Friday, May 16th, Michael and I interviewed Twila Brase, co-founder and president of the Citizens’ Council For Health Freedom (RN, PHN) a nationally-recognized expert on the REAL ID. You can find the full live video on our YouTube and Rumble channels. Please take the time to watch and forward on to your family and friends. ALL Americans need to know this information.
Twila is very knowledgeable about the issue of REAL ID and made clear the ways in which Americans are being mislead into accepting a NATIONAL ID. In fact, she mentioned the head of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem’s lie to the American people who told us that Americans MUST get a real ID by May 7th, when that was simply an arbitrary date that attaches to absolutely zero administrative regulations or laws. Propaganda to create mass compliance much?
Starting May 7, you will need a Real ID to fly. Real IDs make identification harder to forge, thwarting criminals and terrorists. If you plan to fly, make sure you get a Real ID so you won’t be denied from your flight or face travel delays!
dhs.gov/real-id/are-yo…
“These ID’s keep our country safe”, Noem says. How? Recently, Oklahoma Congressman Josh Brecheen and I were at an event together. We were talking about REAL ID and he told me that Congress KNOWS Chinese gang members are counterfeiting the cards. Gosh. How does that “prevent fraud” or “enhance security”?
In the clip below, Twila is clear: this issue is not about the type of data the government has on you, or how much data they have. It’s about ALL Americans having a SINGLE ID card – a single identification card which holds ALL the personal data of that one person, from health records to what they buy at the grocery store. A SINGLE ID card that can be repurposed BY THE GOVERNMENT THAT ISSUED IT for other uses such as collecting healthcare records, or what you buy at the grocery, or where you are in a day. THAT’S the danger.
Congressman Thomas Massie’s X post is below and makes it clear – this is a digital ID system that can only function when every American complies.
Unfortunately, as Massie points out in another X post, though the REAL ID was authored by the man who gave us the Un-American Patriot Act, it wasn’t enforced until Trump got into office. This should give every MAGA affiliate pause for concern.
In the clip below, Twila reiterates this thought and goes on to talk about how facial recognition is a form of digital ID and how Americans absolutely can – and should – OPT OUT of having our photos taken at the airport.
During the interview we talked about the fact that REAL ID is NOT Constitutional. States do NOT HAVE TO COMPLY with the REAL ID system. Unfortunately, the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA) have been putting the REAL ID system into place in states – sometimes without lawful approval. Under Governor Kevin Stitt, Oklahoma has moved away from independent tag agencies and created Service Oklahoma – a new branch of government to issue driver’s licenses. Gosh. How much easier would it be to administrate the REAL ID system if ALL the personal data of Oklahomans had to run through ONE agency? Here’s the front page of the Service Oklahoma website with this friendly pop up TELLING us that we CAN’T fly after May 7th if we don’t have a REAL ID. Amazing. I guess a lie isn’t a lie if it’s repeating the Director of Homeland Security’s lie?
Absolutely you can fly without a REAL ID after May 7th – and any other time! If you’re not sure how to assert this right to the TSA when you get to the airport, be sure to go to Twila’s website and download the PDF documents she has there including, how to turn in your REAL ID for a regular driver’s license, and how to fly WITHOUT a REAL ID.
Make sure to do that and ALSO, contact Senator Kendal Sacchieri and THANK HER for attempting to bring awareness to this issue this session through her SR18, A Resolution affirming Oklahoma’s right to opt out of the federal REAL ID system; supporting the state’s obligation to offer residents a meaningful choice between REAL ID-compliant and -noncompliant identification; and opposing unwarranted collection and sharing of personal data.
Oklahomans must band together to protect our civil liberties here – including the bodily autonomy and privacy that should be protected with the 5th amendment to the Constitution. Please share this information with your Oklahoma Representative and Senator. Tell them you are concerned about REAL ID, that Oklahoma does NOT have to comply with the federal government push for a central ID and that you want Oklahoma to protect your liberty by opting out of REAL ID. And DO NOT COMPLY. DO NOT GET A REAL ID!
Today, Mary from V1SUT Vantage and Roberta Lewis from Moms 4 Liberty, joined me to talk about the recent Governor Stitt appointment to the Oklahoma State School Board – Chris VanDenhende.
Immediately after my friend Kendra Wesson and two other board members were unceremoniously removed from the Oklahoma State School Board by Governor Kevin Stitt due to “political drama” (which turned out to be instituting a process of enumerating the number of kids here illegally enrolled in public schools – something schools HAVE to do to satisfy federal regulations anyway), three new members were appointed.
Today, Mary also wrote a piece about VanDenhende – who has served as an appointee to the Board of Regents for the Regional University System of Oklahoma (RUSO) as well – proving again, my point about the revolving door among previous board/commission appointees, former legislators, lobbyists and government. Here, she puts businesses run by VanDenhende together with the MOU that Governor Stitt signed with Denmark earlier this year. Interestingly, Mary points out that VanDenhende makes just the kind of airplane fuel outlined in the MOU.
Roberta Lewis with Moms 4 Liberty showed us a TicTok video on The Woke Mob channel (formerly the Oklahoma chapter of the national Defense of Democracy organization apparently), where VanDenhende is arguing with Ryan Walters over what made a lie, or merely statements that weren’t “100% accurate”. It’s not the video that was so interesting, however, it was the comments section. Two women, identifying as the daughters of VanDenhende lauded their father’s actions and thanked other commenters for their appreciation.
No, children are not always chips off the old block, but this group is very leftist and quite ugly. Seeing this certainly gives a bit of pause.
