Search

ROPE Report

Open Search
Tag

OSDE

Parent Who Posted Now-Viral State-Approved Waurika Psychology Assignment To Her Facebook Page Speaks Out

Waurika psychology assignment

A truly unfortunate event happened in the classroom of Ashlyn Jade’s niece at Waurika Public Schools Monday afternoon.

According to an interview with Ashlyn this afternoon, Coach Roger Jesse, a teacher/coach with 40+ years in Oklahoma education – and someone with many years of service and an excellent reputation in Waurika Public Schools – gave his 11th grade psychology class an assignment that has now made internet viral status.

Coach Jesse was asked to teach a new extra curricular psychology class at Waurika High School this semester. Ashlyn believes that, in a hurry and under duress from a strenuous teaching/coaching schedule, he downloaded a STATE APPROVED psychology curriculum to use during his class on Monday afternoon, copied it and handed it out without really reviewing it.

Ashlyn’s niece, very uncomfortable with the subject matter, took a picture of the assignment and uploaded it to Snap Chat during class, where it stayed 24 hours – long enough for her 5th grade daughter to see it in her feed in the morning. Her daughter then screenshot the post and sent the photo to her mother.

Immediately upset, Ashlyn put in a call to Waurika High School Principal, Derek Milburn. When Principal Milburn returned her call, Ashlyn explained to him exactly what had happened and that she was very upset that, not only was her 11th grade niece exposed to this kind of assignment, but that her 5th grade daughter had found it on SnapChat.

According to Ashlyn, Principal Milburn seemed rushed and dismissed her by saying that ‘it was already taken care of and that she shouldn’t worry about it. All the parents of students who had been effected had been made aware.’

Ashlyn knew the Snap had gone viral and that a very large number of Waurika Public Schools students had already seen it. She told me she doesn’t believe that Mr. Milburn knew that fact, but because she felt as though the Principal was essentially dismissing her concern that her 5th grade daughter (and other students in the school system) had seen it, she posted the assignment to her Facebook page out of frustration and to make a point.

The post went viral in a short time, with even State Superintendent Ryan Walters posting it – unedited – from his social media accounts.

Not long after the post went viral, so did the accusations from community members pointed in her direction.

Ashlyn says she’s being accused of calling a beloved Coach a predator and she wants to say that this perspective isn’t at all true. During our interview, she called my attention back to her original post, the top of which is posted above. She never mentioned any names, nor even the school system. It only became known that the assignment was from Waurika because someone commenting on her post asked if the incident had happened in Waurika and she answered “yes”.

It wasn’t until Wednesday afternoon that Waurika Public Schools addressed the incident publicly with a letter posted to their Facebook page written by Cody Simmons, WPS’ Superintendent.

According to Ashlyn, Coach Jesse has been put on leave and is being asked to retire. She doesn’t believe that’s fair.

Ashlyn said that she made the post to “shed light on the fact that the teacher used a state approved curriculum. Coach Jesse copied and pasted an assignment that was approved by the Oklahoma State Department of Education. He was not a psychology teacher, he was a coach teaching a psychology class. He copied and pasted the OSDE curriculum and gave it to students without really reading it. He was just overworked.”

She advocates for the return of Roger Jesse and says that she “believes that the responsibility and repercussions for this terrible situation should not fall on the shoulders of the teacher, but on Principal Milburn, Superintendent Simmons and State Superintendent Ryan Walters” because this was part of a state approved psychology curriculum.

Ashlyn has a point. It seems as though the teacher made a really terrible mistake. If you were a hurried teacher and you went to the OSDE website and downloaded curriculum that had been approved for use in high school, would you really worry too much about it being inappropriate for use in state classrooms? I’m not excusing Coach Jesse of all the responsibility for the issue – whether it came from the OSDE or not, he should have really examined what he was using in class – but in light of Ashlyn’s comments, there is some plausibility for his lack of diligence.

