Search

ROPE Report

Open Search
Tag

public education

This Is How Government-Issued Private School Vouchers Will Help Turn Private Education Into ‘Non-Public’ (Public) Education

What in the world IS Non-Public education? We’ll get to that in a minute, but first a recap…

At the end of the Oklahoma legislative session in 2023, the House and Senate passed HB1934, a bill which created ‘Universal School Choice’ in Oklahoma as described by organizations like The State Policy Network which have long-championed giving public tax dollars to private education.

All of Oklahoma’s Republican legislators voted for the bill (House, Senate; excepting those ‘excused’).

Afterward, the legislators we spoke with about the vote couldn’t understand how we were against the bill since it was a ‘tax credit’ – the form of ‘school choice’ for which ROPE has advocated against the concept of vouchers.

In fact, these legislators either argued with us about how the bill WAS a tax credit, or about how a voucher would – insert ‘school choice’ talking points – like those asserted in our interview with the Executive Director of the Catholic Conference of Oklahoma, Brett Farley.

Farley, who was instrumental in the creation of Every Kid Counts Oklahoma, the school choice organization for which now-state Superintendent Ryan Walters was made head, actually admitted in the interview that yes, school choice advocates want voucher bills. In the ‘school choice’ mantra, the state already funds [failing] public education, so the only way to create the ‘competition’ necessary to make public schools ‘no longer a viable option’ is to divert state money to private schools.

This ‘logic’ has always been a head-scratcher to me, because the state legislature holds the budget appropriation strings and can choose to fund public education or not, yet every year they complain about how awful public schools are and then award them ‘historic’ appropriations (see 2023 and 2024 for example) while refusing to tie public school results to funding. Make that make sense.

After the Universal Voucher bill passed, I did a full breakdown on the associated rules and found that, as Farley described, the first two tax categories listed provide – not a tax credit as the legislature promised – or was lead to believe – but a ‘voucher’; a grant of Oklahoma tax dollars to private schools for children whose parents applied to the program because they couldn’t otherwise afford private education tuition.

One more time, let’s break down the school choice options afforded to parents in Oklahoma even prior to the ‘Universal Choice’ bill:

  1. Public school;
    • Traditional public schools – Oklahoma has 509 school districts in Oklahoma. None have requirements for entry.
    • Charter schools – according to the Oklahoma State Department of Education website, Oklahoma had 24 of these in 2022. All are taxpayer-supported. Some have requirements for entry, others are a ‘lottery’ system where if the child’s name is randomly chosen, the child may attend, others have no requirement for entry.
      • Virtual Charter Schools – the OSDE records six of these schools which operate either solely on the internet, or a combination of in-person and online, such as EPIC charter schools. There is no requirement for entry
    • Magnet Schools – I could find no information about ‘magnet’ schools on the OSDE website, but an online site called Niche claims there are five in Oklahoma. Magnet schools provide a specific field of study along with ‘typical’ educational requirements for the state. An example would be Classen School of Advanced Studies where students have the opportunity to have in-depth study in the Arts while completing their Oklahoma educational requirements. There are entry requirements for attendance and all are taxpayer-supported.
  2. Private Schools – According to Private School Review, there are 106 K12 private schools in Oklahoma with an average tuition of $7,293. These are private schools because families use their own household dollars to afford the school.
  3. Homeschooling – The Homeschool Mom has an amazing list of homeschool coops and ‘enrichment’ classes available in Oklahoma. This is probably because Oklahoma is the MOST FRIENDLY homeschool state in the union, having written the ability for citizens of Oklahoma to educate their children at home in the state’s Constitution. This is also a private educational form because families pay out of their own pockets to afford this type of education.

So what is exactly the ‘choice’ School Choice proponents are talking about then? Oklahoma has LOTS and LOTS of choices that parents may choose to provide an education for their child/children. What choice did we not have that we had to have last year with Universal School Choice? Oklahoma taxpayer dollars funding private education for parents who can’t afford it – that’s it. That’s all. The ONLY thing our organization has ever objected to in the ‘choice’ menu – publicly-funding private schools.

Last Wednesday (6.5.24), our guest on ROPE Report Live was my friend and fellow homeschooling mom from Broken Arrow, Sarah DeNeui.

Sarah has become increasingly concerned about what would happen to homeschooling and private schooling since the passage of HB1934 and private schools began to receive state money. She talked with us about several of her concerns, mainly that once PRIVATE schools begin receiving PUBLIC money, they would no longer be PRIVATE schools.

Why? Because once tax dollars are involved, the government must maintain some control of the dollars in order to provide accountability and transparency to the public from whom it was taken (by force).

