the internet. 

When dangerous links in the CSCOPE lessons were made public by concerned citizens, the TESCCC (corporate owner of CSCOPE) pulled those links. This is the big danger of CSCOPE and other online materials.  Links and other content can be taken out or put back in ‘at the click of a mouse’ without parental knowledge.  

Another expert on CSCOPE has stated:

We also need to keep going back to the fact that the TESCCC was never forced to provide actual access for parents  – a requirement of the Texas Education Code. TESCCC skirted by on pledges to create a new website with total access, which turned out to be a sham since parents did not have genuine access to the lessons being used in CLASSROOMS, only samples (as was the case with the original CSCOPE domain)…

No access was ever truly granted.  Therefore, the question of access is still a valid one for the courts and should be the primary focus of legal efforts. 

For success in court, parents need to seek injunctive relief on the basis of being denied access to the lessons used by both the District and TESCCC. Injury on the basis of ACCESS will give all parents standing. And standing, is what judges care about.  

============

Austin American Statesman Writer Kate Alexander

Austin American Statesman Writer Kate Alexander

9.5.13 – “Activists Publish CSCOPE Tests Online” – by Kate Alexander, Austin American-Statesman —

 

Excerpts from this article:

A conservative blogger has published online the questions and answers for social studies tests available to hundreds of Texas school districts because she maintains they reflect a pro-Islam and anti-American bias.

 

The public release of the tests could render them unusable and is the latest development in an ongoing saga over a curriculum system, formerly known as CSCOPE, that has inflamed conservative and tea party activists over the past year.

 

Ginger Russell, half of the mother-daughter duo that sparked the CSCOPE controversy, posted the 10 tests on her website — redhotconservative.com — on Wednesday. Russell said she believed that parents needed to see the tests, which had been provided to her by teachers…

 

It will be left up to the school districts whether to continue using the tests, but many teachers and administrators have already expressed concern that the integrity of the assessments had been compromised, said Mason Moses, a spokesman for the state-funded Education Service Centers that developed the assessments.

 

“We take this very seriously. … This may be just 10 or so now, but there is concern that moving forward it could multiply significantly,” Moses said.

 

Posting the tests online harms the schools that have found them to be a useful resource, said State Board of Education member Thomas Ratliff, R-Mount Pleasant.

 

“Clearly, what she’s trying to do is destroy the whole program,” Ratliff said of Russell…

Join the Movement!

If you are not going to allow your child, grandchild, niece or nephew to be used like this start by signing a petition to remove paid Microsoft lobbyist Thomas Ratliff from the Texas SBOE (State Board of Education) 

 

Screen Shot 2013-08-19 at 9.53.19 PM

 

 

Insight and Wisdom – CSCOPE Controls Teachers

Many would say that those opposing CSCOPE are anti Public School- That could not be further from the truth. At WomenOnTheWall.org we stand for Public School teachers. Our goal is to give them their classroom back. The two groups that are completely marginalized in the CSCOPE debate are Teachers and Parents which are the two groups that are actually closest to the children. Therefore their voices are the most important.

This was posted on a teacher blog ….teachers.net

What many C-SCOPE crusaders fail to realize is that C-SCOPE has been in schools for 7 years and for many districts C-SCOPE is all they have, there is nothing to fall back on.  
Every district has at least one person in curriculum and instruction. We had one for every subject. Before we adopted cscope they did nothing. They had great salaries and did not work on curriculum.
A new superintendent came in and they were all replaced by new team and coaches. They haven’t done much either. They became the cscope patrols. They never taught any of the lessons. One of our new coaches just left her classroom having 60 percent of her class fail. Wow what a joke.
Cscope came in this last year and we failed royally with it. Reading from scripted text that was suppose to be research based even though it wasn’t.  
Now we talk that we will have lots of school districts without a curriculum. Districts were paying millions for cscope so why not hire a good size group to write, adapt etc. curriculum. Money available for cscope but not for writers?
Come on this cscope stuff just gave these service centers plenty of money and they could have gotten together with these curriculum writers for free and assisted with making sure the treks were covered.
Cscope is a mess. It has way too many paper worksheets, tests galore and we need it dead forever.
We had many, many teachers that quit the district. Now they don’t have enough teachers and they are scrambling after anyone they can hire and mostly with no classroom experience. So defending cscope as being the best out there is not true.

Let’s talk about how Teachers are evaluated.

I asked a Texas Teacher – Does this article give an accurate description of how teachers are evaluated in Texas?

Confusion, fear greet school system

Excerpt from the above article. 

What if half your performance evaluation was based on your co-workers’ output, not your own?

Those co-workers might not even be in your department or field.

The other half of your evaluation would depend on your supervisor’s observations.

That’s what more than 17,000 of Nevada’s 25,000 public school teachers face under the state’s first mandatory teacher evaluation system. The vast majority of teachers soon will be evaluated on the test scores of students they never saw or subject areas they didn’t teach, or both.

Here was the response…….
This is the last year under the old PDAS (Professional Development Appraisal System).
 
Next year they will be bringing in a new system.  These are the component parts of the future:
 
Principals are trained to be enforcement officials who conduct chronic, frequent walkthroughs.  That has already started.  Last year Wichita Falls ISD 1,005 walkthroughs.
 
They are anxious to link teacher evaluation to test scores.  That will be factored in somehow on a point system.
 
Llano ISD CSCOPE Defenders!

Llano ISD CSCOPE Defenders!

Teachers will be dismissed much easier without any right to rebut a poor performance review.  In the past, we were assured of a time period to improve with professional development and mentoring.  That is over.

 
What you have to remember is that teachers will move to grade levels with less testing, they will try to get out of assignments where they have to take students with learning disabilities.  They will opt for positions like gifted-and-talented where the students are all likely to do well on the state test.  This will make certain positions have a very high turnaround rate with young teachers.
 
They are moving into areas this year with the new system, like frequent walk throughs.  It is very demoralizing for a high performing teacher.

It is interesting because after what we witnessed in Llano (photo to the right) last Friday all the dots are connecting. There are reports that the Superintendent gave the district the day off so district employees could come to the hearing. (FYI- On the tax payers dime). They were indeed there in their orange shirts ready to defend CSCOPE. 

It makes you wonder why. Clearly CSCOPE has major flaws. Why would a district be so dependent on an inferior product? Maybe because the system was put in place and the “Control of Teachers” is working quite nice. That is for those who are in CONTROL and making a lot of money off the backs of Texas Teachers! 

BREAKING NEWS ON CSCOPE

I need a hero to stop CSCOPE in Texas

I need a hero to stop CSCOPE in Texas

Texas State Board of Education Chair Barbara Cargill met with Lt. Gov. Dewhurst, Sen. Duncan, and others including Marty Rowley, the CSCOPE Ad Hoc committee chair.

It was decided that Rowley’s AD Hoc committee needs to be reactivated to review the CSCOPE social studies lessons for alignment with the state-adopted TEKS and to check for factual errors and/or bias.

Because hundreds of school districts have defiantly said they are going to use these CSCOPE lessons in classrooms even past the August 31, 2013 date, it is important for the Ad Hoc to renew their work to make sure that Texas children are exposed to instructional materials that are aligned with the state-adopted curriculum standards (TEKS).

The following SBOE members have been asked to serve on the Ad Hoc — Pat Hardy, Mavis Knight, and Tom Maynard.  More details will be forthcoming.

The SBOE will oversee the Ad Hoc committee process with the hopes that local school districts will take seriously the posted evaluations and recommendations regarding the CSCOPE social studies lessons.

The comments from the Ad Hoc should help school districts to implement SB 1474 —http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/Text.aspx?LegSess=83R&Bill=SB1474 — which mandates that teachers, district employees, members of the public, and local school board members be a part of the decision-making process to implement major curriculum initiatives.

