Search

ROPE Report

Open Search
Tag

SB224

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

Oklahoma Inc.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

__________________________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dollars For Data – Grok: In Order To Continue Receiving Federal Dollars, Oklahoma Needs To Gather Data On Babies Through 20-Year-Olds

OK SB224 collecting data on Oklahoma kids for federal dollars

I’m not a huge fan of AI, but I’ve been a researcher since 1990 and this tool has helped me find data more quickly and completely than I ever have before.

Today, because I’m still trying find a way to explain that SB224 is NOT FOR Oklahoma’s kids, but to satisfy a broader need to plan the economy on a national level, I asked Grok “does the federal government require states to codify the need to connect education and workforce data”? I got a long, in-depth, very interesting answer. So, is this to help Oklahoma’s kids, or get more federal grants? I’ll let you be the judge.

Grok’s answer:

The federal government does not explicitly require states to codify into state law a specific mandate to connect education and workforce data as a condition for receiving federal grants. However, federal policies, grant programs, and regulations often incentivize or require states to establish systems for linking education and workforce data to meet reporting, accountability, or performance goals. These requirements can typically be met through administrative actions, interagency agreements, or data systems like Oklahoma’s Data Sharing Hub (DASH), without necessarily codifying the connection into state statutes. Below is a detailed analysis based on available information:

Federal Context for Education and Workforce Data Integration

  1. Relevant Federal Laws and Programs:
    • Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA, 2014):
      • WIOA is the primary federal law governing workforce development programs. It requires states to develop integrated data systems to track participant outcomes across workforce, education, and training programs (e.g., Title I for adults, Title II for adult education, Title IV for vocational rehabilitation).
      • States must report performance metrics, such as employment rates, earnings, and credential attainment, which often require linking education and workforce data. For example, WIOA’s performance accountability provisions (29 U.S.C. § 3141) mandate data collection and reporting, which may involve connecting education records (e.g., high school or college completion) with employment outcomes.
      • While WIOA encourages states to establish data-sharing agreements or systems, it does not explicitly require codification into state law. States can comply through administrative frameworks, such as memoranda of understanding (MOUs) between agencies or platforms like DASH.
    • Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015):
      • ESSA requires states to report on student outcomes, including college and career readiness indicators, which may involve linking education data to workforce outcomes (e.g., post-secondary enrollment or employment).
      • States receiving ESSA funds must submit state plans and comply with accountability requirements, but these do not mandate codifying data linkages. Instead, states often use existing data systems or establish new ones to meet federal reporting needs.
    • Perkins V (Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act, 2018):
      • Perkins V funds career and technical education (CTE) programs and emphasizes aligning education with workforce needs. It requires states to report on CTE student outcomes, such as employment or post-secondary success, which often necessitates data integration.
      • Like WIOA, Perkins V encourages data system interoperability but does not require states to pass laws mandating data connections. States can use administrative tools or data-sharing platforms to comply.
    • Higher Education Act (HEA):
      • The HEA governs federal student aid and includes reporting requirements for post-secondary institutions, such as graduation rates and employment outcomes. Some grant programs under HEA may encourage data linkages to track student success, but codification is not a requirement.
  2. Federal Grant Conditions:
    • Federal grants, particularly those tied to WIOA, ESSA, or Perkins V, often include conditions related to data collection and reporting. For instance, WIOA grants require states to submit annual performance reports that integrate education and workforce data (e.g., 20 CFR § 677.155).
      • These conditions typically focus on outcomes rather than prescribing how states achieve them. States can meet requirements through data-sharing agreements, longitudinal data systems (SLDS), or platforms like DASH, without codifying policies into law.
      • Some competitive grants, such as the U.S. Department of Education’s State Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS) Grant Program, explicitly fund the development of integrated data systems. While these grants require states to build capacity for data linkages, they do not mandate legislative codification. Instead, they emphasize technical and administrative solutions.
    • The Department of Labor’s Workforce Data Quality Initiative (WDQI) provides grants to enhance state data systems for tracking workforce and education outcomes. WDQI encourages states to link data across agencies but allows flexibility in implementation, typically through administrative means rather than statutory mandates.
  3. Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA):
    • FERPA (20 U.S.C. § 1232g) governs the privacy of education records and impacts how states link education and workforce data. States must ensure compliance with FERPA when sharing student data, which may require data-sharing agreements or secure systems like DASH.
    • While FERPA imposes strict requirements on data handling, it does not mandate codification of data-linking policies. States can address FERPA through administrative protocols or interagency agreements.
  4. State Longitudinal Data Systems (SLDS):
    • The federal government has supported SLDS development since 2005 through the Institute of Education Sciences (IES). SLDS grants aim to create systems that link early childhood, K-12, post-secondary, and workforce data to inform policy and improve outcomes.
    • While SLDS grants require states to build and maintain these systems, the focus is on technical infrastructure and data governance, not on passing state laws. States can establish SLDS through executive action, agency collaboration, or platforms like DASH.