In addition, schools that receive funds from the Federal Department of Education, are required to comply with federal dictates, including, for example, President Biden’s decree that boys enrolled in schools taking federal funds and wanting to be girls, can use the girl’s bathroom. Though many states wrote laws to get around that particular dictate, the Biden Administration then proceeded to write a rule to keep states from placing a ban on the practice. How’s THAT for government control?

The full live video of Sarah’s interview with Michael and I can be found on our Rumble and YouTube channels, but here is the most concerning issue Sarah raised. In this short video segment, she tells the story of reaching out to her contact in the OSDE questioning a press release concerning the creation of an “Office of School Choice” in the Department. She was interested in exactly what the ‘office’s’ duties would entail.

Essentially, when the answer to her question was returned, it included a phrase she’d never previously heard – non-public education. Sarah wanted to know more, so she went out onto the internet to find that the federal government has an Office of Non-Public Education. Here’s their mission:

ONPE fosters maximum participation of nonpublic school students and teachers in federal education programs and initiatives. Since the initial passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in 1965, private school students and teachers have been eligible to participate in certain federal education programs.

So, the definition of ‘non-public education’ then, relates to private schools that take federal (and/or state?) funds.

The Office of Non-Public Schools even has a list of “private elementary and secondary schools, and/or home schools (?!?!) with which the U.S. Department of Education (Department) regularly communicates regarding the participation of nonpublic elementary and secondary school students and teachers in federal education programs and initiatives”.

It might behoove parents sending their children to ‘private’ schools to find out if the organization under which their private school is sanctioned, or accredited, is on the list provided here. And beyond that, to check DIRECTLY with their private school to find out whether or not they are truly PRIVATE – taking only private funds, no tax dollars.

This is HIGHLY problematic. It should go without saying that the more education becomes funded by a governmental entity, the more controlled it is by the government and the less free parents are to decide what is truly best for their child/children’s education. And we’re not the only organization to believe that.

Sherri Few, President of the organization USPIE (United States Parents Involved in Education) said this in a recent interview with FOX News:

“We don’t want private schools to accept money, no strings attached initially, get dependent on it and then the government starts throwing down these regulations in exchange for the funding. Then they’re stuck having to make a choice of either closing their doors or compromising their values in order to continue to accept the federal and state funding.”

Alex Newman of Liberty Sentinel told us the exact same thing in his interview with ROPE last year.

As did Robert Bortins, CEO of the worldwide homeschool organization Classical Conversations:

So how again then, does a school choice VOUCHER create freedom for parents? How is putting a school under federal ‘rule’ EMPOWERING for parents?

Sarah asks these types of questions and more in the video below. If you are a Republican FOR vouchers before you watch this segment and are still for vouchers afterward, I’m going to suggest you change your political affiliation – none of the questions asked by Sarah here, result in answers that follow the small-government, personal responsibility/liberty model of Republicanism. In fact, they could all be considered LEFTIST ideals, so how are Republicans buying into them?

The idea of every American parent choosing the form of education they want for their child is fundamental to the concept of personal freedom enshrined in the Constitution and I’ll fight with all I have to preserve that ideal.

HOWEVER, the ideal of ‘school choice’ that includes bringing in the government AT ANY LEVEL of a child’s education while asserting that as a ‘free market principal’ or freedom in any way, is a flat out lie and I’ll fight for that lie to be exposed for what it is and the detriment it will become to actual educational freedom in the long run, every day of the week.

0

Oklahoma Hiding Failing Test Scores Behind “Academic Achievement” Indicator, V1SUT Blogger Tells ROPE

Wednesday, May 14th, author “Mary” of the Substack V1SUT Vantage joined Michael Grande and me on our ROPE Report LIVE podcast – which broadcasts live on YouTube, Rumble, X, LinkdIn and Facebook every Wednesday and Friday at 9am – to talk about test scores vs academic achievement in Oklahoma public education. Just the week before, “Mary” had written an article, “OK School Performance & Deceptive Data: Parents & School Board Members Untrained to Assess Student Outcomes“, and we wanted the chance to discuss the data she had uncovered on the state’s School Report Card website.

Many years ago – 2016 to be exact – the OSDE under the leadership of then-Superintendent Janet Barresi, created the “A-F school report card”. ROPE was so against it, we wrote a blog about it (Oklahoma’s A-F Grading System Get’s An “F”), we wrote letters to the Governor and Superintendent and Jenni spoke before the State School Board warning them about the adoption of the grade card.

Our primary objections were 2: 1) the only REAL reason to create the grade card was to get President Obama’s end-around No Child Left Behind. As a Conservative organization, we objected to President Obama’s notion that he could ignore the Constitution and go around Congress to make his own law (waiver) simply because he believed Congress would not act to reauthorize the NCLB and 2) because the measurements used meant nothing and could disguise poor student test results.