The choices that the group yesterday had were either (1) to ignore the fact that teachers still plan to use the CSCOPE lessons or (2) to confront the situation head-on, evaluate the lessons, and make sure that the lessons are aligned with the TEKS and that errors and/or bias are removed.

The plan is to have this CSCOPE review of the social studies lessons finished by October 2013 so that the SBOE can continue with its very busy and important schedule of evaluating instructional materials.

In the September and November SBOE meetings, the Board will hold public hearings for people wanting to testify about the K-12 science and K-8 math (Corrected)  instructional materials that are currently being reviewed.

 

Texas SB 1474 Gives Parents the Power in local Schools~

Your Childs educationNow it is time to use it in the battle against CSCOPE.

From District to District across the state of Texas Moms, Dads and Teachers should be demanding their voice be hear.

Demand a hearing before CSCOPE is adopted or renewed in your district and that the process for adoption follow SB1474.

There is an unknown bill that passed in the Texas Legislature that is not getting play and we believe it needs to.

SB1474 passed and went into effect immediately. 

BILL ANALYSIS SB 1474 by Sen. Duncan

Senate Research Center S.B. 1474
83R10136 CAE-F By:  Sen.Duncan
Education
AUTHOR’S / SPONSOR’S STATEMENT OF INTENT

S.B. 1474 provides a process for school districts to follow before any major curriculum initiative is adopted. By doing so, school districts would be given the opportunity to obtain feedback while deciding if any proposed curriculum meets the needs of their district. Before a district adopts a major curriculum initiative, they would be required to gather input and opinion from both teachers and district employees. The local school board would also gather input and opinion from both teachers and district employees and would be required to have a hearing to discuss the proposed initiative and allow feedback from community members.

As proposed, S.B. 1474 amends current law relating to the adoption of major curriculum initiatives by a school district.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

This bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, institution, or agency. 


SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS
SECTION 1. Amends Section 28.002(g), Education Code, as follows:
(g) Requires a school district (district), before the adoption of a major curriculum
initiative, including the use of a curriculum management system, to use a process that:
(1) includes teacher input;
(2) provides district employees with the opportunity to express opinions
regarding the initiative; and
(3) includes a meeting of the board of trustees of the district at which information
regarding the initiative is presented, including the cost of the initiative and any
alternatives that were considered, and members of the public and district
employees are given the opportunity to comment regarding the initiative.
SECTION 2. Effective date: upon passage or September 1, 2013.

The curriculum your district uses in not the choice of the local Superintendent who wants a consulting position when they retire with the ESC (Education Service Centers), TASA (Texas Association of School Administrators) or TASB (Texas Association of School Boards).

It is the choice of Teachers, District Employees, the local School Board and Parents.

It is time to be EMPOWERED!

TASA Conference

CSCOPE/Common Core exposed to Political Leaders- Will they Lead?

Public Statement by Women On The Wall on Senator Dan Patrick and Lt. Governor David Dewhurst’s attendance at the BackPack and Boots on the Ground Education Summit.

Screen Shot 2013-07-21 at 6.46.52 PM

BackPacks and Boots on the Ground in Conroe, Texas hosted by the Montgomery County Tea Party was attended by Lt. Governor David Dewhurst and Senator Dan Patrick. By all accounts they were shocked by the information they heard.

The question is are these leaders willing to actually lead and get to the bottom of the political corruption involved in the TESCCC’s CommonCore/CSCOPE illegal invasion of Texas schools? Those of us who were there understand the political game and that these two men are running for Lt. Governor. They were both there seeking support from grassroots leaders and their organizations who were attending. What the Lt. Governor and Senator may not understand is that the people who were there could care less about these men’s political careers , and the people are going to do what it takes to protect their children and grandchildren.

Therefore just talking the good talk and getting photo opportunities will not work. There must be action and it must be taken immediately before Texas children are harmed anymore in the 2013 and 2014 school year by the Common Core philosophy that is coming in the back door through CSCOPE and the corrupt education non-government organizations such as TASA (Texas Association of School Administrators), TASB (Texas Association of School Boards) and the ESCs (Education Service Centers) who have direct access to our tax dollars.

If these political leaders want support from the grassroots action is needed and it is needed Now!!! 

We are calling on a full audit by the State Auditor to look into direct conflicts of interest and illegal actions by the TESCCC. In addition , an audit must be done of TASA and TASB. From what public information requests revealed there may be grounds for legal action to be taken by tax payers of Texas.

Lastly we are demanding that Texas Leadership find a remedy to remove Thomas Ratliff as a Texas State Board of Education elected official. The Attorney General has already ruled that he is not eligible to be on the SBOE because he is a paid lobbyist.

We also request that you watch this short talk by Dr. Everett Piper on the Common Core philosophy of education and why it is not a “GOOD IDEA”.

Time is of the essence~ Texas Children must be protected!!

 IMG_7831

 

Who is Teaching Sex Education in your Child’s Classroom or Library?

Do you know? Are you asking the questions to find out?

Hat Tip to the South Dakotans against the Common Core who found The Common Core Sex Education Standards 

The National Sexuality Education Standards

national sex standards cover

Click here to read page 6“The National Sexuality Education Standards were further informed by the work of the CDC’s Health Education Curriculum Analysis Tool(HECAT)3; existing state and international education standards that include sexual health content; the Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality Education: Kindergarten – 12th Grade; and the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Mathematics, recently adopted by most states. 

 You might say…… “We won’t allow it in our schools. We will go to the school board.”

 “Specifically, the National Sexuality Education Standards were developed to address the inconsistent implementation of sexuality education nationwide and the limited time allocated to teaching the topic.” The whole idea behind Common Core is to create universal standards.

Remember this tweet from Planned Parenthood and Media darling Texas Senator Wendy Davis? 

Wendy Davis Tweet

Question Parents are you okay with Tx Sen. Wendy Davis proposing to provide age-appropriate health education to students. Understand folks here is how Planned Parenthood wants access to your children. Through the education system.

In Texas Common Core is coming in the back door-  by the ESC’s (Edcation Service Centers) who formed an NGOs (Non-governmental organizations 501c3) who has access to our tax dollars. CSCOPE exposed exactly how they do this. Develop a product or curriculum they can rent to the district on a yearly basis. It is a money making gold mine. 

Who is behind the Sex Education Curriculum? Here are just a few-

Nora Gelperin, was the recipient of the national 2010 Mary Lee Tatum Award from the Association of Planned Parenthood Leaders in Education! http://answer.rutgers.edu/page/nora_award

Deb Hauser has been with Advocates for Youth for almost 20 years, first as Director of the Support Center for School-based Health Care, then as Executive Vice President. In January 2012, Deb became the organization’s fourth President and Executive Director, representing Advocates with the media, funders and colleagues organizations and speaking nationally and internationally about young people’s rights to honest sexual health information, confidential sexual health services and equitable social and economic opportunities.
http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/about-us/advocates-staff

Cynthia Lam, Sex, Etc. Teen Editorial Staff who has been writing for Sex, Etc since she was 14, she’s now 17.

Robert McGarry, EdD

Director of Training and Curriculum Development
Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN)

You might remember hearing about GLSEN and Kevin Jennings back in 2009

White House “safe schools” appointee Kevin Jennings: How he pushed the homosexual agenda in America’s schools

POSTED: Sept. 13, 2009

Kevin Jennings, now the “safe schools” appointee in Barack Obama’s US Department of Education, is a prominent homosexual activist who has devoted his career to pushing homosexuality in the nation’s schools. Founder of the nationwide Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN)

“Of course educating kids to be accepting of people who are different from them is good. Nobody is opposing that. But Obama’s appointment for Safe-School “czar” and those supporting him have other agendas to undermine the efforts of parents who try to protect the innocence and morality of their children.”-Matthew Warner

I totally agree with Matthew Warner

 Mary Scheel-Buysse shares “What information do the these people think is age-appropriate.”

womb. classroom“Parents will no longer have the right to decide what is developmentally and age appropriate for their individual child.” 

