Wednesday, February 16, 2011

The Facts and CCSS ...
The public is getting shafted

The failure to delay the legislature's 2010 6696 approval of the CCSSI, done one year ago, will obligate the taxpayers to spend $183 million. Of this amount more than $160 million will come directly from local school districts.

If HB 1891 were passed to delay CCSS adoption for at least two years, then we could revise WA standards if needed.

Instead we will be forced to buy unproven brand X, yet again.

States are free right now to benchmark their standards to the CCSS. But that’s an option we retain only by rejecting or delaying adoption of CCSS. With the passage of 6696, legislators put themselves into the position that they must now take a position (vote) to either delay or reject CCSS, or we lose the option to benchmark our state standards by default.

Note there is no assessment scheduled of the CCSS until Spring 2015.

We are buying an expensive half-baked product prematurely.
Buying more nonsense is a fact, unless the legislature acts and fast. By Friday, if a bill to delay did not get a committee hearing, it will be too late.

Call 1-800-562-6000 NOW.

Reps. Pettigrew and Santos are failing to act in the best interests of students in the 37th. Why?


{more wisdom from Mike}

Note: There is scant evidence to support the CCSSI as likely to improve anything, except perhaps some corporation's bottom lines.

On the contrary, there is overwhelming evidence that the CCSSI is about the centralization of control coupled with the homogenization of education markets to benefit certain well-connected & organized companies from both the technology and publishing sectors.

Neither of these scenarios would be likely to occur absent the coercive reins of federal initiatives & dollars.


State officials were bribed to pass 6696 by the hope for "Race to the Top" dollars of which WA received none.

What is the excuse for folly this time? Perhaps head of House Education Committee Representative Sharon Tamiko Santos could explain.


Anonymous said...

This is all sounding familiar... what's with officials and drinking....Is this just Washington or education in general?

"Santos agreed to a preliminary breath test (PBT). At 12:10 a.m. on July 21, she blew a .077, which is below the legal limit of .08. However, Greer’s report states that he thinks Santos’ breath was weak, and he had to manually capture the sample in order to obtain a reading.

She was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving and taken to the Renton Police Department (RPD) station. In Greer’s report, it is shown that Santos didn’t sign the Implied Consent Warning (ICW) because she had concerns.

“I don’t like signing my name to something that I haven’t read and/or that I don’t understand. “[The ICW] clearly says that you are waiving certain rights. It make references to certain RCW (Revised Code of Washington) laws, but it just references the RCW. So I asked for the full citation so I could understand it. The thing that was odd was that there was a cross reference inside one of the RCWs to a different RCW. The trooper didn’t have that information. In some ways, it was a minor thing that ended up being a bigger thing than I certainly intended. All I wanted to do was sign my name truthfully.”

Anonymous said...

Dear Ms. Santos:
You write the laws - one wonders how many things have you signed, but never read? You learned that even if you won't sign a consent form, you still got tested.

While you sit on the education committee, you should read some of the textbooks Washington students are being taught from.

I hope your math ability is better than your driving record. How is your multiplication? Hopefully better than our sixth graders who by age 11, if they were taught with Everyday Math, are first taught how to draw a rectangle.
Division and fractions are unknowns in elementary school. Ever heard of a Takeoff...well, you've been taken and so have voters.

Signed, You silly goose.