The live video where we discuss all these matters – and a truly awful situation with a child at Shawnee high school – can be found on our YouTube and Rumble channels and embedded below. Please take a few minutes to pass this information on to your Senator so they may at least have exposure to this information and then ask if they would NOT confirm Chris VanDenhende to the State Board of Education.
The bill now creates a board of 10 members from 7. One will be the Secretary of Education who will be the chair plus, five members shall be appointed by the Governor by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, two members shall be appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and two members shall be appointed by the Pro Tempore of the Oklahoma State Senate.]. It also changes the way items may be added to the agenda. If three or more Board members wish to add an item to the agenda, they may – it does not have to be approved by the State Superintendent who is the chair of the board. (it was not heard 5.8)
This is a problem because if the governor has five appointments to the Board and the governor is interested in making changes to the Oklahoma State Department of Education, policy or procedure, he could conceivably ask Board members to take that issue to the full board by asking for an item to be added to the agenda. As we’ve seen, Governor Stitt – who has about a year left on his term – has made radical changes to the board in just this year alone because he didn’t like collecting data on illegal children (even though we already do that) so that conception isn’t really out of the question.
During committee hearings, Caldwell claimed the SDE under State Superintendent Ryan Walters’ (R) supports SB 224. We reached out to Supt Walters who denied any public support and asserted his agency’s neutrality concerning the bill.
“I have never publicly supported the bill. Not sure where that would be coming from,” said State Supt Ryan Walters of SB224. “SDE has always been neutral on the bill. We are required to provide data to legislators when they request it.”
OEQA’s claims of having “worked collaboratively with SDE, Regents, OESC, and CareerTech to advance the development of a Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS)” are also exaggerated.
When asked if he had personally attended any meetings with any OEQA personnel concerning SB 224 or a centralized database over the last year, Walters replied, “No, I was not personally involved in that.”
Until today, the Superintendent of Public Instruction had not made a comment – publicly – about whether or not he supported the bill.
Now, put the two things together.
WHAT IS JEB BUSH’S INVOLVEMENT WITH OKLAHOMA AND SB224?
Let me be clear – I do not definitively know. What I’m about to report is pure speculation, but speculation that deserves real consideration.
We know that Jeb Bush has a long history of involvement with Oklahoma education policy. He was heavily involved in pushing Common Core here in our legislature. We know that Superintendent Barresi and others got a free trip to Bush’s – then Foundation for Educational Excellence, now ExcelInEd – during her tenure. We also know that he has come to Oklahoma – at least once – to push school “choice” in 2021.
So, this initiative by the non-profit ExcelInEd organization run by Jeb Bush, has a MODEL POLICY that states can use to create an initiative in their state to allow kids to be tracked from birth through workforce to make sure they can get a job.
No, scratch that – make sure our businesses have the workers they’ll need to keep their business open, pay taxes and wine and dine legislators to create policy to help them do business. Listen below.
Notice “How Can We Fix It?”. Gosh. That sounds a whole lot like what bill SB224 is attempting to do, doesn’t it?
Here’s the Power Point program all about Oklahoma where – shockingly so much legislation stacks up to mesh with the intent of Bush’s initiative. Look specifically at the last three pages on data collection. So uncanny!
BOTTOM LINE
Do we know that Jeb Bush is influencing Oklahoma education? No. Do we have enough evidence to believe so? YES.
I fought hard to have Oklahoma repeal the Common Core State Standards from law. I never really thought anything had been accomplished afterward, because teachers/schools went right back to using them and there was nothing to make them stop. After reading the contents of a search I asked Grok to run for me, I’m having second thoughts.
Groks analysis indicated that the 2014 Common Core data repeal and NCLB waiver revocation “created policy turbulence, potentially disrupting COWIBs alignment with Oklahoma Works’ educational goals. Political resistance to federal mandates may have complicated WIOA implementation”.
So, call your Senator and Representative RIGHT NOW and tell them you
don’t want Oklahoma to be like every other state,
you don’t want your kids to be trained to fill a job, you want your kids to be educated so they can make up their own mind about what they want to be when they grow up
and Oklahoma doesn’t need an out-of-state globalist, policy-monkey ,wrenching up Oklahoma’s education policy.
We MUST defeat SB224 and keep the Oklahoma State Department of Education data from being hooked up with Workforce data (collected at the Department of Commerce) at the Oklahoma Educational Quality and Accountability board, helping to create the Planned Economy our overlords – like Bush! – want!
I’m not a huge fan of AI, but I’ve been a researcher since 1990 and this tool has helped me find data more quickly and completely than I ever have before.
Today, because I’m still trying find a way to explain that SB224 is NOT FOR Oklahoma’s kids, but to satisfy a broader need to plan the economy on a national level, I asked Grok “does the federal government require states to codify the need to connect education and workforce data”? I got a long, in-depth, very interesting answer. So, is this to help Oklahoma’s kids, or get more federal grants? I’ll let you be the judge.
Grok’s answer:
The federal government does not explicitly require states to codify into state law a specific mandate to connect education and workforce data as a condition for receiving federal grants. However, federal policies, grant programs, and regulations often incentivize or require states to establish systems for linking education and workforce data to meet reporting, accountability, or performance goals. These requirements can typically be met through administrative actions, interagency agreements, or data systems like Oklahoma’s Data Sharing Hub (DASH), without necessarily codifying the connection into state statutes. Below is a detailed analysis based on available information:
Federal Context for Education and Workforce Data Integration
Relevant Federal Laws and Programs:
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA, 2014):
WIOA is the primary federal law governing workforce development programs. It requires states to develop integrated data systems to track participant outcomes across workforce, education, and training programs (e.g., Title I for adults, Title II for adult education, Title IV for vocational rehabilitation).
