Jamie Gass: Is Common Core Legal?

November 4, 2013 //

Jamie Gass, who directs the conservative Pioneer Institute in Boston, is a historian and a determined critic of Common Core. While most conservatives support Common Core (Jeb Bush, Bobby Jindal, Mitch Daniels, Tony Bennett, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce), Gass opposes Common Core and the testing because–among other reasons– he thinks that both are a violation of federal law. Read his latest column here.

Categories Common Core

26 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

concernedmom says:

November 4, 2013 at 8:20 am

What is Mr. Gass’s overall agenda?

http://pioneerinstitute.org/center-for-school-reform/

Here is a post from his organization’s website.

http://pioneerinstitute.org/charter_schools/6-takeaways-on-new-orleans-charter-initiative/

This may be a case when my enemy’s enemy is not my friend.

I worry about joining forces with groups just because they oppose the CC because we just may end up with something far worse.

LikeLike

Reply
- Alison Bianco says:
  
  November 4, 2013 at 11:47 am
  
  Ditto
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
- Michael Paul Goldenberg says:
  
  November 4, 2013 at 1:22 pm
  
  Hear, hear, @concernedmom.
  
  I think Gass is right to question the legality/constitutionality of Race to the Top (and the Common Core). I’ve been questioning the former periodically but can’t get an answer from anyone as to why it’s not being challenged by states or local governments.
  
  But I found the rest of his piece somewhat opaque (some local readers in Lowell complained about that, too), and I wonder why an intelligent person couldn’t have been more transparent in making the rest of his points. Is he asserting that the Obama administration in particular is systematically defunding civics and related education? He mentions Congress in the same breath, and these days it’s rarer than a snowfall on a Michigan July day for the White House and Congress (particularly the House, of course) to agree on the time of day, let alone policy. So which is it?
  
  And there’s quite a difference between Massachusetts’ framework for history and civics (which sounds admirable, by the way) and that of other states in general. Is the White House really targeting that particular state’s standards? Seems doubtful to me.
  
  It’s great that people are attacking RttT, CCSSI, and the entire education deform agenda . . . IF that’s what they’re actually criticizing. But when the source and/or author comes from the radical right, it becomes important to note just exactly what is being attacked. You don’t see a lot of conservatives criticizing the corporate deform agenda. The focus tends to be on the notion of some left-wing “dumbing down” of America. Pretty soon, we’re reading about UN Agenda 21, getting citations from the work of Charlotte Iserbyt, Beverly Eakman, and other very far right educational conspiracy theorists.
  
  Of course, these folks COULD be mostly or even entirely correct. Just because someone sounds like s/he’s spent too much time with Alex Jones doesn’t prove s/he’s wrong. Maybe some readers here know the work/ideas of the writers I mentioned above well enough to help critique them. I can’t be the only person bumping into references to them every time some link takes me to The Blaze, Sean Hannity, and dozens of other places so far to the right that I expect to wind up in the middle of the Spanish Inquisition or at least the McCarthy Era.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  - Dawn Hoagland says:
    
    November 4, 2013 at 10:45 pm
    
    Jamie Gass was one of the speakers at the Stop Common Core In NYS event in Westchester that I attended in September. He is a conservative and he is sincere in his disdain for the CC. The hosts rented a room for 500. Only 150 came. Speakers from all over the country flew in to present important information.
    
    The reason that Massachusetts is unique is because they had already raised their standards over the past 12 years with Sandra Stotsky at the helm. They had mediocre standards before and she raised the bar and everyone was happy with the results. She insisted on using classical literature with its rich vocabulary and complex plots as the basis for the ELA standards and curriculum. This improved their schools immensely. Ironically, the CC removes classical literature from the curriculum to make room for all of those boring informational texts they love to have our students “closely read.”
    
    Under Stotsky, Massachusetts rose to the level of Finland and Singapore in terms of international tests so when the RTTT application suggested that they exchange their already proven to be great standards for the unproven CC, Massachusetts did not offer to do so in Phase I. Their application ranked in 13th place because of that. Only 11 states and D.C. ended up getting any money. Massachusetts must have really wanted the money because they revised their application by changing one thing, adopting the CC and, voila, they became number 1 and did in fact receive funds.
    That is why Massachusetts is a particularly sad story.
    