Sadly/oddly/not shockingly, the school grade card today is essentially the same as the one from 2016. Here were the categories and their percentages: Student Achievement (33%), Individual Student Growth (17%), Growth of Bottom Quartile (17%) and Whole School Performance (33%). If you don’t believe me, check out the categories and POINTS (now) of the updated grade card. Not much difference there, just a whole lot of words to describe how it is that the State isn’t really being transparent with taxpayers and parents – I’d imagine so they can continue to get money from the feds as when the whole grade card thing started.

Here’s a short clip of Mary talking about what she found when she wondered why Achievement Scores are so high in schools housing primarily failing kids.

This is, of course, nonsense, but I pointed out in this other clip from the podcast, that since at least the mid-70’s, public education has been dumbing down education and then trying to cover their tracks. In the clip below, I show how the ‘recentered’ ACT scores made it look like students were doing very well, when in reality, they were doing MUCH WORSE on the test than 2 decades before.

If you’d like to see the whole video, you can find it on our YouTube or Rumble channels.

Just for grins and giggles, as I close out this piece, I thought I would include a section from a blog post in 2014 called, “Is Common Core MEANT to Blow Up the American Educational System?” It describes the way I see the PLANNED DESTRUCTION OF PUBLIC EDUCATION by the Marxists who began stepping up the whole program under President Obama. You can also find more information in these two blogs from the same time frame (2012-2014), “Governor Fallin says, “Stop whining or you’ll get no more education funds.” and “ROPE Approves Democrat Disapproval“.

If you got anything out of the podcast or the research – PLEASE SHARE!

…there are those who believe “ObamaCare” was made to be so difficult to navigate in an effort to crash America’s current health care system.  The thought here is that if it becomes too hard to get health insurance, the public will clamor for SINGLE PAYER and just let the government handle the whole ball of wax – none of these silly exchanges – no, we’ll just move America over to the same side of the abacus as England and Canada and nationalize health care.  After all, we’re of socialist stock (eye roll).

I believe this is exactly what is happening to public education in America today when I look at the recent history of education ‘reform’.

  • First; you claim America education is failing.
  • Second; from the start, you act as the hand of benevolence by reaching out to states in their time of monetary need with ‘free’ money to keep education programs running (State Fiscal Stabilization Funds) where you hook states into a four pillared education reform system that includes national standards and state longitudinal databases.
  • Third; you play on America’s competitive spirit by offering states a grant where you can Race to the Top of education accountability and results, providing money through a program that continues to perpetuate the four pillars of education reform.
  • Fourth; you do NOT re-authorize the existing ESEA, but instead, go around Congress completely to create waivers for the worst parts of the law (such as the part where ALL children must be ‘proficient’ in English/LA and Math by 2014).  This, in essences creates your own ala cart law menu that keeps states hooked into the all-important four pillars, but also adds something called “accountability measures” for schools such as Third Grade Reading Retention programs, A-F grading scales and teacher accountability measures.
  • Fifth; you spend 6 years selling the plan to legislators while managing the whole scheme from behind the curtain of private, non-profit organizations within which taxpayers have no representation, propping up the system with huge infusions of cash from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and big business such as Exxon/Mobile and ‘happy to help’ players such as the US Chamber of Commerce.
  • Sixth; after you have states on their nationalized educational track through your promoted “pillars”, you scare states into keeping all their ‘accountability’ measures by threatening their Title 1 funding.  Though states/districts have no idea what will really happen to them if they don’t go along, states take the waivers and in exacting the instructions, districts self-destruct trying to figure out how to keep pressing the bar for their money like a lab rat for its pellet. *Teachers are afraid of having test scores held against them to the point of losing their jobs so they turn on administration.  *Administrators turn on parents who are told they must implement ‘reform’ measures and that they can’t opt out of state tests the A-F grading system utilizes scores to create school grades (page 9) without forcing complete ruination of their school; 
    • Schools are expected to test 100 percent of eligible students enrolled in that school during the testing window for every OSTP exam for which they are eligible, regardless of FAY status. 
    • Schools that do not test a sufficient percentage of eligible students will be penalized as follows (all percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number): 
    • The school’s Overall Letter Grade will be reduced by one whole letter grade if fewer than 95 percent of all eligible test records have valid scores. 
    • The school’s Overall Letter Grade will automatically be reduced to an “F” if fewer than 90 percent of all eligible test records have valid scores.
  • Seventh; you collect lots and lots of data by digitizing the Common Core State Standards states had to take to get an RTT or Waiver, then, you pay two testing “consortia” to create digital online test questions that will align so perfectly that everyone who looks at the scores will be able to tell which standard the students got right and wrong on their exam.  Since we so admire the European system of everything including schooling, can’t you believe this will imagine an end result that sounds like, “Sorry Johnny, you can’t be an engineer because you missed several math-related test questions indicating you are not engineer material.”  You also collect all kinds of miscellaneous data for federal programming such as the “Safe and Drug Free Schools” that includes very detailed information on discipline incidents (that, by the way, don’t just fall off the internet when your child needs a clean record for college and career applications!).  You then use this information against schools when they decide they are dumb enough to come crawling back for more money and or ‘waivers’ from existing unconstitutional federal education laws to further put the screws on them to get what you want.