States must report performance metrics, such as employment rates, earnings, and credential attainment, which often require linking education and workforce data. For example, WIOA’s performance accountability provisions (29 U.S.C. § 3141) mandate data collection and reporting, which may involve connecting education records (e.g., high school or college completion) with employment outcomes.
While WIOA encourages states to establish data-sharing agreements or systems, it does not explicitly require codification into state law. States can comply through administrative frameworks, such as memoranda of understanding (MOUs) between agencies or platforms like DASH.
Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015):
ESSA requires states to report on student outcomes, including college and career readiness indicators, which may involve linking education data to workforce outcomes (e.g., post-secondary enrollment or employment).
States receiving ESSA funds must submit state plans and comply with accountability requirements, but these do not mandate codifying data linkages. Instead, states often use existing data systems or establish new ones to meet federal reporting needs.
Perkins V (Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act, 2018):
Perkins V funds career and technical education (CTE) programs and emphasizes aligning education with workforce needs. It requires states to report on CTE student outcomes, such as employment or post-secondary success, which often necessitates data integration.
Like WIOA, Perkins V encourages data system interoperability but does not require states to pass laws mandating data connections. States can use administrative tools or data-sharing platforms to comply.
Higher Education Act (HEA):
The HEA governs federal student aid and includes reporting requirements for post-secondary institutions, such as graduation rates and employment outcomes. Some grant programs under HEA may encourage data linkages to track student success, but codification is not a requirement.
Federal Grant Conditions:
Federal grants, particularly those tied to WIOA, ESSA, or Perkins V, often include conditions related to data collection and reporting. For instance, WIOA grants require states to submit annual performance reports that integrate education and workforce data (e.g., 20 CFR § 677.155).
These conditions typically focus on outcomes rather than prescribing how states achieve them. States can meet requirements through data-sharing agreements, longitudinal data systems (SLDS), or platforms like DASH, without codifying policies into law.
Some competitive grants, such as the U.S. Department of Education’s State Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) Grant Program, explicitly fund the development of integrated data systems. While these grants require states to build capacity for data linkages, they do not mandate legislative codification. Instead, they emphasize technical and administrative solutions.
The Department of Labor’s Workforce Data Quality Initiative (WDQI) provides grants to enhance state data systems for tracking workforce and education outcomes. WDQI encourages states to link data across agencies but allows flexibility in implementation, typically through administrative means rather than statutory mandates.
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA):
FERPA (20 U.S.C. § 1232g) governs the privacy of education records and impacts how states link education and workforce data. States must ensure compliance with FERPA when sharing student data, which may require data-sharing agreements or secure systems like DASH.
While FERPA imposes strict requirements on data handling, it does not mandate codification of data-linking policies. States can address FERPA through administrative protocols or interagency agreements.
State Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS):
The federal government has supported SLDS development since 2005 through the Institute of Education Sciences (IES). SLDS grants aim to create systems that link early childhood, K-12, post-secondary, and workforce data to inform policy and improve outcomes.
While SLDS grants require states to build and maintain these systems, the focus is on technical infrastructure and data governance, not on passing state laws. States can establish SLDS through executive action, agency collaboration, or platforms like DASH.
Oklahoma’s Context and DASH
Oklahoma’s Data Sharing Hub (DASH):
As noted in your previous question, DASH is Oklahoma’s platform for secure interagency data sharing, managed by the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES). It supports data integration for various state functions, including those tied to federal grants.
DASH likely facilitates compliance with federal reporting requirements under WIOA, ESSA, or Perkins V by enabling secure data linkages between education agencies (e.g., Oklahoma State Department of Education) and workforce agencies (e.g., Oklahoma Employment Security Commission).
There is no evidence that DASH’s operation or Oklahoma’s participation in federal grants requires codifying a mandate to connect education and workforce data. Instead, DASH serves as an administrative tool to meet federal expectations for data integration and reporting.
Oklahoma’s Approach:
Oklahoma has pursued data integration through initiatives like the Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS), supported by federal grants. These efforts focus on technical and administrative solutions, such as data governance frameworks and interagency MOUs, rather than legislative mandates.
State laws, such as those governing data privacy or agency operations, may indirectly support data sharing (e.g., compliance with FERPA or state data security standards), but there is no specific Oklahoma statute mandating education-workforce data linkages as a condition of federal funding.
Does Codification Ever Occur?
Federal Incentives, Not Mandates:
While the federal government does not require codification, it may incentivize states to formalize data-sharing frameworks to ensure sustainability or compliance. For example, SLDS or WDQI grants may encourage states to establish governance structures, which some states codify into law for clarity or permanence.
States like Tennessee and Kentucky have passed laws to formalize SLDS or data-sharing governance (e.g., Tennessee’s P-20 Council), but these are state-driven initiatives, not federal mandates. Oklahoma has not taken this approach, relying instead on administrative tools like DASH.
State Discretion:
States may choose to codify data-sharing policies to address privacy concerns, ensure long-term funding, or align with federal grant requirements. For instance, a state might pass a law to clarify agency roles in data sharing or to comply with FERPA. However, this is not a federal requirement but a state policy choice.
Limitations and Variability
Grant-Specific Requirements: Some federal grants may include conditions that indirectly require data linkages, such as reporting on employment outcomes for CTE students under Perkins V. These conditions focus on outcomes, not codification, but states may codify policies to streamline compliance.
Privacy and Security: Federal laws like FERPA and the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) impose strict requirements on data sharing, which may necessitate state-level policies or agreements. However, these can be administrative rather than legislative.
No Universal Mandate: There is no blanket federal requirement for states to codify education-workforce data linkages. The emphasis is on functional data systems and compliance with reporting requirements, which states can achieve through various means.