    And I wouldn’t put down the Blaze until you have actually watched the careful reporting that Glenn Beck has done on the Common Core. Alex Jones may like to rant and rave but his facts are well referenced and irrefutable. Many people have had to eat crow that have called him a liar when his wild sounding reports turn out to be true. Why is it so hard to believe that it is actually our president who is the liar and has done nothing but bait and switch since he took office? Why don’t we look down our noses at him instead of the truth seekers?
    
    LikeLike
  - Michael Paul Goldenberg says:
    
    November 4, 2013 at 11:22 pm
    
    Some day, Dawn, explain to me what qualifies Sandra Stotsky to weigh in on mathematics and its teaching and learning, exactly. Her professional credentials are in French lit and reading, according to her c.v. She is so paranoid about her complete mischaracterization of constructivism that she objected to the inclusion of geometric constructions in the Massachusetts mathematics curriculum meetings. And the fact that she’s a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Waltons shouldn’t make no nevermind to anyone.
    
    Oh, and the wonderful performance of Massachusetts kids may have something to do with one or two people and factors other than the magical Professor Stotsky.
    
    Off to watch a Glenn Beck/Alex Jones festival now. On the Sci-Fi channel. This one’s about how the shooting in the LA Airport was a false flag operation under the direct control of Barack Obama and the Elders of Zion. The shooter is the grandson of Lee Harvey Oswald. Or maybe just played by him in the movie. Or is there any difference?
    
    LikeLike
  - Robert D. Shepherd says:
    
    November 6, 2013 at 6:21 am
    
    Hilarious, Dawn!
    
    LikeLike
deb says:

November 4, 2013 at 8:25 am

I wish CC were a living framework, not an assumed cure for what is “wrong” with education. They have tried to finesse the idea of the creators of the CC, but it has become lost in the delivery.

I also wish that people could agree on basic knowledge and learning needs. They can’t. I think it would be beneficial to establish some agreement, but it isn’t happening.

The document is too brittle, too full of assumptions, and the testing insanity is nauseating.

It is disgusting that it has become so politicized. This is a combination of years of fears about “liberal” education since the 70s and the End Times “proof” with the added twist of corporate opportunism. I have seen the backlash coming all my life.

LikeLike

Reply
- Jack says:
  
  November 4, 2013 at 9:34 am
  
  And we can’t forget this video
  parodying Common Core-proponent
  and New York State Ed. Commissioner
  John King reacting to parents who
  opt out of Common Core testing,
  or who complain about Common Core
  curriculum:
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvKVkitKOgk
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
- Robert D. Shepherd says:
  
  November 4, 2013 at 9:38 am
  
  I wish CC were a living framework. . . . The document is too brittle, too full of assumptions, and the testing insanity is nauseating.
  
  That is VERY well said, deb!
  
  I think that your analysis is spot on.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
  - KrazyTA says:
    
    November 4, 2013 at 12:00 pm
    
    Robert D. Shepherd: I second your comment.
    
    LikeLike
George Paolacci says:

November 4, 2013 at 8:29 am

Many Conservatives do oppose Common Core. The federal government’s intrusion into education is not validated by the Constitution. Although Common Core is said to be a product of the governors, compliance with it is necessary for state application for RTTT money. That’s a hook into the federal government’s intervening in state affairs.

LikeLike

Reply
Jack says:

November 4, 2013 at 9:32 am

It’s a obvious and total violation of the tenth amendment.

Some questions about challenging it in court
on this basis?

Who would sue / who would have standing?
Would a class of parents / students be the
plaintiffs in this case?

Who exactly would they sue? Would
it be state education officials, or federal
education officials or both? Would
Arne Duncan be at the top of the list
of defendants?

What court would it be filed in?
State court? Federal court?

