Search

ROPE Report

Open Search
Tag

DEI

Oklahoma Inc., Part 2 – Republican OK Governor Kevin Stitt Channels Democrat Obama With His New Education “Turnaround Team”

Oklahoma Inc.

First, why do you suppose it’s important to use the word “Workforce” to describe people who are – or will be employed? Answer: so that people become accustomed to being widgets – not individuals. Who is the Constitution made for? Individuals. Who votes in elections in our Democratic Republic? Individuals.

What about the phrase “community”? Answer: it’s a group of individuals. Groups are much more easily led and studies show this to be true. This is where we get the tongue-in-cheek term, “Sheeple”. So why move to this use of the word “community” to describe multiple groups of individuals? Because

What about the phrase “data-driven”? Answer: Data is science. Science has become the God of many today (COVID anyone?) Therefore, science knows better about people than people can know about people. There’s no argument about a child’s trajectory in life, then, if the “data” lines out that trajectory. No muss, no fuss, no messy, “but mom and dad, I’d like to be a firefighter when I grow up”. If the data says “aerospace engineer” (because the state is giving the industry millions in tax credits), then Johnny gets to be an aerospace engineer.

In 2008, Barack Obama became our 49th president. Let us never forget that under the one-word campaign slogan – CHANGE – Obama set about creating a socialist paradise in this country which dismantled nearly every LOCALIZED state institution – including education – almost thoroughly.

In the place of localized educational standards, Obama worked with the National Governor’s Association (of which Governor (King) Stitt just become Chair – please review his Igniting The Dream initiative below) and of which Mary Fallin was Chair during her term, 2013-14) and the Counsel of Chief State School Officers (all state superintendents) to create top down (national) educational standards to make sure every student in America was learning like every other student in America, which they called the Common Core State Standards. Unbelievably, (wink, wink) The CCSS have been found to be a failure in every state that adopted them (please internet search the term “Common Core failure” for more studies describing this boondoggle).

He also ramped up the State Longitudinal Database System. Working with the The National Center for Education Statistics, the Common Education Data Standards Initiative was created where thousands of data points were developed so that every school around the country could collect information on every student enrolled in public school in the United States to help them ‘learn’ better. (To find more information on Common Core and the SLDS, see our former blogspot.) This initiative has not failed, and in fact, has gained more steam the more tyrannical governments at every level realize how easy it is to control a populace on which they have millions of datapoints of information.

Besides an initiative to grade teachers (which has created part of the mess we now see in public education) – the Teacher Effectiveness system – the last of Obama’s four pillars was to create a TURNAROUND MODEL for ‘turning around failing schools, funded by School Improvement Grants. This roundly debunked initiative has been an absolute failure, yet it cost US taxpayers BILLIONS of dollars.

And so, this last week, Governor (King) Stitt, took full advantage of ELECTED Ryan Walters’ decision to quit his job instead of upholding his compact with his VOTERS to finish his term and made SWEEPING changes to Oklahoma’s upper education infrastructure – which he called Oklahoma’s “turnaround”. Hopefully, you’ll understand from the brief synopsis above, why I’m not in the least inspired by this turn of events.

Now, let’s review all that has happened since Ryan Walters quit:

  • Governor King-Stitt tells the public he’s going to ask the legislature to make the State Superintendent position appointed because there isn’t enough alignment between the Governor’s office and the state superintendent if the position is not appointed. (NO. JUST NO. This is at minimum a CHECK AND BALANCE. Number 2, I’ve had enough of Governor Stitt’s failed appointments and number 3, we are a Representative Government, not an oligarchy or a private business – things Governor King-Stitt forgets on a regular basis.)
  • Governor King-Stitt moves around his office staff – hiring what can only be called “swamp creatures” to help him finish out his term. This included trying to move long-time associate Donelle Harder into the Secretary of State position (don’t worry, after telling him to exit, I’m sure Stitt will find a cozy new deal for perennial government satellite Josh Cochroft) when she wasn’t eligible. How did no one in Stitt’s office seem to know the actual rules? If you’re King, or CEO, what do rules really matter?
  • Governor King-Stitt appoints a new Walters replacement – Lindel Fields – whose pronouns are “nice/kind”, who, in a very OPPOSITE RYAN WALTERS MOVE shed actual tears during the press conference, whose accreditations come from a place called Giant Worldwide (which includes a certification in “5 Voices“) – and include an SSGI/Baldrige Foundation Diversity and Inclusion Yellow Belt Certification from Six Sigma Global Institute. Very NOT GLOBAL! Don’t we have some law thingy against DEI?
  • Governor King Stitt appoints a new Secretary of Education, Daniel Hamlin, whose background includes University of Oklahoma professor, and who was educated both in Asia (MA Sejong University, Seoul, Asian Studies) and Canada where he received a Ph.D. from Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (OISE) Educational Leadership and Policy. So, advanced degrees from socialist countries. That’s comforting. Though he’s worked at OU the last 7 years, before that, he was at Oxford for 8 and University of Toronto for 4. Very Oklahoman! He is also Jeb Bush adjacent and seems to have an itch to control HOMESCHOOLING!
  • Governor King Stitt appoints his Obama-styled “turnaround team” at the Department of Education that includes (among others):
  • Current Okemah Chamber of Commerce President Connie Reilly, will now take over for Oftedal as the head of OEQA. She was a decades-long educator in Okemah schools, who was appointed to the Board of Regents of the Regional University System of Oklahoma by Brad Henry in 2007 – a post she has kept through 2 successive Republican governors now. Why a retired teacher would want to suddenly become president of the local chamber flummoxes me. And yet she will now be in a position where she can work with the Chamber and Dr. Oftedal, to hook all the databases in the state together so we can follow all children from birth to grave. Yay.
  • Governor King-Stitt then replaced two of his friends he had earlier appointed to the Oklahoma State Board of Education, but who haven’t been showing up much lately – Zach Archer and Sarah Lepak (who was Assistant General Counsel at Gateway Mortgage Group, from Apr 2012 – Mar 2017) – with Brian Bobek and Wes Nofire. Stitt has already appointed Bobek to the state board, where he served from 2019 to 2023. Bobek left BP Oil after 23 years to come to work for Governor Stitt, where, so far, he’s been his Deputy Chief of Staff, Chief Operating Officer (of something, I guess Governor Stitt?) and his Director of Faith Based Initiatives (another made up job not found in the Oklahoma Job Catalog so we have no idea what taxpayers pay for his salary). Nofire – like all the others – has been appointed by Stitt to something before: he’s a Commissioner on the Board of the State Athletic Commission and he’s also the Native American Liaison to the Office of the Governor since 2024.

Interestingly – neither our new, nice, State Superintendent, nor King-Stitt, notified our friend – and former Oklahoma State School Board member Kendra Wesson, that she had been fired as the Chair of the Oklahoma State Textbook Committee. She only found out when I read it in a ‘news’ media article and shared the information with her. Just another way we know that King-Stitt’s agenda is NOT about We The People.

I think it’s worth noting that in SEVERAL articles I read, the local “news” media have managed to quote Oklahoma Edvocates (a group for leftist teachers, not for parents or students), President, Jami Jackson Cole on King-Stitt’s Obama-like Turnaround, which she appears to be all for.

So, in closing, let all that sink in. Governor King-Stitt has now put into place all the “yes” men he’s previously appointed/worked with in some capacity as stewards of our Oklahoma Education funds and students. It is clear to me that this “turnaround” is one in which parents will be left behind. It has to be that way for the Jeb Bush/Chamber of Commerce-focused agenda of driving students into jobs so the elites can save money on job training can play out in real time.

Gone will be the effort to remove predators from schools and smutty, developmentally-inappropriate books from the library. Incoming will be the giant cookie cutter of big government, stamping children into widgets through collection of reams of unnecessary and invasive data for the benefit of private businesses. Watch.

__________________________________________

Governor Stitt’s Reigniting The Dream initiative as Chair of the National Governor’s Association, 2025:

The yearlong Reigniting the American Dream initiative will focus on three policy pillars:

  • Unlocking Economic Opportunity: Advancing the American Dream through entrepreneurship, creating a good jobs economy and economic mobility
  • Empowering Every Learner: Reimagining education and creating real on-the-jobs experiences for youth
  • Energizing the Future: Powering America’s next chapter by powering our AI future

Throughout the year, Governor Stitt will lead a series of convenings bringing together governors, private-sector leaders, and changemakers to explore policy and practice to forge a more hopeful, prosperous future for every American.

NGA also announced leadership for NGA’s three Governor-led task forces. The task forces foster a collaborative environment for Governors to focus on NGA’s top federal priorities. The task force co-chairs are:

  • Education, Workforce and Community Investment: Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers, Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon
  • Economic Development and Revitalization: Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear, North Dakota Governor Kelly Armstrong
  • Public Health and Emergency Management: Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe, North Carolina Governor Josh Stein
2

Neither The Oklahoma State Department of Education DEI Rules Or Gov Stitt’s Executive Order Will Stop DEI In Oklahoma Education – Here’s Why

Jenni White – 1.25.24

GOVERNOR STITT’S EXECUTIVE ORDER (EO-31) FOR DEI IN OKLAHOMA HIGHER EDUCATION

December 13, 2023, Governor Stitt signed an Executive Order 2023-31 (EO) that has been referred to as BANNING DEI by the general media. Heritage Foundation (a center-right think tank that also promotes School Choice, but was loudly vocal against Common Core) referred to the Executive Order as “condemning DEI” – a big difference from “banning DEI”.