On page 12 it says
“By the end of 2nd grade, students should be able to: Use proper names for body parts, including male and female anatomy.” 

On page 14 it says:
“By the end of 5th grade, students should be able to: Describe male and female reproductive systems including body parts and their functions. Identify medically-accurate information about female and male reproductive anatomy.  Define sexual orientation as the romantic attraction of an individual to someone of the same gender or a different gender.”

On page 9 under “Guiding Values and Principles”

“Instruction by qualified sexuality education teachers is essential for student achievement.”
Wouldn’t that be the parents? Who decides who is “qualified”?

“Students need opportunities to engage incooperative and active (I underlined those two words) learning strategies, and sufficient time must be allocated for students to practice (I underlined that one too) skills relating to sexuality education.”
What does that mean? Something like this?

And I just have to highlight this principle:
Students need multiple opportunities and a variety of assessment strategies to determine their achievement of the sexuality education standards and performance.

I know this is already in many of our schools. This is sex-education on steroids. You can download your own copy of the standards here.

I have only highlighted a very few of the items I, as a mom, find objectionable. You may not have any issues with the standards, principles and skills that children will be taught as a part of the Common Core Standards. I’m not asking you to agree with me. After all these are only minimum standards. Page 6 –  Outline what, based on research and extensive professional expertise, are the minimum, essential content and skills for sexuality education K–12 given student needs, limited teacher preparation and typically available time and resources. I just want you to be aware of the details.

If Common Core is so wonderful, why did they bring it in the back door without legislation? Education we are paying for, without representation. 

Have you ever had one of those Oh MY GOSH moments when listening to a radio show? Well that happened on the Women On The Wall radio show this morning.  Click and listen to the audio and then check out the Pamphlet by the American Library Association that Education Correspondent Mary Bowen shared with us on the show here>> womenonthewall.org/wp-content/uplo…wyourrights.pdf

The Library lesson Mary referenced in the show is found in this video on Sexting. www.teachingchannel.org/videos/danger…-sexting?fd=1

So here is the question….. Parents and Teachers what are you going to do about it?

Are you willing to STAND in the GAP for the Next Generation! 

Stop Common Core in Texas

[emailpetition id=”4″]

 

Backpacks & Boots on the Ground Education Summit ~ Conroe, Texas

workshops.boots_.on_.the_.ground.001

Montgomery Tea Party

Montgomery County Tea Party

Education Summit you do not want to miss! 

Saturday, July 20, 2013 from 7:00 AM to 4:30 PM (CDT)

Conroe, TX 

 CO-SPONSORS:  

MONTGOMERY COUNTY TEA PARTY & WomenOnTheWall.Org

Stop Common Core in Texas

Be informed – Join us for great speakers and tons of current information on what is going on in our schools and how we can help.

Here’s the schedule, subject to change, but this is the plan:

7:30-8:00AM – Register and have some breakfast

8:00AM til 12:15PM   Speakers on:

Legislature (by Texas State Representative Steve Toth) 
C-Scope, 
Common Core
Social Media 
Home Schools

12:15PM – 4:30PM – Lunch (provided) and afternoon session including:

The Romeike family from Germany came here for religious/educational freedom & this administration is deporting them back to Germany..
How we can support conservative High Schools
Filing a PIR – what you can find out about your school district.
What are the tools available to fight back and take back local control of our schools?

PLANNED SPEAKERS:

PAT TIBBS, President, Montgomery County Tea Party

LYNNETTE SMITH, Vice President, Montgomery County tea Party and Chair of this Event

ALICE LINAHAN, Board Member of WomenontheWall.org

TEXAS STATE REPRESENTATIVE  STEVE TOTH,, District 15

GINGER RUSSELL, MCTP Board Member and CSCOPE WARRIOR

MARY BOWEN, CSCOPE & Common Core

RYAN ELKINS, First Scholarship Recipient to the Patriot Academy

COLLEEN VERA, TexasTrashTalk.com

PLEASE NOTE:  BUY YOUR TICKET  HERE 

A block of rooms have been reserved at:

Spring Hill Suites, 16520 I 45 S., The Woodlands, TX 77384. Deadline for special ratesof $99//Kg. Suite is June 28.  Montgomery County Tea Party Is the name of the room block.   936-271-0051

Book King Suite at SpringHill Suites Houston The Woodlands for $99.00 per night

CHECK OUT OUR LIBERTY SCHOOL ON 7/19/13 FOR JUNIOR PATRIOTS, Ages 7 to 10 yrs:   www.mcteaparty.org

 Any questions, please call the Event Chair:  Lynnette Smith @ 281.363.9514

How Did the Gates Foundation Allocate $150 Million to Common Core?

by Henry W. Burke

Stop Common Core in Texas ~ Stop CSCOPEThe Washington Post published the following article on 5.12.13 by Valerie Strauss about the Gates Foundation Grants – “Gates Gives $150 Million in Grants for Common Core Standards”

Excerpts from this article:

For an initiative billed as being publicly driven, the Common Core States Initiative has benefited enormously from the generosity of the private philanthropy of Bill and Melinda Gates. How much? About $150 million worth.

Take a look at this list of grants, obtained from their foundation’s Web site. Note not only the amounts but the wide range of organizations receiving money. Universities. Unions. State education departments. Nonprofits. Think tanks. The grants were given for a range of reasons, including developing materials aligned to the standards and building support for the standards.

You can see how invested the Gates Foundation is in the success of the Common Core.  What kind of Core support do these grants buy from the organizations that receive them?

[The Washington Post article includes a detailed listing of the Gates Foundation grants directed to the Common Core.]

===================

In Donna Garner’s 5.13.13 article on this subject, she wisely stated:  As you read through these grants that Bill Gates gave to “Universities. Unions. State education departments. Nonprofits. Think tanks,” remember which corporation stands to gain the most financially if Common Core Standards (CCS) are implemented throughout the United States – Microsoft Corporation. 

In other words, a corporation that stands to gain billions from CCS is owned by the private philanthropist who has been driving education policy.  This is called “a direct conflict of interest” by a vendor who is working alongside the Obama administration to create education policy to federalize standards, curriculum, assessments, teacher evaluations, and a national database of intrusive personal information.

 The end result would be billions for Microsoft and the indoctrination of our nation’s school children into Obama’s social justice agenda.  

As someone who has followed the grim progression of Common Core Standards which is the Obama administration’s takeover of the public schools by the federal government, I thought it would be interesting to provide a breakdown of the roughly $150 million ($146.6 million) in grants for the Common Core Standards.  The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Gates Foundation) is clearly the major sponsor of the Common Core Standards Initiative (CCSI).

The largest category by far is “Think Tanks,” which garnered about $67 million or 46 % of the $147 million total.  State Departments of Education received $22 million or 15 % of the total.  The other categories obtained 3 – 12 % of the total.

 

Summary of Gates Foundation Grants

(All Amounts in Millions of Dollars)

Category

Grant

Amount

($ Millions)

Percentage

of

Total

Think Tanks     66.758     46 %
State Departments of Education     22.288     15 %
National Associations     17.629     12 %
Universities     12.293       8 %
Common Core “Project Leaders”     11.500       8 %
Institutes     11.193       8 %
Local School Districts       4.946       3 %
    Total   146.607   100 %

 

The lion’s share of the Gates Foundation Common Core grants were directed to Think Tanks.  The Gates Foundation spent major dollars on Think Tank organizations that are advocating CCS and developing Common Core materials.  As a group, Think Tanks obtained about $67 million (46 % of the Gates Common Core $146.6 million total).  Clearly, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is utilizing Think Tanks to promote the Common Core agenda.

