Federal law states clearly that no agent of the federal government may seek to influence, direct, or control curriculum or instruction. For many decades, both parties agreed that they did not want the party in power to use federal power to control the schools of the nation. Thus, while it was appropriate for the U.S. Department of Education to use its funding to enforce Supreme Court decisions to desegregate the schools, it was prohibited from seeking to control curriculum and instruction. Both parties recognized that education is a state and local function, and neither trusted the other to impose its ideas on the schools.
That explains why Arne Duncan did not use federal funding to pay for the Common Core, but it does not explain why he used the power of his office to promote the CCSS or why he paid out some $350 million for tests specifically designed to test the Common Core standards. As every teacher knows, tests drive curriculum and instruction, especially when the tests are connected to high stakes.
In this post, Mercedes Schneider explains the battle royal in Louisiana, where Governor Jindal is fighting the State Commissioner of Education John White and the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education over the CCSS and the aligned PARCC tests. Now Jindal has decided to sue on grounds that the U.S. Department of Education acted illegally by aiding the creation of CCSS and the tests. The funniest part of the post , as Schneider writesis to see politicians accusing other politicians of acting like politicians.
I hope the underlying issues get a full airing. When I worked at the U.S. Department of Education in the early 1990s in the administration of President George H.W. Bush, we were much aware of the ban on federal involvement in curriculum and instruction. We funded voluntary national standards, but we kept our distance from the professional associations working to write them, and they were always described as voluntary national standards.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Interesting that members of one of the groups involved in creating CCSS, states’ governors, are now backing off and crying “foul” for getting federal support to enact that which they created. Wonder if we’d be having the same discussions if McCain or Romney had been elected.
Yes, CCSS is illegal and it is time for each state to initiate a class action suit against Arne Duncan and DOE.
If federal mandating of education issues is illegal, pray tell me how we were stuck with No Child Left Behind, perhaps the death knell of upward mobility for gifted minority students?
True enough.
Participation in the CCLS and testing consortia is voluntary, as is evidenced by the states that aren’t playing ball. And the argument that the Feds bribed states into signing up by dangling RTTP funding seems suspect to me: it amounted to 0.2% of national K-12 spending.
If anything illegal happened here, it was that the DOE granted waivers (to CCLS and non-CCLS states alike) to the sanctions of NCLB. That should have been done legislatively, not by fiat.
I have to disagree; CCSS are not inherently illegal. They are a product of 2 non-fed groups; in fact, the “state-led effort” included 48 (+ 2 territories and DC) members of the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). What might be illegal, and perhaps unconstitutional, is the fed supplying fed $ as a carrot (support? reward?) for the states to adopt the standards that were developed at the state level by state-level representatives. If your state was forced to adopt the standards developed without your state’s representation in the creation of these standards in order to receive fed $ or face fed sanctions, then maybe you have a case.
Marcia, how many states do you think would have dropped their own standards and adopted CC if Race to the Top did not make adoption of “college and career ready standards” a condition for eligibility for a piece of $4.35 billion? Would Massachusetts have dropped its proven standards? How many others? According to the Texas commissioner, Robert Scott, he was told to accept CCSS sight unseen. He said no.
Those two “state led” groups wrote the federal government right into their CCSS contract (MOU).
I’ve been hoping for a development like this for a long time. If the suit goes forward—and I will be surprised if PARCC and the rest of that crowd aren’t trying to cut a deal to avoid that end—then the boil will get lanced and a lot of ugliness will drain into the court, where the press cannot ignore it.
When court documents, depositions, testimony, and the rest of the fact-finding come to light, there will quite an uproar across the nation.
USDE has been trying to thread a legal needle but the investment in curriculum materials for PARCC and SMARTER tests is a smoking gun for anyone wishing to nail the case of paying for curricula tied to tests. Morevoer the test were created with federal funds. Compliance with the CCSS architecture has been bootlegged into federal policies and anyone who thinks standards have nothing to do with curriculum is a dunce. Many dunces are in charge of USDE. Still waiting for a charge of overreach based on legal arguments.
I’d love to see a lawsuit. Interesting issues.
I agree.
It should be illegal and brought to the court for its constitutionality. There’s a clear conflict of interest in federal funding and their control over state/local education policy. It’s evident in an ugly ‘cat-versus-dog’ fight between Bobby Jindal and LDOE&BESE.
Here’s a cool new blog that comes rights out and says that ed reformers seek to privatize all public schools.
Now which ed reform politician will have the integrity to run on this? If this is the end goal, shouldn’t they have to reveal that to voters instead of slowly starving our existing public schools while pretending to be “agnostics” or pretending to seek to “improve” public schools?
Also! How great is it that politicians have all gotten behind an agenda where they “relinquish” all responsibility and control of public education? Can I ask what we need lawmakers for, if they’re simply planning on outsourcing public education to the most politically-connected contractor? They have to receive the lobbyists for the contractors and sign the checks to pay the contractors? Is that why we need them?
The next time a politician who shows up in your state or district touting ed reform, ask them if they agree with the plan to privatize all public schools. Ask them to tell the truth to voters.
http://relinquishment.org/
I said years ago the goal was to turn the universal public education system into the broken, fragmented, wildly expensive, inequitable and privatized health care system, but even I never thought they would actually promote this.
No one in their right mind would take the US public education system and turn it into our absolute disaster of a “health care system”, would they?
Yup. They are proposing it:
http://relinquishment.org/
I actually don’t oppose the Common Core, as an idea. I read quite a bit on it and I’m okay with it.
It doesn’t matter, though. After 20 years of watching ed reform in action, I have zero faith that they’ll do this well, or even responsibly and carefully and competently.