EO-31 DOES prohibit Oklahoma’s Executive Branches from using “state funds, property or resources” to promote DEI via any of 6 different ways listed, including “(2) Mandate any person to participate in, listen to, or receive any education, training, activities procedures or programming to the extent such education, training, activity or procedure grants preferences based on one person’s particular race, color, sex, ethnicity, or national origin over another’s”. 

It also orders the heads of the Executive Branches to “initiate a review” of any DEI programs or activities under their purview and bring them into compliance with the parameters of EO-31 if not already. 

Here is a listing of Oklahoma’s Executive Branches:

  • Attorney General
  • Governor
  • Lieutenant Governor
  • Oklahoma Secretary of State
  • Oklahoma State Auditor and Inspector
  • Oklahoma Superintendent of Public Instruction
  • Oklahoma Treasurer
  • Oklahoma Agriculture Commission
  • Oklahoma Insurance Commission
  • Oklahoma Labor Commission
  • Oklahoma Corporation Commission
  • Oklahoma Wildlife Conservation Commission

To be clear, according to EO-31, I can’t be hired by the Insurance Commission and have them give me training out of their budget that includes a DEI component. That is good and I do not want to overlook the GOOD part of this EO.

Now, though, let’s look further down in the Executive Order and note that the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education is NOT an Executive Agency. EO-31 is clear in the first statement of the EO, “Executive state agencies shall not utilize state funds, property or resources to:”. It says NOTHING about anything outside the agencies listed above.

Thinking in that vein, note the underlined in red below:

Let’s stop here. This paragraph says that EO-31 will not apply to COLLEGES and UNIVERSITIES or any of the executive agencies SUPPORTING them – INCLUDING THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION – if they apply for a GRANT or to comply with ACCREDITATION requirements. Unfortunately, GRANTS and ACCREDITATION are where so much of the DEI in higher education arises. If you don’t believe me, internet search “DEI in higher ed accreditation” and you will find article after article about how, the only way to really advance DEI principles in higher education is THROUGH ACCREDITATION. 

Here, in fact is an article from the Chronicle Of Higher Education titled, “The New Accountability: How Accreditors Are Measuring colleges’ diversity, equity and inclusion efforts“.

So what about grants? Well, we ALL know Higher Ed takes federal government grant money. Check this out:

And that’s just FEDERAL grants. There are other grants from non-Federal sources in abundance, like this group. 

Now let’s look even FARTHER down in EO-31. It says:

Alright. Let’s think about that. The order says the EO DOESN’T apply if a federal law supersedes. Here’s a Fact Sheet from the Feds that talks about how Title VI law CAN PROMOTE DEI. And not only that, President Biden also has his OWN EO mandating DEI in schools, so NO, EO-31 STILL DOESN’T STOP DEI in higher ed. 

We could go on, but EO-31 won’t stop higher ed DEI scholarly research either and a friend just sent this to me. Not only will EO-31 not stop, creepy research, it won’t stop “a student organization registered with or recognized by an institution of higher education”. This research is in conjunction with the BGLTQ+ Student Center and we all now know that the alphabet sex brigade and DEI go together like furries and cat boxes.

RYAN WALTERS PROPOSED DEI RULE FOR K-12 SCHOOLS

Here is the set of rules proposed by Walters to be heard by the Board on Friday, February 16th. 

The rules for K-12 actually do more than those for higher ed, but they still do not stop DEI.

Walters’ rules FOLLOW THE GOVERNOR’S EO-31 EXACTLY (with the exception of the removal of #2 and #3 under letter (f) of the Governor’s EO that apply only to higher ed). In point of fact, they would have to, as the OSDE is an Executive Branch and it must follow the Governor’s EO-31. 

But herein lies a bit of a problem.

Accreditation of Oklahoma public schools are done by the OSDE using their accreditation standards. So, as long as those standards don’t allow DEI, that window is closed – unlike with higher ed and Oklahoma private schools which can be accredited by the OSDE, or a myriad of other accrediting agencies.

Unfortunately, however, we still have the issue with GRANTS.