In 2021, I wrote an article titled, “Oklahoma State Department of Education Promoting “Anti” Racist (CRT) Propaganda and Risk Behavior Surveys Through SEL and Counseling Services“. After seeing the information and curriculum being pushed under the Hoffmeister administration that was available ON THE OSDE WEBSITE, I totally believe that Coach Jesse downloaded something that should never have been used in an Oklahoma k-12 classroom because it was up on the OSDE website for teachers to download.

Who’s fault is that? Ultimately, it’s our Superintendent’s fault. The buck stops on his desk. He’s had no trouble pounding his dashboard during in-car videos railing (rightly) against discriminatory practices in schools, but he should be doing less pounding/videos and concentrating more on what’s on the state website for teachers to download.

Then, there’s the tepid, dismissive response of the Principal to Ashley. He – and the Superintendent – should have known that students would share that kind of crazy assignment on social media like crazy and be more concerned about ALL the students who could have seen it, instead of just those students in class.

Ashlyn Jade did what she felt like she needed to do as a parent, and an Aunt, and she’s taking a pretty good beating over it in the community. But then, our Superintendent posted an UNEDITED version to his social media. HOW RESPONSIBLE IS THAT? Shouldn’t he have focused on just the part about the investigation?

In the end, there’s a whole lot of blame to go around when it comes to this incident, but I don’t see Ashlyn as a party to that. Parents NEED to speak out when they see this kind of thing – that’s how they protect their children – and they should do that whether anyone else likes that or not.

1

Oklahoma Watch Requests – And Receives – Anonymous Tip Information To Write Story In Favor Of Edmond Teacher Regan Killacky

Once the concept of anonymous isn’t anymore, trust is gone and transparency is dead.

Look, I read the Oklahoma Watch. Sometimes they’re the only online media source from which I can get any kind of real information about our Republican elected officials. But there you go. I’ve personally found their stories to be biased to the left – which, as I said, works for me sometimes because their interest in taking out Republicans at least results in some kind of transparency for one side of the isle.

But right, or left, NO media source should request information that is meant to be anonymous and Oklahoma Watch did.

September 13th, reporter Jennifer Palmer posted a story to the online paper entitled, “State Seeks to Decertify Teacher Over 5-Year-Old Instagram Family Photo“. Palmer contends that Edmond Public School teacher Regan Killacky – who took a picture of himself and his son threatening a Donald Trump mask with plastic swords during an outing to a Halloween store in 2019 – should not be fired for the post.

Here is a legitimate sentence from Palmer’s piece: “But in Killackey’s case, Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters prioritized punishing a teacher over political speech he disagreed with in order to score political points”. Is anyone going to try and argue that this statement is somehow objective ‘journalism’? That it ISN’T completely biased? I hope not. You simply can’t make that argument. You’d look like a dope.

At any rate, Palmer’s desire to “get the story” and apparently prop up Killacky, resulted in her open records requesting (ORR) from the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE) information on who filed the (supposedly) anonymous tip about Killacky’s Instagram post to the state’s AWARITY reporting system.

Now, granted, there’s PLENTY of blame to go around here. Yes, Palmer requested information that was supposed to be anonymous, but the OSDE GAVE IT TO HER. What the absolute HECK? What would be the purpose of something so reckless?

Watch the short video below to get the full story, but suffice it to say, either tips are anonymous or they’re not. If they’re not anonymous and the public is told they’re anonymous, even the most ardent Walters supporters will lose faith in the system after getting doxed the first time by Oklahoma’s poor excuse for objective journalists.

Oklahoma Watch (Jennifer Palmer) AND OSDE – both of you had better do better ASAP.

0

Ageism Dominates Comments On OKC FOX Reporter Payton May’s Post From August State School Board Meeting

I swear, I shouldn’t be surprised by absolutely ANYTHING today, but this one got me.

This was a Tweet from reporter Payton May during Thursday’s (8.22.24) state school board meeting.

I can’t see the comments on the post anymore. I’ve apparently been blocked for repeatedly commenting, but if you go through them, you’ll see a pattern – older people need to sit down and shut up about what’s going on in schools.