Because the Think Tanks played a huge role in shaping education policy, it should not surprise us that they received much of the Gates Foundation funding.  By driving education policy, the Gates Foundation will control what happens in the local classrooms.

 

 

Grants to Think Tanks

Organization Year

Grant

Amount

($ Millions)

WestEd 2013     0.030
LearnZillion, Inc. 2013     0.966
National Paideia Center, Inc. 2013     0.660
The Achievement Network 2012     3.002
BetterLesson, Inc. 2012     3.527
JUMP Math 2012     0.699
Center for Curriculum Redesign, Inc. 2012     0.198
State Education Technology 2012     0.500
Student Achievement Partners, Inc. 2012     4.043
The College-Ready Promise 2011     0.300
Scholastic, Inc. 2011     4.464
New Venture Fund 2011     0.378
Learning Forward 2011     1.000
Americas Promise-Alliance for Youth 2011     0.500
Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, Inc. 2011     4.619
Khan Academy, Inc. 2010     1.465
Khan Academy, Inc. 2011     4.079
National Writing Project 2011     3.096
Creative Commons Corp. 2011     0.813
Reasoning Mind, Inc. 2011     0.743
MetaMetrics, Inc. 2010     3.468
New Visions for Public Schools, Inc. 2010     8.150
Center for Teaching Quality, Inc. 2010     0.396
Alliance for Excellent Education, Inc. 2009     0.551
Alliance for Excellent Education, Inc. 2010     3.200
Cristo Rey Network 2010     0.556
Research for Action, Inc. 2010     1.309
Common Core, Inc. 2009     0.551
Colorado Legacy Foundation  2011     9.707
Colorado Legacy Foundation  2012     1.748
The Education Trust 2009     2.040
  Subtotal — Think Tanks     66.758

The Gates Foundation issued about $22 million in grants to the State Departments of Education.  Gates singled out the Kentucky DOE for $12.028 million (54 % of the State DOE total).  The Louisiana DOE received around $7 million (33 % of the State DOE total).

 

 

Grants to State Departments of Education

Organization Year

Grant

Amount

($ Millions)

Delaware 2013     0.400
Georgia 2010     1.981
Kentucky 2010     1.000
Kentucky 2011     9.125
Kentucky 2012     1.903
Louisiana 2011     7.352
Pennsylvania 2010     0.527
  Subtotal — State DOEs     22.288

An assortment of National Associations obtained mostly small grants from the Gates Foundation.  Together, they received $17.6 million (12 % of the total).  The two major teachers’ unions (NEA and AFT) grabbed 31 % of the National Association total.

 

 

Grants to National Associations

Organization Year

Grant

Amount

($ Millions)

National Education Assoc. Found. (NEA) 2012     0.100
American Federation of Teachers (AFT) 2011     1.000
American Federation of Teachers (AFT) 2012     4.400
National Indian Education Assoc. 2011     0.500
Office of Supt. of Public Instr. (Tribal) 2011     0.075
Council of State Governments 2010     0.400
Council of State Governments 2011     0.370
National Association of SBOEs 2009     0.451
National Association of SBOEs 2011     1.078
Council of Great City Schools 2010     0.100
Council of Great City Schools 2011     4.911
Education Commission of the States 2010     0.799
Military Child Education Coalition 2009     0.270
Military Child Education Coalition 2011     0.150
Assoc. for Supervision and Curr. Develop. 2011     3.025
  Subtotal — National Associations     17.629

Seven universities obtained grants totaling $12 million from the Gates Foundation.  The largest recipient was the University of Arizona at $3.4 million.

 

 

Grants to Universities

Organization Year

Grant

Amount

($ Millions)

University of Kentucky 2013     1.000
University of Arizona 2012     3.417
University of Michigan 2012     2.000
Massachusetts Inst. of Technology (MIT) 2011     2.889
University of State of New York 2010     0.893
University of State of New York 2011     0.600
Purdue University 2010     1.454
New York University 2010     0.040
  Subtotal — Universities     12.293

The Common Core Standards Initiative has been led by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association.  Not surprisingly, the Gates Foundation provided $11.5 million in funding to these organizations.

 

 

Grants to Common Core “Project Leaders”

Organization Year

Grant

Amount

($ Millions)

Council of Chief State School Officers 2011     9.389
Council of Chief State School Officers 2012     0.475
National Governors Association 2011     1.598
National Governors Association 2012     0.038
  Subtotal — CCS  “Project Leaders”     11.500

Gates gave grants to four Institutes, with the largest amount ($5.5 million) going to the James B. Hunt Institute; $3.6 million went to the Aspen Institute.  Common Core supporter Thomas B. Fordham Institute received almost $1 million.

 

 

Grants to Institutes

Organization Year

Grant

Amount

($ Millions)

The Aspen Institute 2013     3.616
American Enterprise Institute 2012     1.069
James B. Hunt Institute 2009     5.549
Thomas B. Fordham Institute 2009     0.959
  Subtotal — Institutes     11.193

The Gates Foundation sent about $5 million in funds to local school districts and local/state organizations.

 

 

Grants to Local School Districts

Organization Year

Grant

Amount

($ Millions)

Albuquerque Public Schools  (NM) 2010     0.500
School District of Philadelphia  (PA) 2010     0.500
Cleveland Metro School District  (OH) 2010     0.498
Forsyth County Schools  (GA) 2010     0.151
Fund for Public Schools  (NY) 2012     1.816
Baton Rouge Area Foundation  (LA) 2012     0.500
Nellie Mae Educ. Fdn.  (New England) 2011     0.350
Pennsylvania Business Roundtable  (PA) 2012     0.257
Hillsborough County Council  (FL) 2011     0.025
Massachusetts Business Alliance  (MA) 2010     0.151
Pritchard Committee for Acad. Exc.  (KY) 2011     0.198
  Subtotal — Local School Districts       4.946

 

CONCLUSION

What did $150 million in grants to the Common Core do for Bill Gates?  For one thing, these grants bought a great deal of control over education policy in this country.  This means that a man who owns a private corporation is directing public policy that will control what is taught to millions of students in their local classrooms.

Gates believes in the ideology enshrined in Common Core, and he knows money talks.  With many organizations clamoring for Bill Gates’ grant funds, they are more than willing to promote whatever he wants; and he likes the Common Core agenda.

The Common Core Standards will require huge commitments to technology.  According to the Pioneer Institute, the 46 CCS states will need to spend $6.9 billion for Technology to implement CCS.  Of course, not all of that money will be for computer hardware and software, but the computer portion will be substantial.

As the co-founder of Microsoft Corporation, William “Bill” Gates has strong ties to the corporation.  He is the former CEO and is its current Chairman.  Bill Gates is the largest individual shareholder of Microsoft, with 6.4 % of the common shares.  Under the Common Core computer demands, Microsoft stands to gain immensely.

It seems obvious that Bill Gates is involved in a classic conflict of interest situation.  Through the Gates Foundation, Bill Gates is actively supporting and promoting the Common Core.  Microsoft will greatly benefit from the huge increase in technology spending required by the Common Core.  Do we need to say more?

