In the previous post, I referred to Din Armstrong of Lee County, Florida, as a hero for his principled stand against Florida’s insane obsession with testing.
Here is more from Don Armstrong:
“Good morning, everyone. Like always, I spend my Sunday, gathering my thoughts and thinking of the upcoming week over a cup of coffee.
“One thought that has crossed my mind this past week is regarding our Constitution. Perhaps this is due to the fact that last week was Constitution Week in the United States. Yet, while listening to our leaders in Tallahassee, as well as many here locally, it seems the Constitution is rarely considered in their talk about parent rights and student rights, specifically with regard to what options and control parents have in schools.
“Specifically, I am referring to our Lee County, FL school district’s stance on parent rights to opt out of testing. In a recent communication from our district, taken from previous board attorney comments, legal advice was provided that although the “14th Amendment provides that parents have the right to control the upbringing of their child, including the education the child receives … the right does not enable the parent to dictate the instruction provided to the student or the assessments administered to the student.” This quote is taken directly from our district directive that further implies the only control a parent has is to choose public or private schools. I can not disagree strongly enough with this statement.
“This misinterpretation of the 14th Amendment infuriates me. Our Constitution is clearly defined and gives specific rights to parents which has been upheld in court precedence. To borrow from Fair Test, a national organization ran by Lee Cty local advocate, Robert Schaeffer, here is a more correct interpretation of the 14th Amendment, with regard to parenting:
“According to the U.S Constitution, specifically the 14th Amendment, parental rights are broadly protected by Supreme Court decisions (Meyer and Pierce), especially in the area of education. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that parents possess the “fundamental right” to “direct the upbringing and education of their children. Furthermore, The Supreme Court criticized a state legislature for trying to interfere “with the power of parents to control the education of their own.” (Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 402.) In Meyer, the Supreme Court held that the right of parents to raise their children free from unreasonable state interference is one of the unwritten “liberties” protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (262 U.S. 399).”
“Like the Supreme Court who criticized a state legislature for trying to interfere “with the power of parents to control the education of their own”, I also suggest our school district reconsider its position on parent rights. Lee County is lucky to have an active community, highly involved in our school system. And, while involvement often leads to greater accountability, it is exactly what we strive for here in Lee County. It is the true definition of local control and I know that is what Lee County residents want. It is certainly the wish of every parent: not just local control over their schools, but especially, local parental control over their children. To expect less of our community is not reasonable.
“So, as I try to always offer solutions, here are a couple. Firstly, I would solve the problem of parent concern by redrafting the district position on parent rights to fully recognize the rights of our local parents, more correctly honoring the 14th Amendment of our Constitution. Let our local parents know we understand their concerns with the overtesting and scripted curriculum. Let our parents know that we appreciate their activism and we know that only through the combined voices of board members, parents, and citizens will we get relief from the overbearing mandates from the state and feds. Local control comes from local voices. Listen to the parents.”
A note from an admirer who sent this letter from Don:
-Don Armstrong, former Lee County School Board Member, well known for being the first board member to opt his own, twin children out of the state FSA exam, creating the momentum to garner the first county wide opt out in the US. While Lee County reversed its decision to opt out of tests, Armstrong and local parents are keeping up the fight.

The heavyweights and enforcers and enablers of self-styled “education reform” blather on unendingly about “choice.”
As do their shills and trolls on this blog.
Opting in or out of high-stakes standardized testing is a perfect example of “choice.”
So what is it to be: are the self-proclaimed “choicesters” for choice or agin it?
😎
LikeLike
Great idea. Hit them with the Constitution, the ultimate weapon! This will hopefully leave them speechless for some time, especially in conservative areas. The only document more revered is the Bible.
LikeLike
What I think is important in this post is the process being used here to fight back. I think this is what it has come to: We must comb through laws, whether federal or state laws or state charters, to research definitions of common school or public schools, how public money may spent on public schools and the rights of children and parents. The “reformers” and “testing lunatics” will keep coming up with new ways to put public education in a choke hold stepping on parents’ children’s and teachers’ rights along the way, if we just keep accepting the unacceptable.
LikeLike
“14th Amendment provides that parents have the right to control the upbringing of their child, including the education the child receives … the right does not enable the parent to dictate the instruction provided to the student or the assessments administered to the student.”
This is astounding and negates everything the old PL 94-142 stood for, which was, among other things, increased parental involvement in educational decision – making. Now we are saying that all of that was unconstitutional? I think not.
LikeLike
I’m reassured that some parents are able to organize against the extreme testing. Unfortunately, right now the backlash is the state threatening to withhold funding from districts if enough students don’t test. Our nitwit commissioner refuses to change her position, even after many of the superintendents, including my own, have publicly declared their lack of confidence in the tests. The emperor refuses to acknowledge she has no clothes. It will take some sort of legal action to turn this tide.
LikeLike
She answers to the Governor and the Legislature. Rick Scott does not care about education outside of winning votes with his fake initiatives. John Legg, president of the Senate, is a charter school operator. Marlene O’Toole, chair of the House K-12 Committee, is bought and paid for by the charter operators. That leaves Pam Stewart, Commissioner of Education, as a total tool.
LikeLike
I would be careful about using the 14th amendment to endorse parents’ rights to weigh in on curriculum, which includes assessment. Imagine where that leads. On the other hand, parents shouldn’t be expected to stand by and watch their children misused. If a parent or group of parents were dismayed by the corporate-inspired monetization of public education in America and were moved to protest and risk the consequences, I think they might find their peaceful protest, free speech, and petitions to the government for a redress of grievances covered by the first amendment.
LikeLike
I would imagine there will be some midnight backdoor regulations/legislations/laws coming down the pike to “handle” unruly and disobedient parents. According to this Pennsylvania post, horrible things can happen to parents. Imagine if they start fining, then jailing, parents for opting out? I know its in a different vein, but still, it should never have happened. Is this how we “help” parents, students, and the community: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/06/13/mother-of-7-in-jail-because-her-kids-skipped-school-dies-in-cell/
LikeLike
This is a feeble attempt by a school board attorney to intimidate people with misinformation, and like so many lawyers, I suspect he has an inflated sense of self, far beyond that of common parents who would never dare to challenge anything that pertains to the law…or his interpretation. The SCOTUS has been an unwavering advocate of parents rights, for example with religious home schooling (Wisconsin v Yoder); private schooling Pierce v Holy Name; forcing foreign language requirements Farrington v Tokushige; special education rights; the rights of transgender students; and many, many more. Moreover, the courts have repeatedly been crystal clear in dilineating the concept of ‘in loco parentis’ which no longer gives school’s the right to restrain and coerce, but it is the duty of school officials to correct and protect our students. Dr. Andrew Rinko, UNCW, p/t professor of Government, Law and Politics in Education.
LikeLike