Here are the specific comments to which I actively replied:

My predictive text decided to use “funded” for “fined” and I hit sent before I saw that…

This guy actually responded that, yes, he was an ageist, but he hadn’t said anything about drag queens or kindergartners. SMH, RME…

I believe I’ve made my point (and not always nicely, but my dander was up) but I have to say – not that Twitter is an indicative replica of all Americans – we’re in trouble.

The people who commented about the age of the people there for Walters were ugly about it. I mean, why even say something like that? They obviously have absolutely no idea how property taxes work (you don’t own your property because the state forces you to pay taxes on your property that fund local public schools, libraries and technical schools and if you don’t pay them, the state comes in and takes your property from you to pay the bill for those things) and that people on fixed incomes (many collect only Social Security having been propagandized to believe that would take care of them in their old age) are more susceptible to having their property confiscated for lack of funds to pay their property taxes.

More than likely, these people live in apartments and take money from the government for different things on a regular basis, so they could care less what happens to people who don’t pay their property taxes, but I think there’s a bigger issue here.

Democrats/leftists, want abortion on demand – they always have. I can’t make a case for it because it’s never made any sense to me why anyone would want to kill a pre-born infant – not even when I was a young moron who thought she was an atheist. You either don’t have sex, or you use birth control if you’re gonna have sex – you don’t kill babies because YOU were too much of an idiot to protect yourself from getting pregnant.

Soon, it will be old people.

I could wax on about why and how and all of that, but it’s been reported for many years – especially since COVID and so many old people were simply put on ventilators and left to die. The important part of even putting this into a blog for public consumption is to understand that AGEISM – like so many other horribly destructive social trends – is here in Oklahoma.

We must push back against the Democrat death cult. We do it with abortion, but we’ve ignored the looming specter of ageism.

When you hear or see this kind of conversation on social media, or anywhere else, remind people how school funding and property ownership works. Remind them that old people have more skin in the game than the young. Remind them that older folks should be cared for and how much we still have to learn from those who are older.

Don’t let the young demonize the old, because if we do, we’ll end up with the same problem we have with the pre-born now – we’ll be having to figure out how to stop euthanasia programs like those invented by the Nazis to get rid of the medically infirm. It’s happened before, it’s happening in other countries now, it can happen here too.

0

Ashley Rolen; Fighting To Have Her Abusers Removed From Oklahoma Public Schools

Ashley Rolen submitted statements to the Little Axe school district in 2002, describing the sexual abuse that had been perpetrated on her by several coaches employed by the district.

Nothing was done either done to help Ashley, or remove the coaches. Ashley moved on with her life.

But as Ashley tells us in the full podcast (YouTube Rumble), the day she heard about Olympic physician, Larry Nassar, and the stories of the brave gymnasts who told of their sexual abuse while under his care, she knew she had to make it right – for herself and for the other girls to whom this had happened and ones to whom it might be happening now.

As an adult, Ashley filed a complaint with the Oklahoma State Department of Education under Joy Hoffmeister. She was told that they had no investigators for her case and that she’d have to do her own investigation – which she did – and returned it to the OSDE under Ryan Walters.

Still – a full year later – and nothing has been done about the coaches who abused her, nearly all of whom are still employed by the State of Oklahoma in a public school.

In the video below, Ashley talks about what needs to happen for these reports to be taken seriously by school administration and the OSDE – which she doesn’t believe is really happening now.

In the video below, V1SUT Vantage blogger, Mary, Ashley, Michael Grande and I discuss how schools are getting around mandatory sex abuse reporting laws, allowing public school employees who have abused students to just disappear from the school and wind up at another without ever being made to pay for their crimes. The level of protectionism among school staff makes it nearly impossible for reporting to occur outside the school and even then, if a school resource officer shows up to talk to the complaining parties (the student and his/her parents or guardians) with school administration, it appears that school administration feels as though that kind of scenario IS the reporting.

If Ashley’s story teaches us anything, it’s that if we’re to save Oklahoma children from sexual predators operating inside Oklahoma public schools, we have to force schools to properly INVESTIGATE and REPORT and for the OSDE to put actually put parents and students first, by having any claims investigated by the OSDE promptly and teaching certificates removed so that the perpetrators can no longer harm CHILDREN.