LikeLike

Reply
- Robert D. Shepherd says:
  
  November 4, 2013 at 10:07 am
  
  By unilaterally pushing a curriculum, Duncan overstepped his legal authority. That’s clear from the legislation that established the Department of Education. By unilaterally revising the FERPA rules so that the state no longer has to get parental permission to turn over very private student data to anyone with a checkbook, Duncan doubtless violated numerous laws protecting parental rights, both common and statutory laws. But privacy law in the U.S. is iffy because our Constitution does not, as the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights does, clearly and specifically address the right to privacy. Instead, that right has been a matter of interpretation, and we have had no end of totalitarians in power, in this country, who have argued that no right to privacy exists, that any such right results from judges “making law.”
  
  I think that we have a choice: we can become a totalitarian surveillance state like the former East Germany, for that is what is happening, or we can pass an explicit amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing privacy.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
Chiara Duggan says:

November 4, 2013 at 9:44 am

This is the Kentucky PTA guide for parents on the Common Core. Check out how many tests 8th graders are slated to take in Kentucky.

Click to access PTA%20Kentucky%20Assessment%20Guide.pdf

LikeLike

Reply
- KYTeacher says:
  
  November 4, 2013 at 10:44 am
  
  I’m not sure what your point is, Chiara. The number of assessments in 8th grade is, basically, the same as in 4th and 5th. EXPLORE is given in 8th grade, yes, but in September, while the others are given in the Spring.
  
  And how is this different from HS?
  
  Based upon what I’ve been reading on this blog, and some others, KY does not have as many assessments as other states do.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
Robert D. Shepherd says:

November 4, 2013 at 9:47 am

We have become a nation where “legal” is whatever the folks who make these decisions unilaterally for the rest of us can get away with. There is a great deal of clearly extralegal activity going on in Washington, and CC is just one of those activities.

And one doesn’t have to look far to explain those History results. Gass is also spot on. NCLB so distorted our pedagogy and curricula nationwide that skills-based test prep pushed out much else, including much teaching of History.

Deb is absolutely right. There would be nothing to object to IF the CC were a living document in competition with other standards promulgated by other groups, if it were continually revised in response to national discussion and debate and to emerging ideas about best practices in the teaching of English, if local people were allowed to exercise their right to choose those standards they deemed appropriate and to revised them according to their judgment, and if the high-stakes tests were abolished.

Otherwise, it’s just another amateurish, invariant, top-down, totalitarian mandate that will grotesquely narrow and distort our teaching.

LikeLike

Reply
- 2old2tch says:
  
  November 4, 2013 at 7:27 pm
  
  Litigation is expensive. There is many a lawsuit that never gets filed because of cost. There are many cases that go to plea bargain because defendants cannot afford to continue to fight. On an even more basic level, think of the regulations within city government that never get enforced. We have one about greenery not impinging on sight lines at corners. Not enforced unless someone is willing to file a complaint. When you have money and/or power, the rules are different.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
Chiara Duggan says:

November 4, 2013 at 9:48 am

Also, we’re terrified that reformers have decided to “help” rural areas.

Please, don’t help us! 🙂

Is there some way to gracefully decline “help” from billionaires, or are we mandated to accept it? Did anyone ask them for help? All I recall asking for is state and federal funding of my kid’s public school. Can they point me to a public school parent who asked TFA or Gates or Broad for “help”? I’d like to meet that parent.

"Geographic location doesn't dictate destiny…poverty doesn't dictate results." Sec of Ed Arne Duncan #RuralEdForum http://t.co/6xEpYr9OB8—
Jared Myracle (@JaredMyracle) October 31, 2013

LikeLike

Reply
Robert D. Shepherd says:

November 4, 2013 at 9:55 am

If the teacher’s unions were not led by collaborators with the totalitarian standards juggernaut, they would be the groups that one would expect to lead the legal fight against the CC. After all, the CC takes away autonomy–the ability to make decisions about outcomes to be measured in mathematics and the English language arts–from teachers, the union’s members, and turns the power to make those decisions over to a distant, unaccountable, inflexible, unilateral, centralized totalitarian authority appointed by a few plutocrats. The unions should be the first to be saying that no one has the right to appoint David Coleman and Susan Pimentel absolute monarchs of English language arts instruction in the United States. But the union leadership is too busy counting is money from the Gates Foundation to attend to such matters.

