Common Core vs. Common Sense

Submitted by ... on 1 April 2013 - 1:38pm

 

Would you buy a car sight unseen? Common Core standards were put into New Hampshire law without legislative review, parental input, or any measurement of its effectiveness. 

·      If you think our students should be used as guinea pigs in this education experiment, then you’re all for the Core!

 

Would you buy a car without knowing how much it cost?  No fiscal analysis was made on the increased expenses of Common Core before being approved for New Hampshire schools.

·      If you’re all for having your property taxes increased to pay for Common Core without any representation, then you’re all for the Core! 

·      If you’re all for expensive teacher training, new computers, additional internet connections, and online testing software required for the Smarter Balanced tests tied to Common Core and less money in the classroom for students and teachers, then you’re all for the Core!

RESOLUTION OPPOSING COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS IN THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Submitted by ... on 27 March 2013 - 12:39pm

WHEREAS, in July of 2010 four unelected officials in the Executive branch, members of the NH Board of Education, committed our state to participation in the Common Core State Standards Initiative through the federal Race to the Top grant application; and

WHEREAS, this participation required our state to adopt the Common Core standards in K-12 English language arts and mathematics, and to commit to implementing the national SMARTER Balanced (SBAC) assessments, all without legislative oversight and without adequate public input; and

WHEREAS, adoption of Common Core obliterates New Hampshire’s constitutional autonomy over education in English language arts and mathematics, placing control in the hands of the federal government and unaccountable private interests in Washington, DC; and

WHEREAS, the Common Core standards have been evaluated by experts as mediocre at best, and based on questionable philosophies; and

WHEREAS, the Common Core standards will inevitably lead to a national curriculum, in violation of three federal statutes; and

WHEREAS, the Common Core scheme will be expanded to include national standards and curriculum in science, social studies, and other subjects; and

WHEREAS, neither the Common Core standards nor the SBAC assessments were ever piloted to determine their effectiveness; and

WHEREAS, both the Common Core standards and the SBAC tests will impose an enormous unfunded mandate on our state and our local school districts; and

WHEREAS, Common Core is part of a national scheme that includes collection and sharing of massive amounts of personal student and teacher data;

THEREFORE, the state of New Hampshire and local school districts should:

  • Withdraw our state from the Common Core State Standards Initiative;
  • Withdraw our state from the SBAC assessment scheme, and any other testing aligned with the Common Core standards;
  • Prohibit all state officials from entering into any agreement that cedes any measure of control over New Hampshire education to entities outside the state and ensure that all content standards and curriculum decisions are adopted through a transparent district-based process fully accountable to the citizens of New Hampshire and
  • Prohibit the collection of personal student data for any non-educational purpose, and the sharing of personal data except with schools or education agencies within the state.

HB 479 - Defending local self-governance of NH school districts

Submitted by doris on 5 March 2013 - 8:01pm

 

Please support local, self-governance of school districts with HB 479.

Common Core Standards:

  • a high stakes gamble based on a completely untested national curriculum
  • costly to implement with ongoing teacher development
  • require hardware & digital textbooks which are 3X the cost of print
  • removes literature from the curriculum and weakens math instruction
  • cripples innovation, local control and parental involvement

HB 479 provides a time-tested structure to restore local control.  The thresholds are purposely low so everyone can participate. School districts are open to the public, so "cherry-picking" members is not possible.

Parents need to work within their community, improving public education one district at a time. If one districts opt-out of mandates & funding, that provides more residual funding for other districts, which prefer federal mandated programs. Live and let live. 

It’s far wiser than straight-jacketing every district to accept yet another questionable federal program and risking our children’s futures.  Please let parents have a voice in their public schools.

HB 479 -- Local Self-Governance of Schools is the Common Sense Solution

Submitted by ... on 25 February 2013 - 9:02am

Why do we allow the federal government to take control of our local public schools?  The practice of accepting federal funding in exchange for mandates is undermining the role of teachers and parents in our schools.  Each mandate handcuffs teachers, restricting their ability to innovate and work constructively within their communities to meet the needs of students.