7

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

Six Reasons Why The Oklahoma State Legislature Should Ban The Use of SEL – Social Emotional Learning – Through SB1442

Last year, the state Legislature – prompted by outcry from parent and taxpayers across the state and the nation – passed HB1775, a rejection of the teaching of tenets tied to Critical Race Theory.

Unfortunately, CRT tenets are still entering classrooms around the state, packaged under the heading of Social Emotional Learning.

WHAT IS SOCIAL EMOTIONAL LEARNING

Social Emotional Learning is a theory which, according to the Collaborative for Academic Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL), became an “essential part of education” “through which all young people and adults acquire and apply the knowledge, skills and attitudes to develop healthy identities, manage emotions and achieve personal and collective goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain supportive relationships, and make responsible caring decisions.”

CASEL also goes on to say that “SEL can help address various forms of inequity and empower young people and adults to co-create thriving schools and contribute to safe, healthy and just communities.”

While every parent wants their child to have traits like empathy and every teacher wants a classroom of children who can manage their emotions, SEL programming does much more.

Like so many before it – Outcome Based Learning and Common Core to name a few – SEL has been federalized through numerous grant programs and school accountability requirements. With the carrot of $122 billion dollars in funding via Elementary and Secondary School Education Relief (ESSER) funds, the Biden Administration has lured schools into a program that fosters philosophies steeped in race, with which many parents and taxpayers disagree.

CONCERNS WITH SEL:

#1 Brings CRT Concepts Into Schools and Classrooms

Karen Neimi, the President and CEO of CASEL (Collaborative for Academic Social Emotional Learning) makes it clear throughout a nearly 50-minute video, that, “We believe that our work in Social Emotional Learning must actively contribute to anti-racism” and that CASEL has “prioritized issues of equity in the center of our work for a long time.”

Deena Simmons, Ed.D, Assistant Director of the Yale Center for Emotional Intelligence and an Associate Research scientist at the Yale Child Study Center advocates that, “You can’t be trauma informed if you’re not talking about racism. Without an anti-racist lens, SEL is white supremacy with a hug”.

One Edmond mother recently researched an SEL program being used in her child’s classroom – Conscious Discipline – and found a letter written by founder Becky Bailey, in which she says that her program is “based on and steeped in inclusion” and that they will train their employees in “anti-racist” goals, using Ibram X Kendi’s “Raising Antiracist Kids” and CASEL’s “SEL as a Lever for Equity”.

Dr. James Lindsay explains the mechanisms by which SEL is used to bring CRT concepts into classrooms in a video interview, and Dr. Susan Berry cites numerous articles which bring awareness to this fact in ‘Social Emotional Learning’ Now a Vehicle for Critical Race Theory”.

Oklahoma passed HB1775 in 2021. This bill specifically states, “Any orientation or requirement that presents any form of race or sex stereotyping or a bias on the basis of race or sex shall be prohibited.” Because CASEL’s specifically stated goals include race stereotyping and bias, SEL programming should be banned from classrooms under the law.

#2 CASEL Foundation Supporters Have Leftist Political Philosophies

CASEL Foundation ‘supporters’ are also a cause for concern. Bill and Melinda Gates have been tied to a slew of ‘education reform’ issues beginning with the Obama education reforms in 2008 which have been completely unsuccessful such as Common Core, School Turnaround and teacher effectiveness initiatives.

The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative has been investigated in several states for their interference in the 2020 presidential and state elections.

The Patrick J. McGovern Foundation uses AI to ‘democratize’ data, and uses data to establish racial equity and create climate change solutions.

New Profit is an organization dedicated to raising money to fight social injustice and to establish racial equity through influencing government.

The NoVo Foundation is funded by Warren Buffet. “NoVo also increased our funding to a wide variety of organizations focused on ending violence, giving voice and generally lifting up the truth about systems that have continually oppress (sic) girls and women – Black. Brown. Indigenous. Cis. Trans and gender non-conforming.”

The Raikes Foundation seeks to create systems that will better empower marginalized communities and create a more just and equitable world.