Here, Edmond Public Schools Foundation is thanking those donors who are helping to raise OVER ONE MILLION DOLLARS for SEL programs inside Edmond schools. Unfortunately, SEL is intricately tied to DEI in a million ways and any grant that comes into a school for SEL will ultimately bring in DEI as well. George Lucas’ educational non-profit Edutopia, has a whole page devoted to ways in which k-12 schools can obtain grants to push out SEL. 

Also unfortunately, we still have the problem with FEDERAL LAW being exempted as well as student organizations, with both of those issues similar in K-12 to my discussion on higher ed.

An article from OETA entitled, “D.E.I. In Oklahoma Schools“, quoted OCU’s DEI coordinator as saying:

Yet LGBTQ clubs such as this one from EPIC Charter Schools, is exempted from the new DEI rule because it’s a student organization recognized by the school.

To close out, since data collection is ALSO exempted, DEI also can come in through THAT door. I’ve written numerous times about how horrible some of the surveys being given by Oklahoma public schools are today. Here’s an article about Success Highways and its link to DEI. Here’s another about the Oklahoma Prevention Needs Survey.

And worse, here’s an exchange I had with a teacher on social media that shows that it’s often teacher training and teacher mindset that bring DEI ideals into the classroom on a daily basis without even needing a private or federal grant, or anything else.

Additionally, Oklahoma uses school counselors from the American School Counselor Association an organization DEDICATED to bringing DEI into every school and with every child. So there’s that.

Consequently, since we still have DEI coming into schools through data, teachers and counselors, whether or not Walters’ new rule on DEI is passed by the Oklahoma State School Board members or not

the bottom line here is this: BOTH THE HIGHER ED EO and the K-12 RULES ARE BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAD BEFORE – WHICH WAS NOTHING – but it’s important to remember that NEITHER STOP DEI. Really, the surest way to keep your child from being influenced by DEI ideology is to:

  1. Educate your child/children at home – not even private schools are ‘sure things’ in terms of rational, classical, non-ideological education anymore
  2. Monitor your child’s social media and internet access closely and lock down problem apps and sites
  3. Talk to your children constantly about your moral values and ethics – your worldview
  4. Make sure you’re clear with your children about what you as a parent – or guardian – expect from them in terms of their behavior
  5. Prevent as much government entanglement as possible, including the use of tax credits or vouchers for private school as these have strings that can bring unwanted influences in through the regulation
0

A List – With Commentary – Of The Newest Rules Added To The Oklahoma State Department Of Education Website For Review

Jenni White

I have simply copied and pasted much of the information from the OSDE website’s Administrative Rules page into this document, so please pay attention to the PUBLIC HEARING DATES in BOLD. Also, if you’d like to provide any commentary on these rules to the state prior to the hearing, you may do so here: rules@sde.ok.gov, or through their address:

Office of Legal Services
State Department of Education
Hodge Education Building
2500 North Lincoln Boulevard
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73105-4599

A public hearing will be held at 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, February 15, 2024, in Room 1-20 (State Board Room) at the Oliver Hodge Building, 2500 North Lincoln Boulevard, in Oklahoma City for the following rules.

Subchapter 3.  Standards for Elementary, Middle Level, Secondary, and Career and
Technology Schools
Part 22. Standard XII: Academic Performance
210:35-3-210. Purpose. [NEW]
210:35-3-211. Applicability of the Standard. [NEW]
210:35-3-212. Metrics for Academic Deficiencies. [NEW]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

These appear to be reasonable rules to specifically address schools with low academic proficiencies. The only question here is, upon what tests will the school year district data assessment be predicated? Oklahoma’s state tests, NAEP, or something else. Without knowing from what assessment tool the data to be considered will be culled, how can the rule be enforced? That issue needs to be addressed.

Subchapter 3.  Standards for Elementary, Middle Level, Secondary, and Career and
Technology Schools
Part 9. Standard V: The School Staff
210:35-3-86. Qualifications; personnel records; health and safety. [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

This rule appears to be addressing the issue at Western Hills Elementary School exposed by ROPE Report Regular V1SUT.

These rules, under the NEW heading of Health and Safety, require all administrative assistants in a school building overseeing staff or an education program to have appropriate teaching certification for the job they hold.  Same for staff.  All certifications must be filed in the school of employment throughout the school year.

Additional PROPOSED rules say:

(g) Health and safety regarding certified employees. If a district maintains the active employment or contract of, or renews a contract of, a certified employee currently under investigation for certificate revocation, and that employee’s certificate is revoked at the conclusion of that investigation, the district shall be given a health and safety deficiency.

