Support Sikeston School Board in signing a Resolution to stop implementation of Common Core State Standards Initiative
Petition to Stop the Implementation of Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) 2014
Presented by Residentsof Sikeston R-6 School District
We the following parents and residents of Sikeston R-6 School District, sign this petition in an effort to show the school board our support in their collective effort to raise a voice of concern and opposition to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) through a resolution. We encourage the board to use their rights to govern our schools according to the Missouri Statutes.We, the following, stand with the board in opposition to the implementation of the CCSS for the following reasons:
I. Whereas CCSSI is Education without Representation:
1. CCSSI was never approved by Congress.
2. CCSSI was never approved by MO State legislators.
3. CCSSI was never formally reviewed and approved by our local school board.
4. CCSSI is thus not a state-led initiative and should not be called such; it was not commissioned by any state legislature, initiated or written by any State School Boards, nor by any local school board. The standards are copyrighted to non-government, trade organizations.
5. The State Board of Education was not authorized by language in the sections of SB 380, the Outstanding Schools Act, to transfer its authority to develop state standards to a non-governmental organization that controls the number and content of the standards
6. Personnel of Americas Choice, owned by Pearson, spearheaded the development of the Standards and personnel from Achieve, Inc., having no K-12 teaching experience, were chief architects of the Standards, while Missouri faculty representative of higher education and active classroom teachers from English and Mathematics did not participate in the drafting of the Standards as required by Missouri Revised Statute Section 160.514.
II. Whereas CCSSI is Taxation without Representation:
7. CCSSI is very expensive. Missouri’s Race to the Top application estimated costs to be over $740 million. Individual school districts are committed to paying unknown costs associated with implementing Common Core assessment plans and purchase of materials, which tax payers and their elected representatives never had any say about and which has not been tested.
III. Whereas CCSSI Violates the Intent of 3 Federal Education Laws to prohibit a federal role in curriculum and assessment development:
8. Department of Education Organizational Act of 1979; the General Education Provision Act and the Amended Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965, in summary, say, “The Federal Department of Education shall not be involved in developing, supervising, or controlling instructional materials or curriculum.”
a. Be it known that President Obama appropriated $4.35B in the American Recovery and Re-Investment Act to education if governors would adopt a national set of standards. See Missouri’s MOU here: http://www.moagainstcommoncore.com/documents (Nixon MOU for Common Core). These Standards were signed on to in 2009 before they were even written.
b. Be it known that the Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, appropriated $360M, to help develop a national standardized testing consortia known as SBAC and PARCC. The SBAC test, sub-contracted under the direction of CTB/McGraw Hill, is scheduled to be issued in MO the spring of 2015. http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/assess/documents/AssessmentFAQ.pdf
c. Be it known that CCSSI is driven by massive special interest groups and corporations such as the Gates and Pearson Foundations – who stand to make billions of dollars by the schools having to purchase computers and software for every student, the Pearson e-books, and the Pearson-developed tests.
IV. Whereas CCSSI, Under the ESEA Waiver, Calls for Extensive, Invasive Data Collection on Students and Teachers:
9. The contract between the SBAC and the USDoE states, “. . . the [SBAC] assessments systems developed with the RTTA grants will assess all students . . . will produce data (including student achievement data and student growth data) that can be used to inform determinations of individual principal and teacher effectiveness for purposes of evaluation (p. 2); . . .Comply with . . . working with the Department to develop a strategy to make student-level data that results from the assessment system available on an ongoing basis for research, including for prospective linking, . . .”
10. Missouri State Fiscal Stability Funds required agreement to the same components as Race to the Top Grant applications including enhancing the state’s longitudinal data system, and encouraging sharing of data systems among states. (See Nixon MOU)
11. Missouri has no laws preventing the Department of Education from collecting data, according to the National Data Model of 400 data points, which would include non-education related information such as religion, voting history, biometric data, etc.
a. Be it known, federal intent to track per federal register: http://missourieducationwatchdog.com/common-core-and-the-federal-governments-announcement-of-intent-to-track-students/
12. The Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) was amended by the USDoE in Dec. 2011 to exceed the agency’s statutory authority and thus, allows invasive data collecting on both students and teachers without clear definitions or full control of what “educational interests” do with the data once they have them. http://crazycrawfish.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/ferpa-does-not-protect-student-privacy-and-never-did/
V. Whereas the CCSSI are untested, unproven, introduce age inappropriate learning and change the definition of “college and career ready”.
13. Five of twenty-seven members of the review committee refused to sign off on the Standards because they were lowered. Algebra is being postponed to eighth and ninth grades. Children will not be required to memorize math facts. The Geometry Method was tried in Russia and thrown out. Classical Literature is to be down-played to 30% and students will study informational texts.