(Sadly, a whole lot of the links in the original piece above from 2014, are no longer working)

0

Swope’s Swoop: An Oklahoma Legislator’s Attempt to Make Homeschoolers into Children of the State

Guest Post By Ann Kerr

swoo͞p: v. 1. To make a rush or an attack with a sudden sweeping movement. 2. To seize or snatch in a sudden sweeping movement.

So long homeschooling parents! We don’t need you anymore. You do not know what is best for your kids, and we are going to tell you what is best. Until further notice, all of your children’s future will rest with the State. If you still want to try to direct their education and act as their parent – EVEN though the State knows best – then you can put in a request. We promise not to send it to File 13. We will look it over, look you over, look all of your children’s various teachers over and then we might look a little more deeply. We really want to get to know you before we would allow you to teach your own kids.

We want a file on you.

If this seems a little onerous…well…you know, you don’t really have to go through this. We have some other options already in place, and we will even pay you to use them. We have those old-fashioned brick and mortar learning centers (or the more recent version – [sheet metal and bolts), we have those more modern public (charter) schools that are not bound by local school boards, which many people believe are actually for homeschoolers, (eh, eh) and now we even have private schools under our wings. Our money is flooding their pockets – and you know what that means. (Or, at least you should.)

We want total control of your children. If you won’t give it to us, we will take it.

This is the power that is hoisted by House Bill 4130, filed by Representative Amanda Swope, Democrat, District 71.

Here are some of the tidbits in the Swoop.

  • Rep. Swope is classifying all homeschooling children as deprived or potentially deprived children, simply by injecting her proposal into a bill filed to amend the law regarding “Children and the Juvenile Code.” More specifically, right in the middle of a lot of definitions regarding child neglect and abuse, Rep. Swope plops in some terms to define pod schools and microschool, which completely ignore Oklahoma Constitutional law and contradict the definition of students learning “by other means.”
  • To make this clear, Rep. Swope takes Oklahoma’s Constitutional Right to educate “by other means,” changes it name and puts it in a child abuse and neglect law. This is a sudden and significant departure from the rule of law and from parental rights in Oklahoma.
  • Even more staggering is Rep. Swope’s next move to re-write the Juvenile Code section regarding records for deprived children. In an added section, Rep. Swope, evidently hopes to pass the following and make it the law of the land in Oklahoma:
    • Require parents to submit a letter of intent to the Department of Human Services in Oklahoma in order to homeschool, pod school or micro school per the new, added definitions.
    • Require parents to give not only names, but also Social Security numbers, children’s names, addresses, everyone else who lives in the home, everyone who might teach the children, and a statement regarding homeschooling.
    • Require parents to submit subsequent letters of intent with any change of schooling.
    • Require parents to submit to criminal background checks.
    • Require others in the home to submit to criminal background checks.
    • Require anyone else associated with the child’s schooling to submit to background checks and, guess where all of the information from this gross invasion of your privacy and your family goes? Rep. Swope has it covered. It will not go missing.

Rep. Swope proposes that the government be required to compile a Database of individuals, facilities and organizations that perform or assist with homeschooling, pod schooling, or microschooling.

That’s you, homeschool parents.

Rep. Swope wants all of the information on you. Meanwhile, it will just sit in an encased, secure database preserved for posterity with your beautiful signature on it, or will it? If you learned your history, you will remember that more than one country has decided that its Uncle Sam or variation thereof is better enabled to raise children than the parents.

And, what has happened, as a result?

Children were cut off from families. Children were cut off from religious training. Parents were denied any rights to raise their children according to their values.

These results are hallmarks of a communist society.

As Karl Marx and Engel’s said in the Communist Manifesto –

Communists: “Abolition of the family! …
Citizens: But, …[communists] destroy the most hallowed of relations, when we replace home education by social [education].
Communists: “The…clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parents and child, … [is] all…disgusting…”

And, so is Rep. Swope’s swoop.