As result many parents are seeking alternatives outside the public schools.   Some families can afford private or home schooling.  For others these options are completely out of reach.

Charter schools are not widely available and often require a child to win-the-lottery to enroll. Tax credit scholarships, which help less affluent families, are being targeted for elimination, as they re-direct potential tax dollars away from public schools.

House Bill 479 provides a common sense solution to this problem by offering educational choice to each and every family in the state without any additional expense, without lotteries and without re-directing tax payer money away from public schools.

This bill restores our district system, which was established during the 1800’s in New Hampshire, and most other states.  It allows families to join a school district that is committed to their educational goals.  It allows parents to band together with others in their community to create new and innovative school districts.

There were over 2,600 unique school districts in NH during the 1850’s These districts were decentralized, setting their own curriculum. Today there are only about 100 school districts, each required to implement the same uniform curriculum.  The latest federal mandate is called Common Core, but it lacks common sense.

Common Core is the follow-up federal program to No Child Left Behind, which failed our children so badly that the NH Dept of Education is now seeking a NCLB Waiver.  Common Core is completely untested and may also fail our children.

Prudence would suggest that legislators do not gamble everything on this new federal program, but offer parents the alternatives that they seek.

HB 479 provides parents with a structure to create those alternatives. It restores education choice to one district at a time, allowing districts to work within their communities and forgo mandates & state funding, if they so choose. It also allows other districts to continue implementing federally mandated programs & accepting state funding without interruption, if they feel that is best for their students.  Live and let live.  That’s far wiser than forcing every district to accept yet another untested federal program and risking our children’s futures.

If we allow parents to find school districts, which they can whole-heartedly support, students will absorb this enthusiasm and the results will exceed expectations.

Please contact your state representative, asking them to restore local, self-governance of our schools ..... on March 6th by voting to SUPPORT HB 479.

HB 479 - Defending local self-governance of NH school districts

Submitted by ... on 8 February 2013 - 11:15pm

HB 479, relative to the creation and division of school districts, will have a public hearing on Tuesday, Feb. 12th at 11 am in the Legislative Office Building, Room 207. 

A copy of the bill can be read here:
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2013/HB0479.html

If you can't attend the hearing, please email the members of the House Education Committee with your support: <HouseEducationCommittee@leg.state.nh.us>

Rep. J.R. Hoell (R-Dunbarton) introduced this bill, "authorizing self-governance of school districts in New Hampshire."  It restores the independence of local school districts, which will benefit everyone in the state. The bill will benefit parents whether their children attend public, private or home schools as well as those without children.

The district system was established in 1805 to protect the rights of the people to control public instruction within their communities. Thousands of independent, decentralized districts were created. These new districts became the fundamental educational units in the state.

Local self-governance of schools provides for greater community awareness and participation, which is essential to excellence and innovation in education.

Restoring the independence of school districts provides an opportunity for the community to take a more active and meaningful role in their public schools. It allows for the development of educational policies that respect the diverse needs and aspirations of individuals and communities.

This bill allows taxpayers to create new districts as well as change membership between school districts. Taxpayers should be able to join school districts which hold compatible ideas on education. Everyone will be more enthusiastic and supportive knowing that their districts addresses their educational concerns.

Each districts will be able to decide whether or not to implement state and federal programs, weighing the benefits of increased state and federal funding against the cost of unfunded mandates, studying the effectiveness of the proposal against alternative programs.

One-size-fits-all education cannot address the unique needs of all children. Nor does uniformity in education respect our right to local control of our schools.