Conclusion
The federal government does not require states to codify into state law a mandate to connect education and workforce data to receive federal grants. Instead, laws like WIOA, ESSA, and Perkins V, along with grant programs like SLDS and WDQI, encourage or require states to integrate data for reporting and accountability purposes. States can meet these requirements through administrative actions, data-sharing agreements, or platforms like Oklahoma’s DASH, without passing new laws. While some states voluntarily codify data-sharing frameworks, this is not a federal mandate but a state choice. In Oklahoma, DASH likely supports compliance with federal data requirements, but there is no evidence of a codified mandate tied to federal funding. If you have a specific grant or program in mind, I can analyze its requirements further.
This is a post that will go with several other posts to come, but because we’ll be going live on Monday morning at 9am to talk about this specific issue (5.5.25), I wanted to be able to get this timeline I constructed out into the public view so the discussion was easier to follow.
The information below is just in a raw format, but it was information I collected via internet searches and using the AI research tool, GROK on X. I have saved all that information, so if you have questions, I can help answer those with the saved information.
Also, I’ve included URL linkages wherever I can so that you can see where the information came from and how to get their yourself.
The BOTTOM LINE?
Oklahoma is pushing federal Workforce policy as education and has been THROUGHOUT the years since the 1990’s assuredly. It doesn’t matter if you’re a Republican or a Democrat, this timeline makes it very easy to see how the Powers That Be, direct policy statewide (regardless of the 10th Amendment) through the carrot and string approach of federal grants to be used to create federal programming.
There is NOTHING good about tracking students across the years of their lives while saying that we’re doing it for them. WE’RE NOT! We’re doing it because the Powers That Be want a PLANNED ECONOMY which will enrich their toady friends and the useful idiots that carry their water, while making the poor poorer, decimating the middle class and turning our children into cogs to fit into the planned economy jobs machine.
SB224 was about using DASH – OMES new data sharing hub – to fit the State Longitudinal Database System holding educational data together with the Data Quality Workforce Initiative holding employment and workforce data – TOGETHER to create a seamless way of sharing data on kids from cradle to the grave. It sounds crazy, but I’ve put enough of the policy below for you to determine whether that assertion is crazy or not.
The worst part is that our STATE GOVERNOR is selling this as something good for kids. IT’S NOT! It’s good for business. Kids should be educated classically in as many subjects as we can stuff into their little heads and then they can use that information to INFORM THEIR OWN DECISIONS ABOUT WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. We don’t need the government MINIMALLY educating our students (What? Proficiency ratings are above 50% in reading and math? No.) so they know just enough to think that they’re deciding what they want to be when they grow up when the counselor at school gives them ‘suggestions’. We need WELL-EDUCATED kids.
If the repeal of Common Core from state law and the inability to secure an NCLB waiver caused the state an inability to secure a completed SLDS (to create widgets of Oklahoma kids that are only educated to fill the need for jobs), WHY WOULD WE WANT TO HOOK THESE TOGETHER NOW? Oklahomans didn’t like it in 2014, but they’re going to want that now? Not only that, but if we did that back then, what could we do NOW if we unite against this?
Help us STOP SB224. Share this. Share the video from Monday morning. Let your senators know they’ll be primaried if they vote for this nonsense. Educate others about what is going on in this state. We made a difference with Common Core – we can do it again!
1965 – President Lyndon Banes Johnson creates the first Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to dovetail with his War On Poverty. It has been reauthorized every 5 years since.
1990 – President George H.W. Bush created Goals 2000 after he signed an international agreement entitled, “World Declaration on Education for All” 42 (EFA), the result of a summit sponsored by the United Nations, called “The World Conference on Education for All”
Included the call for the nation’s FIRST State Longitudinal Database to track student progress
1990 – Oklahoma legislature creates the Office of Accountability
Tasked with overseeing school performance through the Oklahoma Educational Indicators Program (OEIP) and the Oklahoma School Performance Review program (OSPR)
OEIP developed standards to gauge performance of schools
Required by Goals 2000 legislation
1994 – Bill Clinton’s ESEA called, “Improving America’s Schools Act of 1994. Also created School-To-Work Opportunities Act and the Goals 2000 Act in conjunction with the ESEA
School boards and elected legislators would be bypassed as applications would be made and federal funds received by state Governors and their appointees on workforce development boards.
A computer database (aka Labor Market information System) would be used into which school personnel would scan information about students and their family including medical and psychological data that could be shared from the school to others deemed important in the student’s education
1995 – Oklahoma Commission for Teacher Preparation (OCTP) created by legislature (HB1549)
Created teacher preparation system
The non-profit, Oklahoma Workforce Investment Board, Inc. (OWIB) was formed in1998 and established under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (WIA), which required states to establish state workforce investment boards to oversee workforce development programs.
2001 – George W. Bush – renames Clinton’s ESEA, “The No Child Left Behind Act”
Included Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) required testing public school students in 3rd, 8th and twice in high school. State set benchmarks they then had to meet with 100% proficiency. Schools missing target two years in a row were put on a “needs improvement list”. If schools didn’t make AYP, funding could be removed.
Needed database to collect test scores at a minimum
1st slds undertaken in Florida as a pilot project
2002 the Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) Grant Program, authorized under the Educational Technical Assistance Act of 2002 and launched in 2005 by the U.S. Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES). This program provided grants to states to design, develop, and implement longitudinal data systems, starting with the first round of funding in fiscal year 2005, which awarded $265 million to 41 states and the District of Columbia by 2009.