0

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

A Social Media Punking of Leftists Shows Them To Be Not Only Extremely Intolerant But Alarmingly Anti-Christian

Forever it seems, when ROPE, or other conservative organizations, or parents have concerns that, “X is happening in public schools” (substitute the “X” for CRT, SEL, inappropriate ‘sex education’), the Leftists scream, “NO IT DOESN’T”. It doesn’t matter if you have a 3-D color photo of it happening in real time, the educrats inevitably just scream “NO IT DOESN’T”, as though these words are the only ones in their lexicon.

During the Common Core fight, public educators argued nearly every fact we uncovered regarding what the Standards said. Even when we’d publish exactly where we’d found whatever controversial topic we’d uncovered (and believe me there were plenty), the answer from the public school advocates was always some form of gaslighting meant to get people to disbelieve what their own eyes were seeing.

Just since writing about all the books found in public schools – and assigned by English teachers – that were not developmentally appropriate at best and flat out pornographic at worst – the lefties have come out of the woodwork to call any parent who complains about these books “book burners” or “book banners”, as a way to disenfranchise their opinions and deprive them of their First Amendment right to free speech. After all, what’s the fun in being reasonable and saying something like, “Okay, well let’s remove sexually inappropriate materials from school libraries while leaving them at the community library level.” I mean, NO “CONSERVATIVE” IS SUGGESTING BANNING BOOKS, just preventing kids from getting to them unless their parents want them to have them.

Then, there are all the LGBT grooming issues originating in public schools and then being hidden from parents by the school (check below for a substantive list of how often this is now happening in public schools). THIS issue, prompted former Board member, Julia Seay, to pose the exceptionally rational question below. It was merely meant to make people put 2 and 2 together to get the 4 of, if you don’t want your kid baptized behind YOUR back, don’t LGBT my kid behind MY back.

Instead of rational – or even interesting – discussion, we got hundreds of comments similar to the ones posted below. I wanted to put them here because I so often hear people refer to Oklahoma as the “Bible Belt”, or talk about how Conservative (meaning Christian?) we are in this state. HEADS UP: Oklahoma is quickly becoming a-religious and worse – ANTI-CHRISTIAN. If you don’t believe me, read some of these comments posted after Julia’s question, which you can read in full for yourself by clicking on the screenshot above.

PLEASE, IF BAD LANGUAGE OFFENDS YOU, BEWARE!

You get the idea…it went on and on and on…

Finally, a poster hit the nail on the head and – bless her heart – even defended us:

So, there you go. Anita says just what I would have said, but I’ll follow it up with a final thought.

THIS – this lack of critical thinking, narcissistic ideation, hatred of anything religious and/or Christian specifically, unimaginative, literal, inability to reason – did not come merely from the internet, IT CAME FROM PUBLIC EDUCATION. THIS is what we’re doing to kids with the money we earn with the sweat of our brow.

THIS represents educational malpractice of the highest order.

I’m a Christian. I try not to be fearful because I’m told in Isaiah 41:10 specifically not to be, but I can’t lie either; at this point, I’m afraid for our children in public schools and I’m afraid for our society and our way of life. We’re not leaving our kids a legacy to be proud of, we’re miseducating them and then turning them out like dogs on the county dump. It’s unbelievably horrifying and we should all commit to doing everything we can to PROPERLY educate our youth no matter what it takes to do so.

1

I Spoke Before The Oklahoma State Textbook Committee. Here’s Why and What I Said.

Author: Janice Danforth, Chapter Chair, Moms For Liberty, Tulsa County

On Friday, October 6, 2023, I spoke before the Oklahoma State Textbook Committee. Back in September, the Tulsa County Chapter of Moms for Liberty spent time reviewing textbooks that were up for approval and discovered that McGraw Hill has embedded Social Emotional Learning (SEL) into its elementary-level math books. We do not support SEL and it most definitely does not belong in Mathematics.

Social Emotional Learning was coined in 1994 at the Fetzer Institute and came about in the face of school violence. In 2002 ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) either encouraged or required the inclusion of SEL in schools. By 2022 SEL instructional materials cost $1.725B up 25.9% from the previous year. Does anyone believe that school violence has declined since 1994? No, the opposite is true. In fact, a headline from an article in 2021 states, “Violence in schools seems to be increasing, why?” We are being sold an ideology that not only isn’t working but is costing taxpayers a lot of money.