VI. Whereas the CCSSI assessments (SBAC and PARCC) are high stakes assessments, tying as much as 50% of teacher’s evaluations to test results and using a new accreditation system, MSIP-5, to grade school districts based on assessment results.
Therefore, for all of the above-stated reasons, we the following signatories ask this school board to protest the implementation of CCSSI in our school district and let our teachers be free to use their own tried and true methods and that assessment data be managed as per MO Revised Statute 160.518
Updates
May 2, 2014
I have spent the last few days researching the specific state statutes that govern our local board's authority over curriculum standards. Our team is currently finalizing a formal letter to the school board members to demand a public vote on a resolution against Common Core. I will provide a summary of their official responses once we receive them.
Reached 100 supporters
May 2, 2014
63 Comments
Why would we want to allow the Federal Government to intrude into our school system? Why would we want to implement standards created by corporations and special interest groups? I trust that the Sikeston School Board members will join with us in STOPPING common core standards from taking over what our local educators have worked so hard to develop.
the public needs to be brought in on any changes you make in the way our childern are being educated. They are our childern and we pay you to educate them the way we want them educated
please get rid of common core. my daughter has enough problems with math already and common core only makes it worse. no good can come from keeping it....it doesn't even make sense!
I can't even help my children with homework without confusing them. Math was much simpler before all this common core crap
Members of our school board: Please sign a resolution to withdraw any support of the Common Core Standards and Curriculum. We want to continue to have local oversight and control of our schools. Please understand the concerned citizens are not at war against you. We have spent a considerable amount of time studying Common Core and what we've learned is not in the best interests of our children, grandchildren, teachers or school system.
I encourage you to do everything in your power to protect our children from common core.
Stop common core. Vote no.
Sign Petition
We never post to your account. Social sign-in is used only to verify your signature.
Add a comment?
Your signature will be added via . Tell others why you're signing — it's optional.
By signing, you accept iPetitions Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Share Petition
Don't stop at signing, share the petition link with friends to multiply our impact
Copy link or share directly
Support Sikeston School Board in signing a Resolution to stop implementation of Common Core State Standards Initiative
Petition to Stop the Implementation of Common Core State Standards Initiative (CCSSI) 2014
Presented by Residentsof Sikeston R-6 School District
We the following parents and residents of Sikeston R-6 School District, sign this petition in an effort to show the school board our support in their collective effort to raise a voice of concern and opposition to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) through a resolution. We encourage the board to use their rights to govern our schools according to the Missouri Statutes.We, the following, stand with the board in opposition to the implementation of the CCSS for the following reasons:
I. Whereas CCSSI is Education without Representation:
1. CCSSI was never approved by Congress.
2. CCSSI was never approved by MO State legislators.
3. CCSSI was never formally reviewed and approved by our local school board.
4. CCSSI is thus not a state-led initiative and should not be called such; it was not commissioned by any state legislature, initiated or written by any State School Boards, nor by any local school board. The standards are copyrighted to non-government, trade organizations.
5. The State Board of Education was not authorized by language in the sections of SB 380, the Outstanding Schools Act, to transfer its authority to develop state standards to a non-governmental organization that controls the number and content of the standards
6. Personnel of Americas Choice, owned by Pearson, spearheaded the development of the Standards and personnel from Achieve, Inc., having no K-12 teaching experience, were chief architects of the Standards, while Missouri faculty representative of higher education and active classroom teachers from English and Mathematics did not participate in the drafting of the Standards as required by Missouri Revised Statute Section 160.514.
II. Whereas CCSSI is Taxation without Representation:
7. CCSSI is very expensive. Missouri’s Race to the Top application estimated costs to be over $740 million. Individual school districts are committed to paying unknown costs associated with implementing Common Core assessment plans and purchase of materials, which tax payers and their elected representatives never had any say about and which has not been tested.
III. Whereas CCSSI Violates the Intent of 3 Federal Education Laws to prohibit a federal role in curriculum and assessment development:
8. Department of Education Organizational Act of 1979; the General Education Provision Act and the Amended Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965, in summary, say, “The Federal Department of Education shall not be involved in developing, supervising, or controlling instructional materials or curriculum.”
a. Be it known that President Obama appropriated $4.35B in the American Recovery and Re-Investment Act to education if governors would adopt a national set of standards. See Missouri’s MOU here: http://www.moagainstcommoncore.com/documents (Nixon MOU for Common Core). These Standards were signed on to in 2009 before they were even written.
b. Be it known that the Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, appropriated $360M, to help develop a national standardized testing consortia known as SBAC and PARCC. The SBAC test, sub-contracted under the direction of CTB/McGraw Hill, is scheduled to be issued in MO the spring of 2015. http://dese.mo.gov/divimprove/assess/documents/AssessmentFAQ.pdf
c. Be it known that CCSSI is driven by massive special interest groups and corporations such as the Gates and Pearson Foundations – who stand to make billions of dollars by the schools having to purchase computers and software for every student, the Pearson e-books, and the Pearson-developed tests.