2006 – Created the Governor’s Council for Workforce and Economic Development (GCWED – codified by Senate Bill 1397 (2006) to comply with federal and state workforce development priorities – especially the WIA (1998)
The GCWED was created to support the GOVERNOR’s economic and workforce development vision (such as the initiative Oklahoma Works under Governor Mary Fallin in 2013)
2007 – National Chamber of Commerce “Leaders and Laggards” report gave Oklahoma an “F” in accountability, academic achievement and data quality
Oklahoma received an A for its teaching force
Oklahoma had no alignment between educational outcomes and workforce needs
2009 – Barrack Obama – did not reauthorize NCLB, but created a grant process called Race To The Top. States competed for funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds for 4 reforms
Including “building data systems that measure student growth and success, and inform teachers and principals about how they can improve instruction”
RTT Early Learning Challenge began to collect testing data on infants, toddlers and preschoolers enrolled in preK programs
2009 – Governor Brad Henry, takes State Fiscal Stabilization Funds from the Obama Administration including to create STATEWIDE P–16 EDUCATION DATA SYSTEMS.— (A) ESTABLISHMENT OF SYSTEM.—Each State that receives a grant under subsection (c)(2) shall establish a statewide P–16 education longitudinal data system. https://www.congress.gov/110/plaws/publ69/PLAW-110publ69.pdf
2009 – Educational Accountability Reform Act created by SB111 (Republican legislators) and signed into law by Governor Brad Henry
Created in part due to Chamber of Commerce F grades in their “leaders and laggers” report
Transferred management of student data, determination of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP from NCLB), cut scores for tests, and oversight for academic standards and testing to the Office Of Accountability created in 1990
Centralized data
2010 – Workforce Data Quality Initiative (WDQI) grant for 1 million dollars from the Department of Labor to “support the creation of data systems linking workforce and education data to evaluate training and employment outcomes
2012 – Oklahoma applied for an NCLB Waiver under Republican Chief For Change, State Superintendent Janet Barresi and Republican Governor Mary Fallin, Chair of the National Governor’s Association – we did NOT get a waiver
implementation of the A-F School Grading System (and Common Core, etc) and data collection
It will strengthen the OSDE’s ability to link students with teachers, programs, interventions and outcomes and allow the OSDE to link P-12 data with education data from other agencies.
2012 – Oklahoma Office of Educational Quality and Accountability (OEQA) created
Governor Mary Fallin signed SB1797 which consolidated the Office of Accountability and Oklahoma Commission for Teacher Preparation into the Oklahoma Office of Educational Quality And Accountability
Now under supervision of the State Secretary of Education
7-member Board created to govern the office (Commission For Educational Quality and Accountability
The OEQA uses the SLDS and National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) to create the school report cards
2013 – Governor Mary Fallin, announces through her position as the Chair for the National Governor’s Association, creates the America Works: Education and Training for Tomorrow’s Jobs, which spotlights improving education and workforce training systems and aligning those systems with the needs of individual state economies.
2014 – Federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) – replaced Workforce Investment Act (WIA) of 1998
States required to strengthen their workforce systems by aligning them with economic development goals, emphasizing business-led strategies and improving data-driven decision making
2014 – Governor Mary Fallin creates Oklahoma Works
“Under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA), the Governor of each State must submit a Unified or Combined State Plan to the U.S. Secretary of Labor that outlines a four-year workforce development strategy for the State’s workforce development system.
This linked WDQI and SLDS to track education plus workforce outcomes
Provided the framework for a statewide coalition to connect education, training and job opportunities
Five goals – one of which was to “enhance data-driven decisions by using longitudinal data systems to track outcomes and evaluate program effectiveness
Oklahoma Works influenced education policy, including charter school expansion (moving Oklahoma’s charter law ranking from 37th to 10th nationally) and literacy improvements via the Reading Sufficiency
Grok
The initiative’s data-driven approach informed performance-based budgeting, shifting state funding to programs with proven outcomes Grok
The SLDS – which integrated K-12, postsecondary and workforce data gave Oklahoma Works the data to align education programs with employer needs – Grok
Changed the Central Oklahoma Workforce Board (COWB – 1998) to the Central Oklahoma Workforce Investment Board (COWIB) still a non-profit organization covering 9 counties in central Oklahoma
Board is composed of business leaders, county commissioners and representatives from education and community organizations
According to GROK the WDQI and SLDS grants are NOT CONNECTED which is a problem for implantation of its mission
GROK also says that the 2014 Common Core data repeal and NCLB waiver revocation “created policy turbulence, potentially disrupting COWIBs alignment with Oklahoma Works’ educational goals. Political resistance to federal mandates may have complicated WIOA implementation”.
2015 – State ‘reaffirmed’ Governors Council for Workforce and Economic Development in order to meet updated Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act federal mandates in order to receive federal workforce grants.
2021 – National Chamber of Commerce calls on states to adopt the America Works Agenda to “address the nations worker shortage”
Introduce 4 ‘immediate action’ items
Help Americans acquire the skills they need to fill today’s open jobs
Improve education and job training opportunities for the jobs of tomorrow
Remove barriers to entering the workforce
Expand the workforce through immigration reform
Under number 2 we are told that every state needs Learning and Employer Records (LERs): In addition to providing a verified and authenticated record of employment history for every American worker, support the ability of education, training, and credentialing providers to produce a digital record of learning that is based on open and available data standards and used to empower learners and workers with information about their skills and qualifications.
2022 – Oklahoma’s WIOA State Plan for 22-23 is filed
Introduces ICAP: The Individual Career and Academic Plan (ICAP) was recently developed for the state’s PK- 12 system by the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE) with input from students, families, educators and other partners. The ICAP equips students with the awareness, knowledge and skills to create their own individualized, meaningful exploration of college and career opportunities. In order to reflect students’ changing passions, aptitudes, interests and growth, the ICAP is a flexible, evolving document. The ICAP incorporates labor market data into occupational exploration materials to allow students to make informed decisions about education and training for future career goals.