Oklahoma students are suffering with proficiency, not only in reading, but mathematics as well. In 2022 The proficiency rate in MATH for OK 4 th graders was at 27%. We are ranked 49 th in education and I’m certain all can agree that it is time to move the needle in the other direction. Oklahoma students deserve to learn the core subjects and 100% of the material should be focused on academics. SEL takes time away from academics and also undermines parental rights which clearly state that we are the authority of our child and are the ones to direct their moral upbringing. SEL interferes with that. We along with many other parents see the failings of this ideology and by no means desire for the government to mold the character of our children.

As the chapter chair, I had three minutes to state my reasons for why we were requesting the committee to reject this contract with McGraw Hill, and in turn, McGraw Hill had the same opportunity to share why they felt the committee should accept their contract. The State Textbook Committee has a month to make their decision.

While the committee may not reject the contract with McGraw Hill, I firmly believe we make changes one conversation at a time. Going up against a Goliath like McGraw Hill may seem daunting and even impossible, but change only happens when we fight, when we stand up, even if we lose this time. Because eventually, we get a win, and then another, and then another. But it takes all of us willing to stand up to the giant, to ignore the noise of the haters, and to go into the battle, win or lose because our children deserve for us to try. Our children deserve for us to fight for them, because if not us, who else will?

My Remarks

Good morning. My name is Janice Danforth and I am the chapter chair of the Tulsa County Moms for Liberty. I am here because our chapter spent time reviewing textbooks that were up for approval by the State Department of Education. We discovered that McGraw Hill has embedded Social Emotional Learning into its elementary level Math Books. We do not support SEL and it most definitely does not belong in Mathematics.

I want to give a quick background about SEL so you as a committee can understand why SEL is a concern. Social Emotional Learning was coined in 1994 at the Fetzer Institute and came about in the face of school violence. In 2002 ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) either encouraged or required the inclusion of SEL in schools. By 2017, K-12 was spending $21-47B annually on SEL. By 2022 SEL instructional materials cost $1.725B up 25.9% from the previous year. Does anyone believe that school violence has declined since 1994? No, the opposite is true. In fact, a headline from an article in 2021 states, “Violence in schools seems to be increasing, why?”

So, here are some concerns related to SEL:
SEL undermines parental rights
SEL is designed to become the “Parent Voice”
SEL is designed to be woven throughout all subjects
SEL impersonates mental health services
SEL allows teachers to psychologically evaluate students
SEL removes/doesn’t take into account beliefs existing at home
SEL coerces students to pick the “right” answer
SEL distracts and takes time away from actual education and gaining knowledge
SEL sets the focus on feelings rather than truth/facts. Why? Because emotions are easy to manipulate. You can’t manipulate the truth.

So, as a parent and as a taxpayer I have to ask the question, why are we spending so much money on a program that not only isn’t working but is undermining how a parent raises their child? And SEL has now become embedded into all subjects at school and this is a problem.

McGraw Hill creates textbooks and has been doing so since the late 18 hundreds, but that does not mean we blindly trust them and continue to allow their textbooks into our schools. In this particular instance, they have embedded an ideology into a core subject of Math, this is a red flag and should be for each of you. Oklahoma students are suffering with proficiency, not only in reading, but mathematics as well. In 2022 The proficiency rate in MATH for OK 4 th graders was at 27%. We are ranked 49 th in education and it is time to move the needle in the other direction. These students deserve to learn the core subjects and 100% of the material should be focused on academics.

As Moms for Liberty, Tulsa County I am asking you to reject the contract with McGraw Hill. The only way we change the trajectory of where we are headed is to say no to publishers like McGraw Hill who have embedded an ideology into a core subject. If enough states start standing up and saying no, these publishers will be forced to get back to academia and will be forced to remove programs like SEL because let’s be honest, for them, making money is the bottom line.

Set a precedent today for McGraw Hill and for other publishers that want to do business in Oklahoma that we will not tolerate nor invest in publishers that have embedded ideologies into their textbooks. Instead, let’s invest and partner with publishers that desire to increase proficiency and that is their only motivation. This is what Oklahoma students deserve!

0

Once Again, OK Educrats Pull Students Into Their Activism – This Time Trying To Impeach Our State Superintendent

Heavy sigh…The liberal education establishment – Educrats as we like to call them – have once again scored an indoctrination goal.

Yes, this is from the Impeach Walters website. No, it’s not unprecedented for Educrats to pull in students for their little crybaby, bullying activities – see this post from a parent in Edmond during the 2018 teacher strike – or try on this news story from that same year for size:

In fact, teachers and the Oklahoma Commerce department alike LOVE indoctrinating children through what they call “Action Civics” brought to you by a non-profit called “Generation Citizen” whose motto is “Empowering Youth in Our Democracy Through Project-Based Civics” – doesn’t sound super Communist, does it? Okay, maybe a LOT. And guess what? Generation Citizen is funded by all the Lefty Liberals that like to spend money fighting conservatives.