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation promotes socialized health care and bemoans the effects of climate change on “health and equity”.

Wallace – “Our mission is to foster equity and improvements in learning and enrichment for young people…”

#3 SEL Trains Students As Activists

CASEL cites 10 ‘indicators’ of ‘high quality’ SEL implementation. The first four are; ‘Explicit SEL Instruction’, SEL Integrated with Academic Instruction, Youth Voice and Engagement and Supportive School and Classroom Climates.

Number 3 involves teaching students to use their voice (agency) to advocate for change.

In this video about ‘Schoolwide SEL: Youth Voice and Engagement”, we hear from Mayrydennia Perez, a student who explains how, in 10th grade, students didn’t like a class they were given so they protested. This involved the entire 10th grade class walking out of school and Mayrydennia was very happy to report that the Administration ‘listened to them’ and the class was changed the next year.

Children are not adults. Giving children ‘agency’ – autonomy – to defy school administration, teaches children they have a power they don’t have the worldview yet to process rationally. Giving students ‘voice’ and teaching them to engage on issues is not giving students more responsibility, it’s teaching students to use their emotions to react as activists – I don’t like this, so instead of finding a calm, rational solution, I’m going to get mad and walk out. How does THAT help students manage their emotions?

#4 SEL Uses Lots of Behavioral Surveys

School climate surveys are used to gauge students’ feelings about different factors associated with their school under the guise of creating ‘supportive schools’. Here are some questions that can be found on Oklahoma’s School Climate Survey:

  • Do you know what consent means?
  • During the past 12 months have you experienced sexual activity when you did not want to?
  • During the past 12 months has your dating partner hit, slapped (sic) or physically hurt you?
  • Do you currently receive sexual health information? If so, from where?
  • Do you feel like your school supports and affirms your identities?
  • Choose 3 topics you would like to learn more about: pregnancy, bullying, substance use, mental health, violence prevention, sexual health, LGBTQIA+, other

Data is then compiled into a spreadsheet so that the ‘risk profile’ of the student can be determined and a student effectively pigeonholed by his or her behavior.

Another SEL survey called Success Highways is given to students in middle school through 10th grade in Oklahoma. The results tell the administrator of the survey the level of academic ‘risk’ for the student in several different categories.

Here are some questions on the Success Highways questionnaire:

  • The reason I keep coming to school is because if I don’t I’ll get punished
  • In the past week, how often have you experienced breaking things when angry
  • In the past week, how often have you experienced feelings of danger
  • In the past week how often have you experienced nightmares
  • In the past week how often have you experienced overeating
  • In the past month how often did you have difficulty paying for recreation and entertainment

These surveys are given in ‘advisory’. The main questionnaire was over 100 questions with other smaller surveys given depending upon the topic. A concerned Edmond mom took a considerable amount of time researching Success Highways and found it linked to ‘Emancipatory Communitarianism’ a form of social justice, among other issues.

A federal law the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA) passed in 1978 protects children from surveys or questionnaires that ask:

1. Political affiliations or beliefs of the student or student’s parent; 2. Mental or psychological problems of the student or student’s family; 3. Sex behavior or attitudes; 4. Illegal, anti-social, self-incriminating, or demeaning behavior; 5. Critical appraisals of others with whom respondents have close family relationships; 6. Legally recognized privileged or analogous relationships, such as with lawyers, doctors, or ministers; 7. Religious practices, affiliations, or beliefs of the student or student’s parent; or 8. Income, other than as required by law to determine program eligibility

Schools MUST send out letters to parents describing the survey and ask for permission to give their child the survey. Unfortunately, this only applies to surveys administered using federal funds and schools get around this caveat by having an in-state agency (OSDE, OSDH) administer the survey as in the case of the CDC Youth Risk Behavioral Survey, or they simply don’t provide them to parents as in this opt out form for School Climate Surveys.