(h) Health and safety regarding non-certified employees. If a district maintains the active employment or contract, or renews a contract, of a non-certified employee currently under investigation by law enforcement for a felony; and that employee is convicted of a felony, pleads guilty to a felony, or pleads nolo contendere to a felony at the conclusion of that investigation; the district shall be given a health and safety deficiency.  

The problem to me here is the word CURRENT.  It appears to be a grandfather clause.  If there are staff or teachers with a felony record in the past, there is no provision for that.  This is an absolutely REQUIRED rule to protect the safety of children in public schools, but – in my mind – it should include ALL CURRENT employees regardless of whether they are ‘currently’ under investigation.  If a teacher or employee in a public school has a felony record, they should – more than likely – not be around children.

Also, what impact is a “health and safety deficiency” in a school’s accreditation?  If it is a slap on the wrist, why even create the rule?  This question speaks to the rule below.

Subchapter 3.  Standards for Elementary, Middle Level, Secondary, and Career and
Technology Schools
Part 21. Standard XI: Accreditation Status
210:35-3-201. Statement of the standard. [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

I’m unclear how specific are these rules.  Here’s an example of the 3rd accreditation standard:

3. Accredited With Deficiencies: A school site or district fails to meet one or more of the standards but the deficiency does not seriously detract from the quality of the school’s educational program.

Question: We learned above that a “Health and Safety” deficiency will be added if schools continue employment of certified or non-certified personnel under current investigation for a felony or found to have a current felony.  One could argue that employees under investigation of a felony do “not seriously detract from the quality of the school’s educational program”.  Consequently, this needs to be tighter language – or it should at least be made clear that the State School Board retains the right to use recorded deficiencies based on the evidence at hand for each school.  Even that doesn’t work, however, because that kind of language will be construed in whatever way an Administration decides to use it – for good or for evil.

Maybe we should keep the number of ‘deficiencies’ very small and very meaningful and then make the accreditation based on the number of deficiencies alone.

A public hearing will be held at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, February 16, 2024, in Room 1-20 (State Board Room) at the Oliver Hodge Building, 2500 North Lincoln Boulevard, in Oklahoma City for the following rules.

Subchapter 1.  General Provisions
210:25-1-2.  Equal Protection [NEW]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

This is the highly anticipated DEI rule that our Superintendent has been talking about.  I see no reason for this rule.  What the rule states in a-d is effectively wiped out by e-f.  Here’s what I mean:

(e) Nothing in this rule prohibits the Department or any recipient of funds from the Department from applying for a grant or complying with the accreditation requirements by an accrediting or licensing agency, including, but not limited to, submitting to the grantor or accreditation agency a statement that:

And then it goes on to specify services for poor and underserved populations.  Following this, the rule exempts situations:

(f) This rule shall not be construed to apply to the Department or any recipient of funds from the Department with respect to the following:

Included under (f) is this specification:

  1. a policy, practice, procedure, program, class, or activity required for compliance with state or federal laws, rules, or regulations for obtaining or retaining institutional, academic, or discipline-specific accreditation or licensure;

Here’s an example of an accreditation organization for K-12 institutions including Catholic schools;

“Standard 1 Leaders cultivate and sustain a culture that demonstrates respect, fairness, equity, and inclusion, and is free from bias.”

So, if the OSDE is going to exempt accreditation organizations, you’re gonna get DEI.  There are other exemptions in this list.  I’m not going to list them all here, but I’ve pasted in the URL, please look at it yourself and let me know your thoughts, but if these rules DON’T APPLY to any of the items listed under (f) – THEY ARE COMPLETELY MEANINGLESS IN TERMS OF STOPPING DEI.

A public hearing will be held at 2:00 p.m. on Friday, February 16, 2024, in Room 1-20 (State Board Room) at the Oliver Hodge Building, 2500 North Lincoln Boulevard, in Oklahoma City for the following rules.

Subchapter 29. Standards of Performance and Conduct for Teachers
210:20-29-5.  Principle III [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

Here is the text of the rule:

(e) A teacher may be dismissed, refused employment, or not reemployed after a finding that such person has, either in the presence of a minor or in a manner available to a minor online, engaged in sexual acts, acts that appeal to the prurient interest in sex as found by the average person applying contemporary community standards, or acts that excessively promote sexuality in light of the educational value of the material and in light of the youngest age of any student with access to said material.