2022 – Oklahoma Public Resource Center Commissions the Office Of Educational Quality and Accountability Transformation Proposal
Recommendation 2 was to Provide impactful P-20 (SLDS) information
Recommends that OEQA become a data hub for student data
Recommends using the Oklahoma Data Matrix visualization tool
Recommends the use of the Baldrige Excellence Framework for P-20 institutions across Oklahoma
Must have access to the data that follows a student throughout and beyond their formal participation in the education system
a data hub also helps address another core desired outcome of the stakeholder engagement process by not just knowing where kids are now, but where they are six years after high school or college graduation
2023 – Governor Stitt creates Executive Order 2023-21 to transfer the Oklahoma Office of Workforce Development under the Oklahoma Employment Securities Commission
The Oklahoma Employment Securities Commission is designated as the single point of funding and accountability for the WIOA federal Department of Labor workforce grants
2024 – Oklahoma’s WIOA required long range plan for 24-27 states the following on page 119
Improve Access to and Sharing of Data: Oklahoma recognizes the weaknesses it has faced in the past regarding access to and the possession of data critical for the success of the workforce system. We are committed to identifying and acting on opportunities to systematize the sharing of data among partners in the workforce system, to coordinate resources expended on data research and evaluations, and to expand tools available at both the state and local levels to include dashboards and other modern technologies. The main objective of these efforts is to strengthen the aligned efforts of the core, required, and additional workforce system partners for more effective outcomes.
2024 – Oklahoma’s WIOA State Plan for 24-25 is filed
Vision includes: Becoming more data-driven, using independent and objective data to drive workforce transformation.
Coordinating and “braiding” WIOA funds to drive the state’s workforce strategy
Goals include: Preparing an educated and skilled workforce and meeting employers’ skilled workforce needs go hand in hand. Oklahoma will achieve innovation and efficiency through alignment, collaboration, and education. All entities are working together to drive collective and meaningful outcomes.
2024 – Oklahoma Works, Governor’s Council for workforce and Economic Development votes to accept the plan: minutes of meeting January 19th, 2024
Discussion & Vote to approve policy informing/establishing publicly OESC’s Authority to administer the WIOA programs including policy and procedure. – this allows OESC as the agency to administer the program to DOL, standing in accordance with the Workforce Act, signed by Governor Stitt, on August 10, 2023. Chair Gray motion for a vote, Stan McCabe move the motion and David Reid seconding the motion, with all voting aye, no opposed. No further discussion.
2024 – Governor Stitt signs Executive Order 2024-24: creating a Task Force on Human Potential for Future Industries to go through 2027
Mandates coordination between Oklahoma Office of Workforce Development and Oklahoma State Department of Education, Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education and Career Tech to align curricula with high-demand occupations.
Requires use of Oklahoma SLDS and DASH (data sharing hub at OMES) to integrate education, workforce, and economic data
Supported by MOU – Data Sharing Agreement (DSA) among 9 agencies which, according to GROK are NOT LISTED IN AVAILABLE RESOURCES
Possibly OSDE, OESC, OK dept of commerce, OSDH, Oklahoma office of workforce development
Cannot find the exact members of the task force – only the criteria are found in the EO
Not able to find any meeting agendas or minutes
2024 – October meeting of Oklahoma Works, Governor’s Council for Workforce and Economic Development speaker, Chad Warmington from the Oklahoma State Chamber
Warmington also addressed House Bill 621, which led to the creation of a new workforce commission, with its priority being the recruitment of a CEO to lead these initiatives. A secondary priority is enhancing workforce data. Warmington stressed the importance of building a strong workforce infrastructure, particularly in preparing K-12 students to be career-ready by the time they graduate. He shared Superintendent of Oklahoma City Public Schools’ vision that students should be ready to “Employ, Enroll, or Enlist” upon graduation, and he talked about the need for schools to align their programs with the state’s workforce requirements.
Our focus has been to establish OEQA as a central hub for data, analytics, and actionable information—fostering a culture of data driven decision-making that supports systemic improvements, transparency, and accountability.
With the launch of Power BI dashboards and progress toward integrating data across K-12, higher education, and workforce sectors in a Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS)
2024 – December – OMES creates DASH – Data Sharing Hub in conjunction with Google (for analytical tools) and Cloudflare (for security)
According to GROK, DASH supports secure data sharing for Oklahoma Works and OLDS, but specific developer names are undisclosed
Rolled out to 6 unnamed agencies with plans for more agency use
According to GROK, DASH was needed to share data to align education and workforce programs according to Governor Stitt’s EO 2024-24 and Oklahoma Works
2025 – Oklahoma State Chamber of Commerce 2025 Legislative Priorities states:
Support improving K-12 Graduation Requirements to include Career Ready, Advanced Placement, and concurrent academic credit options.
Advocate for partnerships and the integration of workforce system partners, resources, and strategies supported by state funding, that utilize data driven strategies for skill alignment and credential attainment, ensuring alignment with economic development goals and employer needs.
Oklahoma has a data sharing agreement (DSA) among NINE state agencies which are unnamed according to GROK.