They’re having an event in Oklahoma in December. I wonder how many lawmakers know about this?

But I digress. Back to the topic at hand. The crybaby bullies have established a website I won’t link here because I don’t want it to get traffic, but they have a logo very much like a logo a Conservative would design; an intact family with two American flags and the word “liberty”. In fact, the group that has created the website calls itself, “Families 4 Liberty”.

Here’s the kicker. THEY WON’T TELL YOU WHO IS BEHIND IT! They’ve been asked questions about their genesis because no self-respecting lefty Educrat wants to participate in something a Conservative would put together and the logo has been throwing them off, yet no answer is forthcoming. Their “about” page – instead of indicating that they have some transparency and guts by naming anyone involved – have inserted the portion of the movie “Spartacus” where everyone stands to say they’re Spartacus so Spartacus is not immediately drug out of the group and crucified.

Again, this seems to be a very bizarre attempt at humor, because the person involved with the largest group of Educrats – Oklahoma Edvocates – is Jami Cole who pushes switching voter registration for elections and demonizing (crucifying?) Christians.

I’m not allowed to know TOO much about what’s going on in the @okedvocates world because – like many Conservative Twitter (X) users – I’m blocked from seeing her content and can only search what she might be saying in another public forum.

Well, I’ll cry over that later, but right now, I want to point to one more thing on the Impeach Walters site I find seriously funny.

Here’s a helpful list of the mechanics behind impeachment. But let’s just look at the parameters of impeachment itself:

  1. Willful neglect of duty. ROPE doesn’t agree with everything Walters does, but he has been out doing his job faithfully whether you like what he’s doing or not. So, you’re out of luck there.
  2. Corruption in office. Walters will have to answer for the way Oklahoma’s COVID education funds were spent. There is an ongoing investigation, but I’m not sure it will rise to the level of corruption. We will see. I’m sure that sending out emails to gin up support for spending more taxpayer dollars on education through taxpayer email systems and colluding with an election PAC aren’t at all forms of corruption. Again, pot calling kettle black.
  3. Habitual drunkenness. Not Walters – though there have been numerous Oklahoma legislators meeting that metric in the last several years.
  4. Incompetency. I’ve not seen that yet and that’s a pretty hard bar to prove. As far as I’m concerned, the fact that Oklahoma teachers can’t educate students beyond 30% proficiency in math and English is incompetency, yet the legislators keep stealing from taxpayers to give them more money every year to do worse, so good luck with that category.
  5. Moral turpitude. Anyone know what that is? What teachers get in trouble for frequently. Like the picture at the top of the page. This category would actually surprise me from Walters, but again, it just seems too, well, hypocritical for a group of teachers to throw this one out when so many of them are having sex with their own students at the capitol, or in the band room, or their apartments.

The bottom line here is this: If Walters has done something impeachable, charges must be brought and answered. Until that happens, this is crybaby nonsense from people butthurt about the fact that they are getting slammed for the HORRIBLE jobs they are doing educating Oklahoma kids on the taxpayer dime and they DEFINITELY shouldn’t be bringing STUDENTS into their plans!

1

Dystopia Reached: Oklahoma Republicans Continue Their March Toward Socialism By Redistributing Wealth Through EDUCATION

Not that Oklahoma – and Governor Stitt in particular – haven’t begun to truly love giving our tax dollars away and calling it an “investment“, but here’s yet another. A BIG one!

An “HISTORIC” 700 MILLION dollar “investment” in Oklahoma education. Here are some lines from the Senate press release praising this “historic” vote:

Here’s what’s in HB1935. To see the other “historic” “investments”, click on the link to the press release. There’s plenty there to read:

The Oklahoma State Senate today gave passage to its historic $700 million education package. 

Senators voted overwhelmingly on both measures 40 – to – 7 on House Bill 1935 and 46 – to – 2 on House Bill 2775, approving the single largest appropriations increase to education in state history, sending it back to the House of Representatives. 

Senate Pro Tem Greg Treat, R-Oklahoma City, said the Senate did its job and delivered for teachers, children and parents. 

https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/OKSENATE/bulletins/35206ac

Here’s what the press release says about HB1935:

HB 1935 will give parents additional options and control over their children’s education by providing a $100 million investment in school choice. This bill provides a $7,500 tax credit per eligible student each tax year if the eligible student attends a private school and the family has an income of less than $250,000. The bill also provides for a $1,000 tax credit per family, for certain qualified expenditures, each tax year if one or more eligible students is homeschooled. Valid receipts must be provided to OTC to receive the $1,000 tax credit.