Again, this seems to be a perfectly reasonable rule that SHOULD stop predators from being around public school kids.  HOWEVER: here are some concerns:

  1. This is similar language to that used by many parents to try and remove sexually inappropriate library books from school libraries – this has only worked in isolated incidences.  Sexually inappropriate library books are still littering the shelves of libraries across the campuses of Oklahoma public k-12 schools.
  2. The left will argue until they turn blue in the face that whatever sexually disgusting nonsense they’ve brought into the classroom “has educational value”.
  3. In addition, they MAY be dismissed etc?  What does THAT mean?  That means that no one could be removed from the classroom.

This rule basically needs to say that ANY STAFF MEMBER OF A PUBLIC SCHOOL WILL be dismissed if – after a law enforcement investigation AND/OR a school inquiry of the individual – has found that they engaged in ANY sex act with a minor student – including inappropriate online communications.

So much of this stuff ends up being useless because the wording doesn’t say what it needs to say (not that mine is perfect either, just saying what’s written is NOT good)

A public hearing will be held at 10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, February 20, 2024, in Room 1-20 (State Board Room) at the Oliver Hodge Building, 2500 North Lincoln Boulevard, in Oklahoma City for the following rules.

Subchapter 3.  Departmental Precepts 
210:1-3-4. Annuities contracts. [REVOKED] 
Subchapter 5.  Due Process 
210:1-5-7. Teacher evaluation, dismissal, and nonreemployment. [REVOKED] 
Subchapter 9.  Interlocal Cooperative Agreements [REVOKED] 
210:1-9-1. Purpose. [REVOKED] 
210:1-9-2. Definitions. [REVOKED] 
210:1-9-3. Enabling provisions/restrictions. [REVOKED] 
210:1-9-4. Conditions applicable to interlocal cooperative agreements. [REVOKED] 

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement
 

Not sure why all these are being revoked, but nothing much to say about revoked law.  The more revoked laws we can get, the happier I’ll be!

Subchapter 1.  General Provisions
210:1-1-1. Purpose Declaration of Foundational Values [AMENDED]
210:1-1-7. Purpose [NEW]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

Oh my goodness.  So much of this is completely unnecessary.  While I agree with many of the sentiments, this is a Department of Public Education supported by the tax dollars of ALL Oklahomans.  This entire document should be scrapped excepting the BASICS contained in (a), (b) – I suppose, (e), (f), (i) and (j).  Because it’s been said in many of the other rules that the Department of Education of the State of Oklahoma follows that State and Federal Constitutions, there is no reason to take up space banging that ideal on the head.  It simply serves to put liberals into spasms and why should we use tax dollars for that?  We must educate kids properly as asserted in letter (e) and move on.  The more strife this department stirs up with the Left, the harder it becomes to get business done.

Subchapter 5.  Due Process
210:1-5-6.  Suspension and/or revocation of certificates [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

This rule inserts a single paragraph that states the number of days in which the OSDE must be notified if contesting the revocation of a teaching certificate.  Nothing here out of the ordinary.

Subchapter 1. General Provisions
210:10-1-6. Computer assisted pupil accounting [REVOKED] 
210:10-1-10. Accreditation rating [REVOKED] 

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

It appears the accreditation rating was revoked in favor of the language submitted under 210:35-3-201. Statement of the standard.

Subchapter 1.  General Provisions
210:10-1-16.  Oklahoma Academic Scholar and other student recognitions [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

This is VERY HELPFUL.  It adds language including the CLT (Classic Learning Test) – a test that is being used by some universities now instead of the SAT and ACT (or at least in conjunction with).  My kids took the CLT as 8th graders and while there was still some iffy gunk on it about global warming for example (according to my kids), there was nothing at all as just downright confusing and indoctrinating as some of the ACT and/or SAT language.

But again, this goes back to my question about Metrics for Academic Standards at the beginning of this document.  What test will the state use to make those determinations?  We can’t have some kids tested with the state test, but then include ACT/SAT or CLT scores.  We need to pick a test and we have long advocated for an independent testing service like CLT or the Iowa Test of Basic Skills as the ACT is HORRID.

Subchapter 2.  Parental Rights
210:10-2-2. Definitions [AMENDED]
210:10-2-3. Requirements [AMENDED]
210:10-2-4. Noncompliance [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

This language has been added to the existing rule:

“Independent Contractor” means an individual, organization, or entity that is engaged by and/or contracted by a school district to provide services or instruction, whether directly or indirectly, to students or within a school district on a temporary or contractual basis and is not an employee of the school district.

Does this person have to be certified?  The school is responsible for them ultimately, but it makes me uncomfortable.  I’m not sure exactly what this might be.  If it’s a health coordinator, what information could they bring in the parent might not be aware of.  It’s a tricky business.  We have always wanted the public schools to have more ability to be flexible, but with all that has been going on in the last 10 years, one could argue that many are already way more flexible with education providers than we want them to.