Schools should NOT collect behavioral data on students for numerous reasons:

  • Whether there is an active parent in the home or not, parents MUST be the ones dealing with their child’s behavior – not a public school. Parents know their children MUCH better than anyone else and behavioral data collected at school is only as good as the context in which it’s collected.
  • Often, students lie on surveys to be funny or because they don’t want to answer the questions truthfully. Answers are collected and recorded, leading to improper data collection and results.
  • Many schools are not trained to collect and analyze data and as such data can be misapplied and results meaningless.
  • Data is not safe and parents have no say or knowledge as to how the data is disseminated or to whom, leaving their child’s behavioral profile to be used to sell further educational products or used in ways that could expose the child.

#5 Not All School Counselors Respect Parent Authority OR HB1775

A recent blog involving a walk through the Oklahoma State Department of Education website involved a great deal of connection with the American School Counselors Association (ASCA).

Further research found that the ASCA is another organization steeped in the philosophy of racial justice. An article on their website titled, “Racial Justice Starts At School” indicates that one of the primary functions of school counselors is to “address racism and bias in their school counseling programs.”

In fact, the article goes on to say that, according to the 2020 State of the Profession survey report, “About 42% of school counselors said they are monitoring student behavior to identify racist behavior or speech, 38% are providing individual counseling and 35% are providing classroom lessons…”

This kind of monitoring should be frightening to parents whose children could be counseled for racist ‘behavior or speech’ when there was none such meant. What about children 3 In addition, how in the world could this kind of counseling be done without violating the tenets of HB1775?

Several parents have reported that, following Success Highways surveys, counselors have called their children in to their office for counseling. Once the parents became aware of the practice, the counselor stated that their child was in a ‘low-risk’ category (the risk category never explained to them) and did not require parental notification for counseling. This is a clear violation of Parent’s Rights and should not be allowed.

Then there’s the fact the school counselors have Common Core like “Mindsets and Behaviors” standards – specific behaviors which children should exhibit in order to be ‘successful’ students. Never mind that every student is different and success is as different for each as they are from another. Counselors collect behavioral data on students through these standards.

#6 Teachers Do Not Need A National Program To Help Children

Though SEL has been in classrooms in some form for years, teachers have been helping children develop character by prescribing classroom responsibilities for many decades without it. Good teachers have always had rules in their classrooms to inform students of the ways in which they must manage their own behaviors – raise your hand before asking a question, no talking when the teacher is talking, no hitting or bullying – a program to do this is simply unnecessary and a waste of dollars and time that could be better spent studying academics.

It seems completely bizarre that, while Oklahoma’s NAEP scores have continuously fallen in nearly ALL subjects, schools are now stopping class to have children talk about their feelings in a classroom not staffed by a trained behavioral psychologist.

It’s also a bit bizarre that ESSER funds were meant, in part, to be spent on SEL programs to mitigate student ‘trauma’ resulting from COVID school closures, yet schools created the crisis they now want to mitigate. In fact, numerous studies have indicated that school closures caused students more harm than the virus itself.

It appears that much of the push for SEL is being driven by rising discipline problems in classrooms and schools over the years, made worse by a Dear Colleague letter sent to all US schools asking them to adopt discipline polies that would promote equity in classrooms. This letter resulted in numerous problems in classrooms around the country as schools became unwilling to discipline special education or students of color.  

SEL behavioral programming will accomplish little to nothing until administrators allow teachers to discipline students who provide disruption in the classroom. Disruptive students should be removed from class to allow the rest of the class to learn. Once removed, administrators should work with parents to help the child realign their behaviors and return successfully to the classroom. Why put a program in place to deal with an entire class of children when administrators could simply deal with discipline problems on an individual basis?

True, some parents do not parent their children and some children have deep-seated behavioral issues, yet nothing prevents schools from working with individual students in these circumstances by referring them to state, or private, behavioral assistance – all children should not be placed in behavioral training for the few students who need it.

Sadly, SEL programs will not help the fact that many Oklahoma schools say one thing, but do another. What good does it do to have SEL in every classroom, yet when a student reports something as serious as sexual assault, nothing is done by the Administration to rectify the situation? This has happened more and more often, as administrators abdicate their role in school discipline as seen in both Shawnee and Bixby recently.