Henry W. Burke

E-mail: hwburke@cox.net  

“Common Core Standards with Henry W. Burke on Dr. Laurie Roth Show” – gives state-specific costs for implementation of Common Core Standards — audio clip – listen to interview —

 

CSCOPE-Texas Teachers’ Concerns & $100 Million into Bottomless Pit

Screen Shot 2013-05-21 at 8.40.15 AM

Women On the Wall ~ Communication Team Conference Call hosted by Alice Linahan– audio clip (easy listening on iPhone, iPad, computers) –5.22.13

SPECIAL GUESTS:

Anita Moncrief  former Leftist but now a committed conservative, exposed ACORN at national level, reveals Leftist agenda behind Common Core Standards

John Griffing investigative journalist for World Net Daily with well-researched articles on CSCOPE, Common Core Standards, burqa incident at Texas public school, dangers of lack of accountability/no paper trail with online learning

Bill Ames Social Studies expert who served on the Texas curriculum standards writing team, describes 4thgrade Texas classroom in which look-alike Common Core Standards are being taught

Various Texas teachers, Marie Frazier, Donna Garner  – speaking out on CSCOPE, Common Core Standards, indoctrination of public school students

 ============

5.24.13 – From Ginger Russell

 A “THANK YOU” FROM GRATEFUL TEXAS TEACHER THAT CSCOPE LESSONS ARE GONE

Thank you, thank you, thank you! I do not know what control this thing has over superintendents, but it’s a scary thing! Prior to the hiring of our supt., we had district curriculum consultants who with teachers’ assistance, developed curriculum calendars for all subjects. Our ELA scores were amazing!

And then the current supt rolls in. Cscope is the Bible, Cscope is the National Archives, Cscope is everything a teacher needs….if you listen to the supt. Countless meetings have been held with the assistant supt. to share concerns but to no avail.

I have gone from a teacher having the confidence that I could accomplish anything in the classroom to a teacher that hasn’t known which end is up. Metaphors are our mantra…a ship without a rudder, a kite without a string, a compass without a needle.

How sad that education in our district wears the mask of deceit. I just wish that sanity could return to our classrooms.

Thank you so much for your continued work in exposing Cscope for what it is. Isn’t it interesting that this conflict has never been experienced over a textbook adoption?

==========

[Below is a link to a letter sent by Janice VanCleave to Dr. Duron, Deputy Commissioner for Finance and Administration at the Texas Education Agency.  Janice is inquiring about the $100 Million in Rider 42 funds that were given to the Texas Education Service Centers to train teachers adequately on the new curriculum standards (TEKS).  Instead, the ESC’s were so busy throwing all their efforts into their money-maker CSCOPE that they did a terrible job of providing teachers with the proper training.  Janice wants to know what happened to all that $100 Million, and why it was not spent appropriately.  — Donna Garner]

5.26.13 – “What Happened to the $100 Million Sent to the Education Service Centers To Train Teachers on the New Curriculum Standards – the TEKS?” – by Janice VanCleave — 

Petition to Remove CSCOPE from Texas Schools

THe Children are our Future

“ACTION ALERT: Texas Schools on Cusp of Failure”

From the Communication Team Conference call last night we learned about an underhanded maneuver  in the Texas Legislature.

HB 2836 a bill which is dumbing down Texas students is MADE EVEN WORSE BY SECT. 39.0236. 

Along with the other “dumbing down” sections of HB 2836, Sen. Dan Patrick added Sect. 39.0236 to the Senate bill. This section would create an interim study committee made up of 12 appointed members with only 2 elected members of the Texas State Board of Education. This committee would have the majority voting power (12) to change the TEKS in the foundational grade levels of 3 through 8 and change them right back into Type #2.  

Please read:  5.17.13 – “SUPER TEXAS ALERT: The Education Bureaucracy at Its Worst” http://educationviews.org/super-texas-alert-ed-bureaucracy-at-its-worst/

CURRENT STATUS

HB 2836 was passed by the House on 4.30.13 and by the Senate yesterday, 5.22.13. Because no engrossed version from the Senate is posted online yet, I called Sen. Dan Patrick’s office since he authored Sect. 39.0236.  I talked to three different people to find out whether Sect. 39.0236 is still in the final version of HB 2836.  No one seems to know even though I have waited hours for a response.  His office staffers also do not know whether HB 2836 will be sent to a House/Senate conference committee because of differences between the House and Senate versions. 

If the bill goes to conference committee, then we must first WRITE and then CALL our Texas Legislators to tell them that we do not want HB 2836 to be passed at all and we certainly do not want Sect. 39.0236 to be a part of it.  

If HB 2836 should make it to the Governor’s desk, we will need to contact Gov. Perry and plead with him to veto this bill.  

Unfortunately, another bad bill, HB 866, is already on Gov. Perry’s desk and would work in conjunction with HB 2836 to dumb down our Texas students.  Both HB 866 and HB 2836 must be vetoed if Gov. Perry wants our Texas schools to lead the nation in academic excellence.   

THE IRONY ALMOST TOO MUCH TO BEAR

The irony is that parents around the nation are beginning to look to Texas as the bellwether state in authentic education reform as they realize that their own children are trapped in the Type #2 Common Core Standards.

Our state has done it right with Type #1 standards, Type #1 STAAR/End-of-Course tests, and challenging graduation requirements of 4 years each of English, Math, Science, and Social Studies.  

Thank you Steve TothMany Texas Legislators have worked effectively with grassroots citizens to debunk CSCOPE.  Now if Texas Legislators and Gov. Perry would allow Texas’ already-well-thought-out New Plan to move forward, this year’s 10th graders on down would be the beneficiaries of a quality education.  If not, then the responsibility for allowing our public school children to continue to be immersed in Type #2 will be on the heads of the 83rd Legislative Session.

Request for Public Information (PIR) Templete for TASA and TASB 

The Battle continues~ Common Core is seeping in the back door.#StopCommonCore in Texas. TASA, TASB and the TESCCC must be stopped completely.

Stop Common Core Presser

Knowledge is Power and together we can make the difference!!

The Latest News on CSCOPE

If you are in Dallas on 5/16/2013 we highly encourage you to attend the AD HOC CSCOPE Meeting. Here is a link to the information TEA Adhoc CSCOPE Meeting 

From Donna Garner: 

Donna-Garner1Sen. Dan Patrick has taken the CSCOPE issue very seriously (please see his Facebook link posted further on down the page), and I appreciate his efforts on that education issue.

Unfortunately, while Sen. Patrick has been doing some effective investigation of CSCOPE, he and the other Legislators are doing irreparable harm to the high education standards set in place by those of us who have battled for well over 10 years to increase the knowledge-based, academic rigor of our Texas public school students:

5.14.13 – “Texas Legislators: Determining Students’ Fate” — http://educationviews.org/texas-legislators-determining-students-fate/

5.8.13 — “Duped Through Ignorance or Intent: Texas Legislators”  — http://educationviews.org/duped-through-ignorance-or-intent-texas-legislators/

To be totally honest, it is SB 6 that was passed during the last legislative session and supported by Sen. Patrick and other legislators which opened the door to the proliferation of CSCOPE and other inferior and out-of-alignment curriculum throughout our state.  Under SB 6, these materials can be purchased with taxpayers’ dollars at the local level without their having to pass through the organized and public review process of the elected members of the Texas State Board of Education.

What makes that SBOE review process so important is that it is done publicly!  First, the IM (instructional materials such as textbooks, etc.) are made public; and copies of the IM with page numbers, lesson unit numbers, and other identifiers are made available so that people who review them can designate problem passages along with the exact reference points. The hard copies of the IM make it possible for evaluators to cut/copy/paste exact passages onto a WORD document along with reference points and evaluators’ comments, expediting the ability for all concerned to be able to discuss the same passages with one another.

In contrast, CSCOPE materials are a hodge-podge of various pages; they are not consecutively paginated; the pages are erratically formatted with small and hard-to-read print, making it extremely difficult to read online. Because of the way CSCOPE is formatted, an evaluator cannot cut/copy/paste troublesome excerpts from the online site in order to put those passages into a WORD document along with proper documentation and page references for ease of transmittal to other committee members.  How can committee members discuss the problem verbiage if all of the members cannot easily locate the same passages at the same time in the CSCOPE lessons?