LikeLike

Reply
- Robert D. Shepherd says:
  
  November 4, 2013 at 9:56 am
  
  cx: unions’
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
- Robert D. Shepherd says:
  
  November 4, 2013 at 9:57 am
  
  cs 2: is in the last sentence s/b their
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
Deborah says:

November 4, 2013 at 5:04 pm

Consider this perspective (I don’t know if it is legally accurate but wouldn’t it be wonderful if it were?) regarding Race to the Top: “There is nothing in the text of the ARRA [(American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009)], or in the portions of the two other statutes to which it points (the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the America Competes Act), that authorizes, requires, or even suggests that states competing for [(RTTT)] funds would need to adopt common state standards, create more charter schools, evaluate teachers and principals based on gains in student achievement, emphasize the preparation of students for careers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, or restructure the lowest 5 percent of their schools.” http://www.brookings.edu/research/opinions/2010/04/27-education-whitehurst

LikeLike

Reply
- deb says:
  
  November 4, 2013 at 5:10 pm
  
  The testing: its developmentally inappropriate objectives, its punitive nature, and its lack of true vetting prior to implementation seem to necessitate the CC and Pearson’s interpretation of it. I find it very disturbing…even without direct mention of corporate ties.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Reply
John Young says:

November 4, 2013 at 9:43 pm

Reblogged this on Transparent Christina.

LikeLike

Reply
Laura H. Chapman says:

November 4, 2013 at 10:13 pm

The CCSS are marketed as a state initiatives to thread the legal needles in federal law. Duncan put carrots in front of states. He required states to have a substantial core of “common standards” in ELA and math to qualify for federal funds. He then funded two consortia to developed tests of the “common core.” Then, the consortium managers realized tests could not be developed without curriculum materials. The stumbling along and spending money like crazy on this national management-by-objectives theory of reform is as bad as the roll-out of the Affordable Care Act. In 2027 we will find out if more that 1,620 standards in ELA and math ( not counting HS courses) will be met by most students, so they can be declared ready for college and a career. The whole conceit of referring to “state standards” is a byproduct of legislation that prohibits the federal government from using its funds to mandate, endorse, approve, or require academic content and student achievement standards, curricula, or programs of instruction.
“U. S. Congress. General Provisions Concerning Education. (2010, February). Section 438 (20 U.S.C. § 1232a). US Code TITLE 20 EDUCATION CHAPTER 31, SUBCHAPTER III, Part 2, §§ 1232a. Prohibition against Federal control of education. No provision of any applicable program shall be construed to authorize any department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational in-stitution, school, or school system, or over the selection of library resources, textbooks, or other printed or published instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, or to require the assignment or transportation of students or teachers in order to overcome racial imbalance.” Retrieved from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/20/usc_sup_01_20.html
Legal Restriction: “The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002). Section 9527 ESEA amended by NCLB (20 U.S.C. § 7907(a).1) This provi-sion is based on 20 U.S.C. 7907(a) (Section 9527(a) of NCLB). Section 7907(a) is one of the ESEA’s general provisions contained in Title IX of the Act. It states: Nothing in this [Act] shall be construed to authorize an officer or employee of the Federal Government to mandate, direct, or control a State, local educational agency, or school’s curriculum, program of instruction, or allocation of State or local resources, or mandate a State or any subdivision thereof to spend any funds or incur any costs not paid for under this [Act]. 20 U.S.C. 7907(a).”

LikeLike

Reply
Taylor Hoynes says:

November 8, 2013 at 10:13 am

Common Core is not only illegal it is subversive and undermines our Constitution, Bill of Rights and is revisionist history. But, I agree with some that what we need is 20 or even 10 point review with book , chapter and page number of the most egregious. So far I have not seen one.
http://www.colonialpublishingco.com

LikeLike

Reply