NOT ONE OKLAHOMA REPUBLICAN SENATOR STOOD UP TO THIS. Not one.

Please, make sure you stop everything you’re doing and kiss your backside good-bye. Oklahoma is now a socialist state – and proud to be one. We just decided to take money from businesses and private citizens to educate the children of people making less than 250k at a private school.

Our family makes less than 250k. My husband and I both have Master’s degrees. We chose that I would stay home and educate our kids. We have never bought new cars, for years we couldn’t afford vacations, and we NEVER SPENT $7500 a year A PIECE on ANY of their educations – for FOUR kids.

Now, I get to be happy that, though we scrimped and sacrificed to provide our children with an education outside that provided by the government, others in our tax bracket can educate their kids at a private school ON MY DIME without that messy inconvenience of having to scrimp and sacrifice.

So let’s break down some issues with this “historic” investment :

1. The Oklahoma state government will take my property if I refuse to pay my property taxes and/or put me in jail if I don’t pay my income taxes and if I don’t pay my business taxes, they will divest me of the business I run which allows them to take my taxes.

2. The government cannot “invest” my tax dollars. They can’t take funds and apply ANY market ‘risk’ to the funds they steal from us by force. So the idea of an “historic” INVESTMENT is a complete crock.

2. The property taxes my husband and I pay for our schools are less than 2000. A tax credit – ideally – would be me not having to spend the money that comes out of my household that supports the public schools I DON’T USE. Can you imagine how fast the ‘public’ school would clean up when it became funded by a USE tax? If you can’t imagine, I’ll tell you: FAST, because THAT would be market competition – not this BS the legislature is selling calling it SCHOOL CHOICE.

3. Who pays the 750 million dollar price tag? Oklahoma citizens.

4. What happens if there isn’t a surplus, or we have a downturn in the economy? Where does the money come from then? If the ‘credit’ can’t be funded, where do all the kids go from private school who can’t afford it anymore? How much more will the legislature decide to ratchet up fees (they can’t call them taxes or a majority of the legislature has to agree which is why we haven’t had a tax increase in a long time – they learned they can tax us and call it a “fee” the legislature doesn’t have to agree to) when Oklahomans who have been hooked on the teat of FREE MONEY for PRIVATE SCHOOL have an absolute fit and demand ‘their’ money to finish educating their kids in private school? This ‘historic investment’ will become MEDICAIRE!!!

5. How many private schools are there to take all these new kids? Are there enough now? No, actually.

6. Does it make sense that enterprising Oklahoma legislators would go into the business of building private schools so they could make money on tuition?

7. What happens when a Satanist private school is built and accepts kids? The Supreme Court ruled recently that tax dollars can go to religious schools. What happens when my tax dollars fund a Satanist school? Wasn’t that one of the arguments against abortion? People were sick of their tax dollars funding abortions? Well I don’t want my tax dollars funding Satanic schools.

8. How many legislators/people complained it was socialism for Biden to pay for the student loans of flailing college students? ISN’T GIVING PARENTS 7500/KID TO GO TO PRIVATE SCHOOL THE SAME THING? What happens to those of us who schooled our kids on our own WITHOUT government help? Oh, that’s right. Tough luck – just like with business tax credits – the government will pick winners and losers and those of us with personal responsibility are the big losers.

9. The funding of public education is in Oklahoma’s constitution. The Oklahoma legislature is tasked with running these schools – hell, they make countless laws to make public schools kowtow to every year! IT’S THE LEGISLATURES JOB TO FIX OKLAHOMA PUBLIC SCHOOLS THAT AREN’T EDUCATING KIDS.

The legislature’s job isn’t to SHIRK their job and put that job off on parents and call it PARENTAL EMPOWERMENT.

10. How empowering is it to parents to have their taxes go up year after year to pay for public schools that don’t work and countless government programs so that they don’t have the money to educate their own children?

11. And the bottom line: how is it the GOVERNMENTS JOB TO PRIVATELY EDUCATE KIDS? The more government grows, the more our liberty shrinks, the more our liberty shrinks, the more socialist we become.

For God sakes! I feel so sorry for the people who have emigrated to Oklahoma from the left coast thinking they were going to get ‘freedom’ here. Here’s the bottom line, as Reagan said many times, “We’re only one generation away” from losing America.

Sadly, the subsequent generations from that quote were educated in government schools that took away their history, dumbed down their math, botched their reading so the majority of kids can’t read at grade level and hooked them on porn. AND WE HAD THE PLEASURE OF PAYING FOR THAT. Government is now king – personal responsibility is done for. Bye-bye America. Bye-bye Oklahoma. RIP.

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