 

SB 53 -- Eliminating the ability of parents to opt-out of objectionable materials in public schools

Submitted by ... on 27 January 2013 - 5:14pm
On Tuesday, January 29th at 10:30 am, the Senate Health, Education & Human Services Committee will hold a hearing on Senate Bill 53, relative to school district policies regarding a parent's determination that certain course material is objectionable.
The hearing will be held in the Legislative Office Building, Room 103 which is behind the State House in Concord.

Members of the Health, Education & Human Services Committee:
Nancy Stiles(R) Chairman
John Reagan(R) V Chairman
Peggy Gilmour (D)
Molly Kelly (D)
Andy Sanborn (R)

The bill sponsor, Sen. D'Allesandro (D-Manchester), wants to eliminate  a parent's right to object and opt-out of objectionable material presented to their child in a public school.  Parents are currently allowed to find alternative material for their child at their own expense and reach an agreement with the school. 

Less than a year ago on January 4, 2012 legislation, HB 542, was passed to allow parents to voice their concerns about material in a public school, opt-out when they feel the material is objectionable, and provide alternative material for their own child at their own expense.  This law was designed not to disrupt the instruction of other students, but to respect the rights of parents to direct the education of their children.

Rules have hardly been adopted to allow parents to opt out.  Yet Sen. D'Allesandro wants to block parents from having a voice in their child's education and trample their inalienable rights of conscience. 

Three Education Bills to Watch Closely

Submitted by ... on 18 December 2012 - 11:20pm

Defending local self-governance of NH school districts

Rep. J.R. Hoell (R-Dunbarton) introduced a bill, House Bill 479 , "authorizing self-governance of school districts in New Hampshire." 

This bill restores the independence of local school districts, which will benefit everyone in the state.  It will benefit parents whether their children attend public, private or home schools as well as those without children. 

  • The district system was established in 1805 to protect the rights of the people to control public instruction within their communities.  Thousands of independent, decentralized districts were created. These new districts became the fundamental educational units in the state.
  • Local self-governance of schools provides for greater community awareness and participation, which is essential to excellence and innovation in education. 
  • Restoring the independence of school districts provides an opportunity for the community to take a more active and meaningful role in their public schools. It allows for the development of educational policies that respect the diverse needs and aspirations of individuals and communities.

This bill allows taxpayers to create new districts as well as change membership between school districts.  Taxpayers should be able to join school districts which hold compatible ideas on education.  Everyone will be more enthusiastic and supportive knowing that their districts addresses their educational concerns. 

Each districts will be able to decide whether or not to implement state and federal programs, weighing the benefits of increased state and federal funding against the cost of unfunded mandates, studying the effectiveness of the proposal against  alternative programs.

One-size-fits-all education cannot address the unique needs of all children.  Nor does uniformity in education respect our right to local control of our schools. 

 

Public School Bill - Allowing Parents to Opt Out of Objectionable Material

Sen. Lou D'Allesandro (D-Manchester) introduced a bill, Senate Bill 53, "repealing the requirement that school districts adopt a policy regarding parents' objections to material in public school courses. "

Less than a year ago on January 4, 2012 legislation, HB 542, was passed to allow parents to voice their concerns about material in a public school, opt-out when they feel the material is objectionable, and provide alternative material for their own child at their own expense.  This law was designed not to disrupt the instruction of other students, but to respect the rights of parents to direct the education of their children.

Rules have hardly been adopted to allow parents to opt out.  Yet Sen. D'Allessandro wants to block parents from having a voice in their child's education and trample their inalienable rights of conscience. 

 

Home Education Bill

Rep. Mary Gile (D-Concord) introduced a bill, House Bill 251, "relative to the legislative members of the home education advisory committee and relative to school district policies regarding home educated pupils."  

It's difficult to know what the purpose of her legislation is without reading the bill. 

On June 21, 2012 legislation, HB 1571, was passed reducing regulations on home educators.  Again, rules have barely been adopted to implement this new law.

What is the objective of Rep. Gile's new legislation?  Will the rights of parents be respected?