IV. Whereas CCSSI, Under the ESEA Waiver, Calls for Extensive, Invasive Data Collection on Students and Teachers:
9. The contract between the SBAC and the USDoE states, “. . . the [SBAC] assessments systems developed with the RTTA grants will assess all students . . . will produce data (including student achievement data and student growth data) that can be used to inform determinations of individual principal and teacher effectiveness for purposes of evaluation (p. 2); . . .Comply with . . . working with the Department to develop a strategy to make student-level data that results from the assessment system available on an ongoing basis for research, including for prospective linking, . . .”
10. Missouri State Fiscal Stability Funds required agreement to the same components as Race to the Top Grant applications including enhancing the state’s longitudinal data system, and encouraging sharing of data systems among states. (See Nixon MOU)
11. Missouri has no laws preventing the Department of Education from collecting data, according to the National Data Model of 400 data points, which would include non-education related information such as religion, voting history, biometric data, etc.
a. Be it known, federal intent to track per federal register: http://missourieducationwatchdog.com/common-core-and-the-federal-governments-announcement-of-intent-to-track-students/
12. The Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) was amended by the USDoE in Dec. 2011 to exceed the agency’s statutory authority and thus, allows invasive data collecting on both students and teachers without clear definitions or full control of what “educational interests” do with the data once they have them. http://crazycrawfish.wordpress.com/2013/12/26/ferpa-does-not-protect-student-privacy-and-never-did/
V. Whereas the CCSSI are untested, unproven, introduce age inappropriate learning and change the definition of “college and career ready”.
13. Five of twenty-seven members of the review committee refused to sign off on the Standards because they were lowered. Algebra is being postponed to eighth and ninth grades. Children will not be required to memorize math facts. The Geometry Method was tried in Russia and thrown out. Classical Literature is to be down-played to 30% and students will study informational texts.
VI. Whereas the CCSSI assessments (SBAC and PARCC) are high stakes assessments, tying as much as 50% of teacher’s evaluations to test results and using a new accreditation system, MSIP-5, to grade school districts based on assessment results.
Therefore, for all of the above-stated reasons, we the following signatories ask this school board to protest the implementation of CCSSI in our school district and let our teachers be free to use their own tried and true methods and that assessment data be managed as per MO Revised Statute 160.518
Updates
May 2, 2014
I have spent the last few days researching the specific state statutes that govern our local board's authority over curriculum standards. Our team is currently finalizing a formal letter to the school board members to demand a public vote on a resolution against Common Core. I will provide a summary of their official responses once we receive them.
Reached 100 supporters
May 2, 2014
63 Comments
If you are uncertain as to whether or not Common Core would be a good thing or a bad thing for our School District, listen to the teachers and students who are experiencing it first-hand. Common Core is not about educating our young by the best means possible. It is about money and control.
Why would we want to allow the Federal Government to intrude into our school system? Why would we want to implement standards created by corporations and special interest groups? I trust that the Sikeston School Board members will join with us in STOPPING common core standards from taking over what our local educators have worked so hard to develop.
the public needs to be brought in on any changes you make in the way our childern are being educated. They are our childern and we pay you to educate them the way we want them educated
please get rid of common core. my daughter has enough problems with math already and common core only makes it worse. no good can come from keeping it....it doesn't even make sense!
I can't even help my children with homework without confusing them. Math was much simpler before all this common core crap
Members of our school board: Please sign a resolution to withdraw any support of the Common Core Standards and Curriculum. We want to continue to have local oversight and control of our schools. Please understand the concerned citizens are not at war against you. We have spent a considerable amount of time studying Common Core and what we've learned is not in the best interests of our children, grandchildren, teachers or school system.
I encourage you to do everything in your power to protect our children from common core.
Stop common core. Vote no.
Help this petition grow
Share it with friends to help reach 250 signatures.
Sign Petition
We never post to your account. Social sign-in is used only to verify your signature.
Add a comment?
Your signature will be added via .
Tell others why you're signing — it's optional.
Signing with Google or Facebook verifies your signature instantly — no email needed.
By signing, you accept iPetitions Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Share Petition
Don't stop at signing, share the petition link with friends to multiply our impact
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
If you are uncertain as to whether or not Common Core would be a good thing or a bad thing for our School District, listen to the teachers and students who are experiencing it first-hand. Common Core is not about educating our young by the best means possible. It is about money and control.