Oklahoma’s Context and DASH

  • Oklahoma’s Data Sharing Hub (DASH):
    • As noted in your previous question, DASH is Oklahoma’s platform for secure interagency data sharing, managed by the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES). It supports data integration for various state functions, including those tied to federal grants.
    • DASH likely facilitates compliance with federal reporting requirements under WIOA, ESSA, or Perkins V by enabling secure data linkages between education agencies (e.g., Oklahoma State Department of Education) and workforce agencies (e.g., Oklahoma Employment Security Commission).
    • There is no evidence that DASH’s operation or Oklahoma’s participation in federal grants requires codifying a mandate to connect education and workforce data. Instead, DASH serves as an administrative tool to meet federal expectations for data integration and reporting.
  • Oklahoma’s Approach:
    • Oklahoma has pursued data integration through initiatives like the Statewide Longitudinal Data System (SLDS), supported by federal grants. These efforts focus on technical and administrative solutions, such as data governance frameworks and interagency MOUs, rather than legislative mandates.
    • State laws, such as those governing data privacy or agency operations, may indirectly support data sharing (e.g., compliance with FERPA or state data security standards), but there is no specific Oklahoma statute mandating education-workforce data linkages as a condition of federal funding.

Does Codification Ever Occur?

  • Federal Incentives, Not Mandates:
    • While the federal government does not require codification, it may incentivize states to formalize data-sharing frameworks to ensure sustainability or compliance. For example, SLDS or WDQI grants may encourage states to establish governance structures, which some states codify into law for clarity or permanence.
    • States like Tennessee and Kentucky have passed laws to formalize SLDS or data-sharing governance (e.g., Tennessee’s P-20 Council), but these are state-driven initiatives, not federal mandates. Oklahoma has not taken this approach, relying instead on administrative tools like DASH.
  • State Discretion:
    • States may choose to codify data-sharing policies to address privacy concerns, ensure long-term funding, or align with federal grant requirements. For instance, a state might pass a law to clarify agency roles in data sharing or to comply with FERPA. However, this is not a federal requirement but a state policy choice.

Limitations and Variability

  • Grant-Specific Requirements: Some federal grants may include conditions that indirectly require data linkages, such as reporting on employment outcomes for CTE students under Perkins V. These conditions focus on outcomes, not codification, but states may codify policies to streamline compliance.
  • Privacy and Security: Federal laws like FERPA and the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. § 552a) impose strict requirements on data sharing, which may necessitate state-level policies or agreements. However, these can be administrative rather than legislative.
  • No Universal Mandate: There is no blanket federal requirement for states to codify education-workforce data linkages. The emphasis is on functional data systems and compliance with reporting requirements, which states can achieve through various means.

Conclusion

The federal government does not require states to codify into state law a mandate to connect education and workforce data to receive federal grants. Instead, laws like WIOA, ESSA, and Perkins V, along with grant programs like SLDS and WDQI, encourage or require states to integrate data for reporting and accountability purposes. States can meet these requirements through administrative actions, data-sharing agreements, or platforms like Oklahoma’s DASH, without passing new laws. While some states voluntarily codify data-sharing frameworks, this is not a federal mandate but a state choice. In Oklahoma, DASH likely supports compliance with federal data requirements, but there is no evidence of a codified mandate tied to federal funding. If you have a specific grant or program in mind, I can analyze its requirements further.

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