I think you’d have to value existing public schools to “improve” them. The ed reform “movement” lack that essential job requirement. If you don’t value public schools, you’ll never “improve” them.
It’s a shame, really, because it’s going to cost public school districts a bundle and most of the people who work for them will probably bust ass and put in untold hours to put the CC in. I don’t think ed reformers have earned that kind of local effort, but they’ll get it.
I think anyone that cares about the future of public education needs to be vigilant when either the feds or states violate a law, a lawsuit should be filed to challenge the insanity. Even if it doesn’t stop them, it will slow them down and make it harder and expensive to plunder public education. This question of the Common Core is a perfect example of a challenge that should be pursued. I don’t understand how it is legal to starve public schools or allow government funds to go to religious schools. We should exploit every avenue to grieve and file. If Charter schools violate Civil Rights Laws, I think it might be a good idea to work with the Southern Poverty Law Center. This is a time for action, not silent suffering. Maybe we need a legal defense fund.
“I don’t understand how it is legal to starve public schools or allow government funds to go to religious schools.”
It is not legal, is it?
NO! Many states have vouchers that allow public money to be given to families and spent in private schools, including religious schools. One state (was it Ohio?) found that this was perfectly legal. Sickening.
Threatened,
Are you concerned that Pell Grants are used by students to attend Notre Dame and Georgetown? Pell Grants are government funds and both schools are religious schools.
I am not against Pell Grants. Many colleges with religious affiliations don’t require any religious studies while attending while most k-12 schools require daily religious study, and it seems to me there is a conflict in receiving federal or state funding. Something should be done about funding inequities. Lots of charters siphon money from public schools and then receive huge donations from the 1%. This is unjust. If they receive so much private money, they should have to return the money to the public schools. Also, if charters fail, they should have to repay the money they lost which should go back to public schools. Public schools should be able to sue to get back squandered revenue. The current system leaves public schools holding the bag while they increase class size, cut out music, art and PE. The current system allows public schools to be plundered without any redress.
Retired,
Would you be in favor of prohibiting any public funding from going to schools that require religious study? That seems reasonable.
Some public schools seem to be able to raise substantial funds. PS 321’s PTA reported raising a hair under $980,000 in 2012.
It’s one thing not to have one of the political parties setting national education policy at the federal level, but what about when there is an Overclass consensus about privatizing education that unites them both?
In that case, the floodgates open, and following the law is for The Little People.
The hubris is absolutely amazing. Anyone who supports public schools is now irrationally attached to “the status quo”
There’s not the slightest amount of humility that would indicate the possibility that they could learn something from those who came before them.
I think my favorite part is when they turn to “governance” of their ideal privatized system. What would be a new “governance” mechanism they could impose from above? It reminds me of Iraq, quite frankly.
Do you think they’ll draft the laws at the next policy roundtable? Why bother involving elected people at all?
Diane, is there a link so that I can see these volunteer national standards? Please?! Thanks.
Beyond Frustrated: I have never looked up the links. There would be a different link for each subject area. They are government documents. Which one are you looking for?
ELA LInk:http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/
Math Link: http://www.corestandards.org/Math/
A piece of a $4.35 billion carrot is hard to resist. Have any lawsuits prevailed about other things the Feds more-or-less bribe states into doing – like highway funds for drinking age restrictions? I don’t know how many examples exist, but certainly there must be others, and some tried by the courts?
We’re finally going to get a hearing on whether charter school management companies own assets that were paid for with public funds:
“As for-profit White Hat Management heads to the Ohio Supreme Court to defend its position on owning public charter-school assets, another Akron-based charter-school management company has signed on as a supporter.
Summit Academy Management — a nonprofit company that operates 27 publicly funded and privately run charter schools in Ohio — filed a friend-of-the-court brief last week in support of White Hat.
The high court agreed in March to hear a case that could determine whether taxpayers or private companies — some profit-driven and located outside of Ohio — own the school property purchased with tax dollars.
The assets include the real estate, furniture and computers.
The case pits White Hat against 10 school boards that previously employed the Akron company to run their schools. As the schools produced poor academic results and the boards asked questions about White Hat’s use of public dollars, the company declined to open its books to inspection.
The boards attempted to expel White Hat, but the company responded that it owned the assets and the boards would be the ones to leave.
The school boards have until Aug. 25 to submit to the high court a final brief. Oral arguments have been scheduled for Sept. 23.”
Should be really interesting. We never reached the issue of who should own and benefit from assets that are purchased with public funds re: charter schools. If you’re calling yourself a “public school” shouldn’t the public own the school? Why should publicly-funded assets convert to private ownership? What happens when more and more publicly-funded property comes into private ownership?
It’s nice because White Hat has an absolutely terrible reputation in the state. It’s great that they’re the lead on claiming they own publicly-funded assets. I think ordinary people don’t understand that these companies become owners and the public loses their investment in the property and assets.
If one is addressing reclaiming assets bought with state money,
what about recourse to the family of the student whose time was wasted by simply going through the motions, but not learning.
This could be a problem at any form of school, independent, parochial, charter, home, or public.
If they do not perform, it is definitely a problem.
What is invalid is selecting a high cut off score to predict college success n then naming this mastery level of performance “proficiency”. Nice “bait n switch”. Imagine law bar scores attached to professor tenure n the state raising scores so that 70 percent of students fail. Would this fly at U of Chicago Law School?
What bothers me most is that people don’t seem to really care about this issue. Wake up!
The only thing I’ve really found that convinces people that they should give a rats rear about Common Core has been this: https://www.indierabbit.com/share/53de7dcd78fea577a2c3d222/53ec044678fea537418fceb0
Super super well done.