 

**N.B.  Rep. J.R. Hoell was the prime sponsor of both bills, HB 542 and HB 1571, which Sen. D'Allessandro and Rep. Gile are now trying to undermine or reverse.

HELP SULLIVAN ESTABLISH IT'S OWN SCHOOL DISTRICT

Submitted by ... on 26 November 2012 - 8:05pm

The people of New Hampshire have the right to establish their own schools.  Local self-governance provides for greater community awareness and participation, which is essential to excellence and innovation in education. 
 
The people of Sullivan, New Hampshire are trying to establish their own schools and their own school district.  Please help them by sharing this information with your friends.

If you live in the MRSD towns of Richmond, Roxbury, Troy, Swanzey, Fitzwilliam, Gilsum or Sullivan, PLEASE vote "YES" tomorrow, Tuesday, November 27th to support Sullivan's withdrawal from the Monadnock Regional School District.

There has been a last ditch campaign to sabotage two years with of work using misleading information. The committee of MSRD board members & selectmen had months of input, (including Dick Thackston). Dick was the one who spearheaded the demand for the compressed timeline. The committee voted overwhelmingly to support the plan (9 or 10 to 1). The NH Dept. of Education has supported the process & officially approved the plan. The Town of Sullivan's entire contribution to the current budget ($1.3 million) is less than the current surplus of $1.7million. The selectmen of Sullivan, the Sullivan committee and the town as a whole are overwhelmingly in favor of withdrawal, voting 87 to 13 to pursue this. But we are an extremely small town and can't do this without the support of voters in the rest of the district.

PLEASE spread the word to everyone you know in the district to vote tomorrow to LET SULLIVAN GO.

For more details, check out the Sullivan town website:
Please "LIKE" the "Sullivan School District" Facebook page:

If you have any questions, call Jen at 847-3136 or cell 283-8395

Thank you all for your patience & support.

 

UPDATE:

On November 27th voters of the Monadnock Regional School District approved the withdrawal of the Town of Sullivan by a margin of 412-308.

Eighty-nine percent of Sullivan voters casting ballots supported the withdrawl! Thanks to the immense support from Sullivan, we overcame some larger-than-expected opposition from other towns.

 

 

Texas Public Schools Indoctrinating Students: "1773 Boston Tea Party Was Terrorism"

Submitted by ... on 23 November 2012 - 7:53pm

TEXAS -- Public schools are using a curriculum that teaches that the Boston Tea Party was an act of terrorism. The image below was taken from a lesson plan developed by CSCOPE. This plan is distributed widely to public school teachers to indoctrinate their students.

http://beforeitsnews.com/tea-party/2012/11/the-boston-tea-partiers-were-terrorists-2465858.html

http://www.nhteapartycoalition.org/tea/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Terrorism.pdf

 

 

House Democrat Introduces Legislation for an Income Tax

Submitted by ... on 12 November 2012 - 2:39pm

  • Remember when Democratic candidates were pledging not to pass an income tax? Well, forget that promise! They now want an income tax to pay for education.

    INCOME TAX FOR CHARTER SCHOOLS (2013-H-0191-L)
    Title: establishing a one percent personal income tax to fund chartered public schools. Sponsors: (Prime) Peter Sullivan

    Education Tax Credits (2013-H-0190-L) Title: relative to education tax credits Sponsor: (Prime) Peter Sullivan

    Rep. Sullivan is a Democrat who voted against the original education tax credit bill that passed in the last session.  He will likely ask to eliminate education tax credits (LSR 190), if he can't get his income tax (LSR 191). 

    57% of New Hampshire voters not only voted against an income tax, but in favor of a Constitutional Amendment to prevent an income tax from ever being enacted. Only days later, the Democrats are already pushing an income tax.

    The public sector union officials are backing the Democrats every year, even manning the polls with union members at taxpayer expense. Tuesday was "payback," according to a few public employees.  With taxpayer funded lobbyists, it's hardly surprising.

     

Syndicate content

User login