Oklahoma also has specific Memoranda Of Understanding (MOU) with
Oklahoma State Department of Education
Oklahoma Employment Security Commission
Oklahoma Department of Commerce and Local Workforce Boards including The Governor’s Council For Workforce and Economic Development
Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education
Oklahoma State Department of Health
Oklahoma Department of Labor
The State Data Platform and DASH
DATA PROTECTIONS – listed
Government Transparency Act of 2019
Oklahoma Computer Data Privacy Act
Oklahoma Student Data Accessibility, Transparency and Accountability Act
MOUs are to align with HIPAA, FERPA and Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA)
DATA CONCERNS
GROK was asked “do the Government Transparency Act of 2019, Oklahoma Computer Data Privacy Act, Oklahoma Student Data Accessibility, Transparency and Accountability Act, FERPA, and HIPPA protect individual data in Oklahoma.
The following is copied from the result
Critical Examination
Strengths:
Robust Framework: The five laws collectively cover diverse data types (student, health, consumer, government), ensuring comprehensive protection in OLDS and DASH, as seen in COWIB’s secure data use.
Interagency Coordination: DSA and DASH, supported by the Government Transparency Act, streamline secure data sharing, aligning with Executive Order 2024-22’s focus on personalized learning.
Compliance Mechanisms: Audits (Student Data Act), penalties (Computer Data Privacy Act), and public disclosures (Government Transparency Act) enhance accountability, reducing misuse risks.
Weaknesses:
Re-Identification Risks: FERPA and HIPAA exemptions allow de-identified data sharing, but indirect identifiers (e.g., ZIP code, race) could enable re-identification, especially in small Oklahoma communities.
Enforcement Gaps: FERPA’s rare use of funding penalties and HIPAA’s federal oversight may limit state-level accountability, while the Computer Data Privacy Act lacks a private right of action.
Transparency Limitations: Sensitive MOUs or audit details may remain non-public to avoid security risks, as allowed by the Student Data Act, reducing full transparency.
Narrative Scrutiny:
Oklahoma’s narrative of robust data protection is largely accurate, given the layered legal framework, but overstated due to re-identification risks and enforcement weaknesses. The 60% attainment goal’s stagnation (~30%) suggests data protection alone cannot address systemic educational barriers.
The business-led focus of Oklahoma Works and GCWED may prioritize employer data needs, potentially straining privacy protections, though FERPA and HIPAA compliance mitigates this.
Political controversies, such as Stitt’s Executive Order 2023-31 (anti-DEI) or the 2024 OMES audit citing mismanagement, may erode public trust in data systems, despite legal safeguards.
Sources and Further Inquiry
Primary Sources:
Oklahoma Statutes, Title 74, § 3122 (Government Transparency Act), Title 70, § 3-168 (Student Data Act), via www.oscn.net.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services HIPAA guidance (www.hhs.gov/hipaa).
Secondary Sources:
Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services (dash.ok.gov) for DASH and DSA details.
Central Oklahoma Workforce Innovation Board (cowib.org) for workforce metrics.
CaseGuard on Oklahoma’s Student Data Act (caseguard.com, April 6, 2022).
McAfee & Taft on HB 1030 (mcafeetaft.com, March 9, 2023).
Contact for Verification:
OMES Data Services: 405-521-2141 or data.services@omes.ok.gov (mailto:data.services@omes.ok.gov) for DASH and DSA.
OEQA: 405-522-5399 for OLDS and student data policies.
OSDH: 405-426-8000 for HIPAA MOUs.
Oklahoma Attorney General: 405-521-3921 for HB 1030 enforcement.
Accessing Details: Request MOUs or audit reports via the Oklahoma Open Records Act (51 O.S. § 24A.1 et seq.) through OMES or OSDH. Visit oklahoma.gov for transparency policies.
An Analysis of Recent Education Reforms and The Resulting Impact On Student Privacy
“Our system isn’t tapping into the potential of every student. That’s what we’re setting out to change,” Oklahoma State Secretary of Education, Nellie Sanders said. “Artificial intelligence, virtual reality and other emerging technologies can offer Oklahoma students a learning advantage. We’re going to explore ways to personalize curricula to interest, expand apprenticeship programs and define universal soft skills so our students are ready to lead us into the future.”
This past February , governor Kevin Stitt’s Education task force, dubbed the “Human Potential for Future Industries Task Force”, announced that an AI math tutor program would be introduced into select Oklahoma schools in March, with the goal of rolling it out in participating districts statewide for the 2025-2026 school year, allegedly at no cost to the schools themselves. The program, “Synthesis AI”, is the creation of Josh Dahn and Chrisman Frank, co-founders of Synthesis, and they both attended the February task force meeting to promote their product.
Oklahoma Secretary of Education Nellie Sanders, who chairs the task force, is quoted in a recent OKBusinessVoice article: “Our current education system isn’t built for the future—it’s barely built for the present,”… “Oklahoma’s students are full of untapped potential, and it’s our job to ensure they have the right opportunities to thrive. This task force is focused on breaking away from outdated, one-size-fits-all education models and create real-world pathways that prepare students for their future. Oklahoma will proudly become the first state to put Synthesis’ priceless, one-of-a-kind piece of technology in our classrooms— and I couldn’t be more excited for our teachers, students, and parents. I’m grateful to Josh and Chrisman for their partnership.” (highlights mine)
Something to note here: Synthesis AI has never before been used by a school district in the nation, meaning that Oklahoma students will be using an AI tutor that remains untested in a school setting. Are our schools to be a laboratory for this unproven technology, and can we really afford to go in blind on such an endeavor?
Stitt, who dubbed the AI tutor as “revolutionary”, is quoted as saying, ““Every student needs to be prepared to leave school college-ready or career-ready. That isn’t happening for too many Oklahoma students,”…“We want kids to develop their God-given talents and apply them in high-demand industries right here in Oklahoma. I’m grateful to Secretary Sanders and her task force for doing their part to ensure students go from classrooms today to careers tomorrow.”