CSCOPE Questions, who are the wormsBefore any review can be done by anyone, including the SBOE, CSCOPE must provide their materials in print form with consistent formatting for ease of reading and with the ability for reviewers to be able to cut/copy/paste questionable passages onto a WORD document with accompanying documentation and reference points.

Until CSCOPE provides the materials in a workable format with pagination and reference points, it is useless for anyone to try to review the lesson content.  Simply putting the CSCOPE lessons online will not allow for the free-flow of discussion among the evaluators.

The good of the SBOE public review is that it will do just that – make the CSCOPE lessons public.  Then the public can testify, offer their concerns along with documentation, and discuss with the SBOE in open session the various passages.  This is the advantage of putting CSCOPE under the purview of the SBOE: transparency.

Once the problem passages are identified, they should be submitted to CSCOPE; and if the normal textbook adoption process were in place, any problem passages left in the CSCOPE lessons would accrue a sizeable penalty.  Wouldn’t it be nice if those penalties had to be paid out of the pockets of the CSCOPE directors who allowed objectionable passages to remain in the lessons?    

 ==============

 

5.15.13 – From Sen. Dan Patrick regarding the latest news on CSCOPE: https://www.facebook.com/dan.patrick.texas

5.6.13 – Letter from Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott to TESCCC making it clear that parents should not be charged a fee to access CSCOPE materials: https://www.oag.state.tx.us/oagNews/release.php?id=4394

 

Parents say “NO” to CSCOPE~ Superintendents dig in their Heels……

News on the ground from Rockwall ISD ~ According to CWA’s (Concerned Women for America) Michelle Smith…..

“I have been told just this morning of 25 students who will be pulled from RISD if RISD does not pull CSCOPE..that list is growing everyday. Lets see that’s 175,000 dollars the district will lose. Text books are looking better everyday.” 

News on the ground from Carthage ISD ~ Superintendents Dig in their Heels…..

Sups dig inLast night the Friday before Women On The Wall’s Alice Linahan is scheduled to speak in Carthage, Texas an article by: Three local superintendents has been published in the Panola County Watchman. 

Glenn Hambrick, Ed.D., Superintendent, Carthage ISD

Donna Porter, Ed.D., Asst. Superintendent, Carthage ISD

Mary Ann Whitaker, M.Ed., Superintendent, Hudson ISD

Before you read their article read about the Green, Yellow and Red People and ask yourself where are they in the analogy of the Green, Yellow or Red people. 

There are three different types of individuals involved in Common Core/CSCOPE; and we can see this all across America.

Green Yellow and Red CSCOPE People

Green Yellow and Red CSCOPE People

The “green” people are those who go-along to get-along; they go with the status quo and are content to follow whatever teaching fad is in vogue at the present time. These people are not bad people but are easily deceived by those who have ulterior motives (e.g., drive-by media, national educator organizations, left-leaning politicians, CSCOPE, Common Core Standards).

 

The “yellow” people are those who are driven by greed, money, power, and fame. Many of these people are vendors, lobbyists, or school employees who look past the egregious content of their products so long as they themselves are benefitting.  Into this group fall some CSCOPE/TESCCC/ESC employees, Thomas Ratliff, Mike Moses, Pat Jacoby, TASA, TASB, etc.

 

The “red” people know exactly what they are doing. They have long-term goals to change America, and they realize that the best way to do this is to indoctrinate this and succeeding generations of school children in their classrooms.  Into this group fall such people as Obama, Arne Duncan, Linda Darling-Hammond, Bill Ayers, the National Education Organization, and many other left-leaners.

Now, here is a link to their article.

CSCOPE and Carthage ISD

“It is sometimes mindboggling how some controversies begin. Certainly, the wildfire that has swept across Texas concerning the CSCOPE curriculum has our heads spinning. Misinformation has spread rampantly and the truth backed by factual information has been difficult to get out in front of the folks that are taking small excerpts and lessons out of context. In some cases, the CSCOPE curriculum has been attacked with reckless, unsubstantiated accusations.

The shame is that CSCOPE should be a success story of how 870 public school districts, average enrollment of 2000 students, working together with the twenty Education Service Centers (ESCs) created a 21st century curriculum based on the state mandated Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). Prior to selecting this curriculum for CISD, an extensive investigation was conducted to assure that it was a good fit for our district.”Please read the rest of the article here……

Women On The Wall encourages parents, grandparents and community members to show up and find out the truth about CSCOPE the Common Core philosophy of education that is being forced into our Texas Schools.

As Alice Linahan said today in response to this article….. “I will be happy to give them time to defend and will encourage their participation in the meeting on Monday night in Carthage, Tx. I am not looking for a fight, I am looking for debate and solutions. I hope we have the room filled and that good will come out of a hearty debate.” 

Here are some great resources for those looking into CSCOPE in Texas.

Compare Traditional Type 1 vs Type 2 CSCOPE Methods of Teaching

Click here for a list Texas School Districts using CSCOPE.  Although this list is in the process of changing. I know school boards in districts such as Argyle ISD have voted to not fund CSCOPE. 

Women On The Wall’s Stop CSCOPE Tool Box

________________________________________________ 

Join the Movement to Stop CSCOPE

Click the photo to sign the Petition and Join the movement to#StopCSCOPE 

Women On the Wall  takes on the issues that matter. Sharing information and updates on our weekly radio show on Monday mornings at 10 am CST. You will not want to miss this show. We will have up to date information on CSCOPE  and guests who are the experts on education and other issues that are effecting our children and grandchildren.

WOW_Radio_2_Ad15c0bf

Knowledge is Power and together we can make the difference!!

Alice Linahan

Follow @AliceLinahan on twitter and Facebook 

Voices Empower has partnered the Freedom Trailer Teams to Educate, Inspire and Motivate.

Women On The Wall.org

_________________________________________

Just Breaking: Power of the People!! Republican Win Against Common Core

The National Republican Party passed a resolution against Common Core in their platform. Yeah!

Common Core

Photo Courtesy of Left, right unite against Common Core

Hat Tip to Dawn Wildman – San Diego Tea Party organizer Southern California Tax Revolt Coalition Inc. www.socaltaxrevoltcoalition.org California Co-Coordinator Tea Party Groups www.Californiateapartygroups.org Guest Host of City on a Hill radio show http://www.blogtalkradio.com/cityonahill

and to Truth in American Education 

Here is the original draft:

RESOLUTION CONCERNING COMMON CORE EDUCATION STANDARDS

WHEREAS, the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are a set of academic standards, promoted and supported by two private membership organizations, the National Governor’s Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) as a method for conforming American students to uniform (“one size fits all”) achievement goals to make them more competitive in a global marketplace, (1.) and

WHEREAS, the NGA and the CCSSO, received tens of millions of dollars from private third parties to advocate for and develop the CCSS strategy, subsequently created the CCSS through a process that was not subject to any freedom of information acts or other sunshine laws, and never piloted the CCSS, and

WHEREAS, even though Federal Law prohibits the federalizing of curriculum (2.), the Obama Administration accepted the CCSS plan and used 2009 Stimulus Bill money to reward the states that were most committed to the president’s CCSS agenda; but, they failed to give states, their legislatures and their citizens time to evaluate the CCSS before having to commit to them, and

WHEREAS, the NGA and CCSSO in concert with the same corporations developing the CCSS ‘assessments’ have created new textbooks, digital media and other teaching materials aligned to the standards which must be purchased and adopted by local school districts in order that students may effectively compete on CCSS ‘assessments’, and