Subchapter 13.  Student Assessment and School Accountability
210:10-13-2.  Oklahoma School Testing Program (OSTP) scope and general administration [AMENDED]
210:10-13-18. Oklahoma School Accountability System [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

I couldn’t really find anything that was problematic in either of these rules.  Basically it’s allowing for remediation for schools who do not score at least satisfactory on the state criterion-referenced tests (very specific test, thankfully).  The only problem is that the school only gets remediation if there’s funding.

The second rule gives schools a way to challenge their A-F score and makes it clear that F schools must get comprehensive support and show improvement – but then it doesn’t say here what will happen if they don’t.  It’s always the follow-up that kills the best rules/laws/plans…

Subchapter 17.  Federal Programs complaint procedures
210:10-17-1. Complaint Procedures [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

This is HUGE!  So huge in fact, that I wrote a whole blog just about that.  Please read it.

Subchapter 9. Professional Standards: Teacher Education and Certification 
Part 1. General Teaching Certificate Requirements
210:20-9-12. General education requirements of individuals who already hold baccalaureate
degrees [REVOKED]
210:20-9-14. Alternative plan for student teaching requirements [REVOKED]
Subchapter 11. Professional Standards: Accreditation Standards for Approved Teacher Education Programs
210:20-11-1. Evaluation process [REVOKED]
210:20-11-2. Specific Standards for Program Approval [REVOKED]
210:20-11-3. General education and professional education [REVOKED]
210:20-11-4. Specialization standards [REVOKED]
210:20-11-6. NCATE/State joint visits [REVOKED]
Subchapter 15: Residency Program
210:20-15-3. Residency committee [REVOKED]
210:20-15-4. Variations to the residency program regulations [REVOKED]
Subchapter 24. Science and Mathematics Advanced Recruiting Technique (SMART) Program
210:20-24-1. Purpose [REVOKED]
210:20-24-2. Science and Mathematics Advanced Recruiting Technique (SMART) Program [REVOKED]
Subchapter 26. Academic Achievement Award Program
210:20-26-1. Purpose [REVOKED]
210:20-26-2. Selection and payment criteria [REVOKED]
210:20-26-3. Qualified employees [REVOKED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

Again, not sure why, but happy to revoke any laws, rules or regulations. LOL

Subchapter 23. School Board Members    
210:20-23-3. Requirements for new and incumbent school board member training [AMENDED]
210:20-23-4. Requirements for continuing education; certificates; costs [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

Interesting; the only thing changed about this rule is that the Oklahoma State School Boards Association (OSSBA) has been removed from the wording of the rule under training.  Unfortunately, I’m not sure how this will help anything because state law has not been changed.  We tried to get it changed, but we were not successful.  Several times in the rules I’ve read today it says that if the rule disagrees with state law, state law prevails, so I’m not sure how this will do anything.  If you’d like to see why I say that, please read this article.

SB1447 STOPS MANDATORY SCHOOL BOARD TRAINING and SB1445 REDUCES ALL SCHOOL BOARD TERMS TO TWO YEARS

Subchapter 5.  Budgeting and Business Management
Part 1. Implementation 
210:25-5-4.  Accounting [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

Apparently this removes the ability of a charter school to appeal any changes in the data they’ve sent the OSDE regarding their financial reporting and accounting.  They can show cause that changes are warranted before the data is locked, but the appeal process no longer would exist.

Subchapter 3. Standards for Elementary, Middle Level, Secondary, and Career and Technology Schools 
Part 5. Standard III: Administration and Organization
210:35-3-48. Local board responsibilities/staff relationships [AMENDED]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

Nothing really much to say about this.  These look to be changes required by reorganizing the text after removing this statement:

(3) The local board and its individual members shall refrain from involvement in or interference with the administrative functions of the school.

I’m surprised that was in the rules, but then I was also surprised that THIS was in the rules previously:

(B) Lack of harmony in the teaching staff, board, or community, when such conditions affect the quality and effectiveness of instruction and climate of the school, shall be considered sufficient cause for not accrediting a school. Political and special interest groups or individuals shall not interfere in the operation of the schools.

Subchapter 3.  Standards for Elementary, Middle Level, Secondary, and Career and Technology Schools
Part 17. Standard IX: Financial Support
210:35-3-167.  School District Transparency Act [NEW]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

This is a new section of rules that basically say that if a school’s website does not comply with accountability law they’ll get a deficiency on their accreditation if they don’t fix it within 30 days.