In closing, like so many other federalized educational programming, SEL will not produce the results desired and has the very large potential to in fact, inject harmful and unlawful philosophies into classrooms.

Supplemental Links and Information:

New Study Finds Multiple Problems with Push for Social-Emotional Learning in K-12 Education (https://pioneerinstitute.org/featured/new-study-finds-multiple-problems-with-push-for-social-emotional-learning-in-k-12-education/)

Oklahoma School Climate Risk Screening Scale (https://www.scribd.com/document/523717182/Oklahoma-School-Climate-Student-Risk-Screening-Scale)

Oklahoma High School Climate Survey (https://www.scribd.com/document/523755206/HS-Student-Climate-Survey-1)

Social Emotional Learning, Part 1: The New Age Nanny State (https://idahofreedom.org/social-emotional-learning-part-1-the-new-age-nanny-state/)

Social Emotional Learning, Part 2: How SEL Became A Vehicle For Critical Race Theory (https://idahofreedom.org/social-emotional-learning-part-2-how-sel-became-a-vehicle-for-critical-race-theory/)

Social Emotional Learning, Part 3: How Did This Happen In A State Like Idaho (https://idahofreedom.org/social-emotional-learning-part-3-how-did-this-happen-in-a-state-like-idaho/)

Social Emotional Learning Now A Vehicle For Critical Race Theory (https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/03/09/social-emotional-learning-now-a-vehicle-for-critical-race-theory/)

Social Emotional Learning: The Dark Side (https://nancyebailey.com/2018/03/19/social-emotional-learning-the-dark-side/)

Emotional Learning Will Be The Downfall of Society (https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/emotional-learning-will-be-the-downfall-of-society)

Jenks Directs Parents To ‘Social Justice’ Materials (https://www.ocpathink.org/post/jenks-directs-parents-to-social-justice-materials)

Pushback Against SEL Bubbles Up In Idaho (https://www.edweek.org/leadership/pushback-over-sel-bubbles-up-in-idaho/2020/02)

“Meatless Mondays” and The Rise Of Social Emotional Learning in Schools (https://fee.org/articles/meatless-mondays-and-the-rise-of-social-emotional-learning-in-schools/)

What’s So Great About Social Emotional Learning (https://truthinamericaneducation.com/social-emotional-learning/great-social-emotional-learning/)

Gasp! How Will We Educate Without Social Emotional Learning (https://truthinamericaneducation.com/social-emotional-learning/gasp-how-will-we-educate-without-social-emotional-learning/)

Trading Academics for Far Left ‘Social Emotional Learning’ (https://illinoisfamily.org/education/trading-academics-for-far-left-social-emotional-learning/)

Using Schools To Retrain Kid’s Emotions – What Could Possibly Go Wrong Here (https://thefederalist.com/2016/12/14/using-schools-retrain-kids-emotions-possibly-go-wrong/)

How Social Emotional Learning Could Harm Our Kids (https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/streams-of-consciousness/how-social-emotional-learning-could-harm-our-kids/)

Using Schools To Retrain Kid’s Emotions – What Could Possibly Go Wrong Here (https://thefederalist.com/2016/12/14/using-schools-retrain-kids-emotions-possibly-go-wrong/)

Schools Ditch Academics For Emotional Manipulation (https://thefdrlst.wpengine.com/2016/10/19/schools-ditch-academics-for-emotional-manipulation/)

How Social Emotional Learning Became Another Vehicle For Anti-White Racism In Schools (https://thefederalist.com/2021/02/08/how-socio-emotional-learning-became-another-vehicle-for-anti-white-racism-in-schools/)

Zuckerbucks Aren’t Just Tampering With Elections, They’re Tampering With Your Kids’ Education (https://thefederalist.com/2021/08/02/zuckerbucks-arent-just-tampering-with-elections-theyre-tampering-with-your-kids-education/)

Social-Emotional Learning and Teachers Students Love? Teachers in Los Angeles! (https://nancyebailey.com/2019/01/22/social-emotional-learning-and-teachers-students-love-teachers-in-los-angeles/)

3

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