WHEREAS, the CCSS program includes federally funded testing and the collection and sharing of massive amounts of personal student and teacher data, and

WHEREAS, the CCSS effectively removes educational choice and competition since all schools and all districts must use Common Core ‘assessments’ based on the Common Core standards to allow all students to advance in the school system and to advance to higher education pursuits; therefore be it

RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee, as stated in the 2012 Republican Party Platform, “do not believe in a one size fits all approach to education and support providing broad education choices to parents and children at the State and local level,” (p35)(3.), which is best based on a free market approach to education for students to achieve individual excellence; and, be it further

RESOLVED, the Republican National Committee recognizes the CCSS for what it is– an inappropriate overreach to standardize and control the education of our children so they will conform to a preconceived “normal,” and, be it further

RESOLVED, That the Republican National Committee rejects the collection of personal student data for any non-educational purpose without the prior written consent of an adult student or a child student’s parent and that it rejects the sharing of such personal data, without the prior written consent of an adult student or a child student’s parent, with any person or entity other than schools or education agencies within the state, and be it finally

RESOLVED, the 2012 Republican Party Platform specifically states the need to repeal the numerous federal regulations which interfere with State and local control of public schools, (p36) (3.); and therefore, the Republican National Committee rejects this CCSS plan which creates and fits the country with a nationwide straitjacket on academic freedom and achievement.

References:

1. www.corestandards.org

2.  Federal Law 20 USC 1232a-Sec. 1232a. and The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Pub.L. 89-10, 79 Stat. 27, 20 US.C. ch. 70.

http://us-code.vlex.com/vid/prohibition-against-federal-control-19195093

3.  http://www.gop.com/rnc_counsel/

 ________________________________________________ 

Join the Movement to Stop CSCOPE

Click the photo to sign the Petition and Join the movement to#StopCSCOPE 

Women On the Wall  takes on the issues that matter. Sharing information and updates on our weekly radio show on Monday mornings at 10 am CST. You will not want to miss this show. We will have up to date information on CSCOPE  and guests who are the experts on education and other issues that are effecting our children and grandchildren.

WOW_Radio_2_Ad15c0bf

Knowledge is Power and together we can make the difference!!

Alice Linahan

Follow @AliceLinahan on twitter and Facebook 

Voices Empower has partnered the Freedom Trailer Teams to Educate, Inspire and Motivate.

Women On The Wall.org

___________________________________________

Voices Empower

Check Out Voices Empower Articles .

  Please attribute to Alice Linahan  with Voices Empower

“Education Is Serious Business: Green, Yellow, and Red People”

By Donna Garner 

GREEN, YELLOW, AND RED PEOPLE:  CATEGORIES IN EDUCATION

Generally, I believe there are two different types of philosophies of education; and nearly all educators, curriculum, vendors, organizations, and advocacy groups fall into one of these two categories.  (3.3.13 — “Traditional vs Progressive— Two Completely Different Philosophies of Education”

Green Yellow and Red CSCOPE People

Green Yellow and Red CSCOPE People

Next, there are also three different types of individuals involved; and we can see this all across America.

The “green” people are those who go-along to get-along; they go with the status quo and are content to follow whatever teaching fad is in vogue at the present time. These people are not bad people but are easily deceived by those who have ulterior motives (e.g., drive-by media, national educator organizations, left-leaning politicians, CSCOPE, Common Core Standards).

 

The “yellow” people are those who are driven by greed, money, power, and fame. Many of these people are vendors, lobbyists, or school employees who look past the egregious content of their products so long as they themselves are benefitting.  Into this group fall some CSCOPE/TESCCC/ESC employees, Thomas Ratliff, Mike Moses, Pat Jacoby, TASA, TASB, etc.

 

The “red” people know exactly what they are doing. They have long-term goals to change America, and they realize that the best way to do this is to indoctrinate this and succeeding generations of school children in their classrooms.  Into this group fall such people as Obama, Arne Duncan, Linda Darling-Hammond, Bill Ayers, the National Education Organization, and many other left-leaners.

Politicians can come in all different colors – green, yellow, and red. Those who blindly follow are green. Those who seek fame, fortune, and/or control for themselves are yellow. Those whose aim is to change America from a capitalist, free-market Republic into a Socialist, Communist, Marxist country are red.

I do not believe that very many of our Texas Legislators fall into the “red” category, but I do believe many of them do fall into the “green” or “yellow” categories.

 TEXAS’ NEW TYPE #1 CURRICULUM STANDARDS (TEKS)

Here are the links to the TEKS as posted on the official Texas Education Agency website for the four core courses adopted by the SBOE starting in May 2008 through May 2012:

ELAR TEKS –http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/rules/tac/chapter110/index.html

SCIENCE TEKS –http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/rules/tac/chapter112/index.html

SOCIAL STUDIES  TEKS –http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/rules/tac/chapter113/index.html

MATH TEKS –http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/rules/tac/chapter111/index.html

The TEKS (curriculum standards – not curriculum) tell school districts/educators WHAT to teach. It is left up to the local teachers to decide HOW to teach them.

As you look over the TEKS, you will find that most of them are knowledge-based, academic, grade-level-specific for each grade level or each course; and the standards (i.e., elements) are largely measurable. Those were the parameters set by the elected SBOE back in 2005-2006 before they started adopting the new set of TEKS. These specific parameters were set so that the writing teams would be forced into Type #1.

As you scan through the various subjects and grade levels in the new TEKS, please notice the verbs used at the beginning of the standards. The verbs have deliberately been chosen to bring measurability to the standards such as identify, create, interpret, locate, examine, describe, explain, compare, summarize, master, demonstrate, follow, communicate, incorporate, use, apply, evaluate, organize, etc.

This is the Type #1 philosophy of education – no subjectivity, feelings, opinions, etc. The new Type #1 TEKS emphasize academic knowledge – the right answer – instead of the “process.”  This is why school districts that have become totally fixated on constructivist, project-based learning (e.g., CSCOPE districts) are not in alignment with the Type #1 TEKS because the constructivist/project-based  activities glorify the process rather than the right answer.

Can you find any of the new TEKS that say discover, give your opinion, what do you think, etc.?  These are Type #2 verbiage.

(One of our SBOE members made it a habit each time he visited a school district and viewed a technology demonstration or a science experiment of some kind to go up to a student afterwards and ask him to verbally explain what he just proved. The SBOE member said he hardly ever found a student who could actually explain the concepts underlying the demonstration/experiment.)

Measuring StickBecause of the parameters set by the SBOE for the new TEKS before the writing teams even met, the new Type #1 TEKS elements can be measured on the STAAR/End-of-Course tests largely through objective questions and answers.  Because of these parameters, the constructivist, project-based philosophy of education as seen in CSCOPE does not align well with these new TEKS and explains why the CSCOPE schools did worse on their STAAR/EOC’s than did the non-CSCOPE schools. This also should help us to understand why we must not lose the “measuring stick”  – the STAAR/EOC’s.

If the truth were known, I imagine Pearson really enjoyed producing and then setting up the “answer keys” for the STAAR/EOC tests for Texas because our standards are clear, precise, and measurable.  Producing a test for a “road map” (Type #1) is much easier than producing a test for a “wish list” (Type #2).

RESULTS OF TYPE #1

If we want our public school children to learn to read well, we must have Type #1.

If we want them to be able to speak and write English well, then we must have Type #1.

If we want them to be patriotic citizens who revere the Founding Fathers and know and honor the Constitution, then we must have Type #1.

If we want our graduates to be knowledgeable voters who know history and can analyze current events based upon the past and the present, then we must have Type #1.

If we want our public school children to recognize that they and the whole world were created by a Higher Being, then we must have Type #1.

If we want our public school children to know their math facts to automaticity, then we must have Type #1.