A public hearing will be held at 2:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 20, 2024, in Room 1-20 (State Board Room) at the Oliver Hodge Building, 2500 North Lincoln Boulevard, in Oklahoma City for the following rules.

Subchapter 3. Standards for Elementary, Middle Level, Secondary, and Career and Technology Schools
Part 25. Standard XIV: Freedom of Religion [NEW]
210:35-3-251. Voluntary prayer [NEW]
210:35-3-252. Minute of silence in public schools [NEW]

Text of proposed rule
Rule Impact Statement

I’ll be honest.  I think this is nonsense.  I think it’s detracting from the REAL issues which are that our kids can’t read or do math proficiently, and while I love Jesus personally, I don’t think adding one minute of quiet time to their school day will affect a single thing about that.  Making  teachers teach properly and schools follow the law will do more for that than a single silent minute.

In fact, I don’t see anything different in this section of ‘new’ law than what has already been happening in public schools for many years.

The only thing different about this ‘new’ rule is that it provides for a complaints process if the school isn’t following the law and:

(c) The State Department of Education shall annually verify that districts have adopted policies that comply with this rule and shall recommend an accreditation deficiency to the State Board of Education for any school district that fails to comply.

Getting an accreditation deficiency for not enforcing a single silent minute is way over the top to me.  Now, if a school is not allowing a coach to say a prayer before a game, or teachers to keep Bibles on their desks – I think there’s a problem, as those are personal issues, not state issues – but those situations aren’t addressed in this rule, most probably because they’ve been adjudicated frequently at numerous levels of the judiciary.

1

This Social Media Exchange Helps Explain How DEI Gets Into Public Classrooms

I recently came across this post on social media and stopped. I agreed with the notion and started to look down through the comments to see what was being said about it.

Quickly, I came across this comment:

This comment made me feel the need to respond because of the use of her language, “bringing students into the conversation”, “using diverse methods”, “approaching students” – all which are progressive education buzzphrases – so I responded:

She replied:

I continued, hoping that she would understand what I was trying to say. She wasn’t ugly, she was – probably like me – trying to reach a point of understanding between us.

I wish I hadn’t been so terse in my response, but it’s somewhat shocking – even now – to see someone who so clearly wants to be helpful and so clearly believes she is doing the right thing, when in fact nearly her entire outlook is based on a completely flawed premise – that somehow teachers can overcome family and other outside influences (Tik Tok anyone?) by treating their students differently based on a concept that doesn’t exist in reality (equity). She responded one last time:

As did I:

Looking back on this conversation reminds me of one of the reasons I quit teaching; I saw these ideals bubbling up through continuing education courses and I knew I was never going to be able to assimilate them into my classroom. I couldn’t.

I have ALWAYS believed in the power of the INDIVIDUAL to succeed – or fail – depending upon how much effort that INDIVIDUAL put in. Now, is every kid primed to take up the gauntlet of self-individuation and put their head down with a plan? No. Too many other factors – especially a bad home environment – can put a chip on the shoulder of a kid that may never come off. That doesn’t mean that teachers in public school classrooms are to deal with that chip – even if a kid isn’t learning. Teachers can only do what they can do WHILE INSTRUCTING KIDS IN THE NECESSARY TOOLS OF LEARNING; reading, writing and math.

The particular theory this young teacher espouses asserts that teachers should become the parents of the children – because, obviously, the parents are not doing their jobs if kids are coming to school scared and weak and timid. Sadly, it’s true for many children today. Many parents use school as a babysitter and could care less what their kids are doing in a day to actually recieve an education, but that doesn’t mean it’s THE JOB OF THE TEACHER TO RECTIFY THE POOR UPBRINGING OF THEIR STUDENTS. In fact, most of the time, it’s either a psychologist, or the school of hard knocks that changes students with downward trajectories – if they do – some, sadly, go to prison or wind up dead. Still and all, the lifetrack of a child is not the responsibility of the teacher. The education of that student is – alone – the job of the teacher.

Teachers are not to become the parents of poorly-performing students, they are to work harder to bring parents into the equation (or remove the child from school if the child is disrupting others and the parents won’t help control the child) to help the child, not take on the troubles of the child themselves. In fact, it’s this kind of progressive ‘theology’ that leads to classrooms where feelings and psychological concepts take center stage, NOT INSTRUCTION IN READING, WRITING and MATH. I believe it’s easy to see how wrong-headed this model of ‘education’ is and how it’s RUINING children just by looking at Oklahoma’s test scores. And if you don’t believe me, check out this video for an enormous wake-up call.

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