Every parent wants their child to succeed, but we must be wary of misguided attempts at a solution that ends of making the situation worse. Initial research on the use of AI in the classroom has not produced glowing results, and in fact has shown that AI has resulted in poorer performance outcomes than tried-and-true education strategies.
Chrisman Frank, the co-founder of Synthesis AI, praised his meeting with Stitt’s task force in a post on X: “Thrilled to partner with visionary Governor@GovStitt and Education Secretary @NellieSandersOK to bring the magic of the Synthesis AI tutor to Oklahoma schools and families. Tutor will be available to ALL third grade students in the state this fall. Proud to work with the administration to serve the people of the great state of Oklahoma!”
So the Synthesis AI Tutor is a done deal for Oklahoma’s students? According to Chrisman’s post, it is. The replies to Chrisman’s X post seem suspiciously bot-like. Did he pay for artificial engagement on what is arguably his most important post on X, as co-founder of an AI startup that could potentially be used across the nation?
The task force released what it considers to be “priority actions”, and it reads like the familiar, meaningless buzzword glop we’ve seen elsewhere:
Strengthening workforce-aligned education by integrating industry-driven skills into curricula.
Expanding hands-on learning through apprenticeships, internships, and immersive learning experiences.
Leveraging artificial intelligence, virtual reality, and other emerging technologies to create immersive classroom experiences.
Assessing teacher preparation programs to ensure Oklahoma educators are equipped to meeting evolving student needs.
Long, hard experience shows that these wildly-optimistic bullet points never deliver. Parents and legislators should be very wary of anyone promising Heaven on Earth in order to push through another education “revolution”, when students here are already struggling to read and perform math at grade level. Long before “Ed Tech”, schools were able to successfully teach math, reading, and reading comprehension. Something terrible has happened along the way that has resulted in plummeting scores across the board. Rather than the savior, many point to just this type of Ed tech as the culprit.
In an article entitled, “The EdTech Revolution Has Failed”, Jared Horvath argues that, since the widespread introduction of internet-connected devices into the classroom beginning in the 2010s, student scores have dropped across the board. Rather than a mere coincidence, Horvath places the blame on EdTech itself, citing multiple large-scale studies that equate the omnipresence of internet-connected devices in the classroom with a significant drop in learning.
The logical solution, albeit one that no one in the business of education wants to hear, is to remove Ed Tech from our classrooms entirely, not double or triple-down on what has clearly been a massive boondoggle.
If an AI math tutor is indeed “revolutionary”, then Oklahoma should require proof, rather than allow students here to themselves become the test subjects. Untested, experimental EdTech has no place in Oklahoma schools, and our government should understand that before pitching us headlong into uncharted waters, when we are barely keeping our state’s students afloat as it is.
Tuesday, April 29th, SB224 – Creating the Oklahoma Education and Workforce Statewide Longitudinal Data System – was brought to the floor for a House vote following passage in the Senate 33 to 13. The bill failed in the House 35 to 56 with 7 absent.
At that time, author Representative Caldwell captured the bill to be reheard at a later time.
Thursday, May 1, the bill came to the House floor again, where it was voted down Ayes: 46 Nays: 37.
Then, a Motion to Rescind THAT vote was adopted Ayes: 51 Nays: 32.
The measure THEN passes Ayes: 51 Nays: 36 without the emergency clause.
Representative Tom Gann – who argued against the bill on the floor – wrote a Press Release concerning the unprecedented THREE votes the bill received on the 1st. That press release was read live on the air after it was sent, but Gann was advised that it would NOT be placed on the House website for publication. Please see below for a copy of that press release.
Rep.-Tom Gann, R-Inola Issues Statement on Bonus Vote of SB224 and Warns of the Dangers of Setting New Policy
Representative Tom Gann released the following statement on the unprecedented bonus vote taken by the house on Thursday on Senate Bill 224.
“On Thursday, May 1, 2025, Representative Kyle Hilbert, Speaker of the House, took actions regarding SB224 that did not align with the House Rules of the 60th Legislature.
House rules dictate that once a bill is defeated it is not eligible for additional consideration. The House vote to defeat SB224 was considered final action under the rules.
However, Hilbert, while presiding over the house allowed an additional bonus vote to occur by which the bill was approved. This breaks with years of clearly established House precedent that prevents never ending bonus votes on failed legislation and opens up a Pandoras box of potential abuse.
What other bills will be allowed a bonus vote?”
The relevant house rule and written precedent are attached to this release.
House Rule 6, Bills And Resolutions,
6.8 – Final Action
(a) The following action shall constitute final action on any bill or resolution:
1. committee recommendation, including any oversight committee recommendation or any policy committee recommendation of “Do Not Pass”;
2. if a motion to reconsider the vote on Third Reading orFourth Reading fails to prevail or expires;
3. if a motion to table the motion to reconsider prevails; or
4. if a vote is taken on Third Reading or Fourth Reading and no notice is served to reconsider the vote.
(b) If final action is such as to defeat a bill or resolution,no other bill or resolution having the same effect and covering thesame specific subject matter shall be considered by the House ofRepresentatives during either session of the current Legislature.
Page 53
On page 209 of Precedents
6.8 – 4 (2010) Motion to Rescind May Not Be Used to Avoid Final Action
Rule – House Rule 6.8, paragraph (a) states in part:
(a) The following action shall constitute final action on any billor resolution:
…a motion to reconsider the vote on Third Reading or FourthReading [that] fails to prevail…
History – Representative Nelson moved to reconsider the vote whereby Senate Bill 2207 failed, which motion failed of adoption. Representative Nelson moved to rescind the vote whereby the reconsideration motion failed.
Representative Reynolds raised a point of order stating that the motion to rescind was dilatory.