If we want our public school children to be able to do well in foreign languages, then we must have Type #1 that teaches the phonetic sound system and grammar/usage in English so that they can apply that to their foreign language learning.

If we want our public school children to read the great pieces of literature that have connected our country to past generations, then we must have Type #1.

If we want our public school children to have the skills and knowledge they need for college and/or the workplace, then we must have Type #1.

If we want to turn out scientists who are well read, logical, analytical, and who can write down their scientific conclusions, then we must have Type #1.

If we want our graduates to be able to write compositions built upon facts and persuasive techniques, then we must have Type #1.

If we want our high-school students to know how to research a topic and then put that information into well-written text, we must have Type #1.

If we want legislators who are well read and who have a deep understanding of world history/American history/U. S. legal system and how those apply to current events, then we must have Type #1.

________________________________________________

Join the Movement to Stop CSCOPE

Click the photo to sign the Petition and Join the movement to#StopCSCOPE 

Women On the Wall  takes on the issues that matter. Sharing information and updates on our weekly radio show on Monday mornings at 10 am CST. You will not want to miss this show. We will have up to date information on CSCOPE  and guests who are the experts on education and other issues that are effecting our children and grandchildren.

WOW_Radio_2_Ad15c0bf

Knowledge is Power and together we can make the difference!!

 

Connecting the Dots… Common Core Curriculum ~ CSCOPE and the Gulen/Charter Public Schools

Below is a series of short videos that will explain what the Common Core Curriculum is, who owns it and the threat it is to the United States. Notice Common Core is referenced in Michelle Malkin’s lastest  article which I highly recommend that you take the time to read. Rotten to the Core, Part III: Lessons from Texas and the Growing Grassroots Revolt

You have to also understand the connection between Common Core and the Texas CSCOPE online technology curriculum that is getting national attention. In the video linked above Jane Robins with the American Principles Project explains who Linda Darling Hammond is. 

One of the key influencers on the developers of Common Core is Linda Darling Hammond.

The developers of CSCOPE  reference Linda Darling Hammond as professional developer in their materials.

 Below will explain why the Common Core/CSCOPE opens the door for the Gulen Charter School and brings forward a major National Security Threat. 

Photo By New YorK Times Click Photo to linked article.

Because we are taking on the public schools parents are looking for other avenues to educate their children. Many who can’t afford private schools (even though private schools use CommonCore and CSCOPE) run to charter schools. Who by the way target the lower income hispanic and black community.

By promoting Charter School legislation some elected officials see a way to get votes and stay in their positions of power. Which gives them the opportunity to move to higher office. In addition it opens the door to raise huge campaign donations from charter school lobbies such as the Cosmos Foundation/Harmony/Gulen Science Centers who are giving free all expense paid trips to legislators in Texas and across the country and whose consultant was former executive director of the Republican Party and trusted advisor to President George W. Bush, Karen Hughes Hughes. 

 Just to be clear, I am not against all Charter Schools. I firmly believe we must put in safe guards first before passing comprehensive Charter School legislation and hold elected officials accountable for the legislation they put forward which may pose a true National Security threat to our nation.

If you are reading this and asking what are the Harmony Charter Schools? Below is a great video by Frank Gaffney founder of the (Center for Security Policy) as he works within his own community to stop the Gulen movment in Loudoun Virginia. Harmony is the name for the Gulen/Cosmos Foundation schools in Texas. In other states they go by different names. “

 

List of Gulen Charter Schools in the United States

An example of what results is Texas Senate Bill 2 currently working its way through the Texas Legislature.  Some of the heroes on exposing CSCOPE are now pushing a bill that completely opens the door for the Gulen Charter Schools to come into Texas in mass numbers.

Below is a breakdown of  Texas Senate Bill 2. 

 

Senate bill 2 is a comprehensive overhaul of the laws that govern charter schools.  Changes are made on the authorizing, governing, and establishing of charter schools in Texas.

Looking at the bill, there were a lot of areas of concern, given the recent experience with CScope in Texas.

  • The current laws cap the number of charter schools in Texas at 215.  The cap is entirely removed.
  • A new governing board of 7 appointees will be the only oversight of these schools.  The State Board of Education will have no authority to grant or revoke charter school privileges in this state.  This puts us back in the position of non-elected officials in charge of the education.
  • If there are any vacant or underutilized facilities in a school district, the ISD “shall” lease that taxpayer funded facility to any approved charter school that wants it.  Note the word in the bill is shall (a mandate) rather than the word “may” (which is a choice).
  • First time charter schools will be granted a license to operate for a term of 5 years.  It will automatically renew at that point for 20 years.  Most of the Harmony/ Gulen charter schools (currently under question) will fall in the 20 year category.
  • The TEA will be required to post all vacant or underutilized facilities for all to see.  For organized charter efforts underway, it will be easy to snap up these facilities all over the state.
  • No new charter will have to pay rent or purchase the facility.  They pay $1.
  • The license of a charter school can be revoked by the newly formed commission only under the following circumstance:

      a.  The school performs badly in 3 out of 5 years
b.  The school is not fiscally satisfactory on multiple reviews

 

Questions to ask…..

1. Why are non- elected officials being put in charge without public accountability?
2.  Why a 20 year renewal?
3.  Shouldn’t we worry about enormous expansion of schools of any type without input?
4.  What if the curriculum is found to be offensive?
5.  Why is our state funding for-profit enterprises?

Women On the Wall will be taking on this issue and sharing information and updates on our weekly radio show on Monday mornings at 10 am CST. You will not want to miss this show. We will have up to date information on CSCOPE  and guests who are the experts on education and other issues that are effecting our children and grandchildren.

WOW_Radio_2_Ad15c0bf

Knowledge is Power and together we can make the difference!!

Call for Information Pushers ~ Help spread the word about another CSCOPE scandal.

Call for Information Pushers ~ Help spread the word about this CSCOPE scandal. 

 

Here are links to articles written on the Texas CSCOPE Burqas Scandal. 

STUDENTS MADE TO WEAR BURQAS – IN TEXAS

Muslim garb taught as alternative dress – not oppressive to women

School Makes Female Students Wear Burqas

 

Community Conversation Conference Call presented by WOW~ TAKE 2 ~ Education in Texas and America

  

Register Today for the Women On The Wall Community Conversation Conference Call ~ Topic Education in Texas and America ~ Are We Being Infiltrated from Within?

Another patriot joined.

[signature]

Share this with your friends:

   

 

CSCOPE ~ Controversy in the Media ~ Critics include…..

I DEMAND MY NAME BE ADDED TO THIS LIST OF CRITICS OF CSCOPE

I join with Colleen Vera who commented on Ginger Russell’s post Cscope tries to Intimidate Private Citizens which links to a power point presentation to be given at the CSCOPE conference in San Antonio on Aug. 8th-9th.

Following is their power-point presentation for this upcoming Summer Cscope Conference. CSCOPE Intimidating Citizens?

Therefore I join Colleen Vera when she says……

I have a complaint against the person(s) responsible for this Power Point. My name was NOT listed as a critic of CSCOPE on slide #8. Also, no descriptions of criticisms are given. To be accurate, mine should read as follows:

“Colleen Vera – Retired Texas Teacher; critical of the fact that no one at CSCOPE, ESC 13, or TESCCC has yet to be charged with a crime for stealing property from the citizens of Texas by transferring ownership of CSCOPE to a private corporation under their own control, holding secret meetings against the Texas Open Meetings Act, and/or misuse of public funds by using public employees to staff a private corporation.”

Wade Labay promised the Texas Senate Education Committee that CSCOPE was now transparent. So people need the whole truth, not just what you want them to hear. Please have my name and the description of my criticism added to the presentation ASAP