By Bill Korach www.thereportcard.org
Unless you live in Northern Waziristan, you will be aware that the IRS, by their own admission targeted conservative organizations and Christian organization for special audits and harassment. Those group that applied for non-profit status were not only audited by the IRS, but some of them were visited by the FBI and the BATF. Many of these organizations applied 2-3 years ago, and still have no word. Apparently, the IRS used keywords like “patriot” “conservative” “Christian” “Tea Party” and so forth to identify potential Obama administration enemies. Those conservatives who suspected that the IRS was targeting conservative groups were dubbed conspiracy theorists. Well, there was a conspiracy.
So what if the Department of Education had a database on every child in school. What of their religion was one of the data points? What if party affiliation was a data point? Well, guess what, under the Common Core Standard (CCSS), such a database is being built right now. Could that information be used to intimidate administration opponents? Unheard of-until now. If there is anything more important to American families than their money, it is their children. The plan for a huge national CCSS database is now in the implementation phase.
Michelle Malkin writes:
According to the New York Daily News, Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, echoing parents across New York City, blasted the tracking database in a letter to government officials: “I don’t want my kids’ privacy bought and sold like this.” This Wednesday, prompted by parental objections, Oklahoma state representatives unanimously passed House Bill 1989 — the Student Data Accessibility, Transparency and Accountability Act — to prohibit the release of confidential student data without the written consent of the student’s parent or guardian.
As I noted in last week’s column, the national Common Core student database was funded with Obama stimulus money. Grants also came from the liberal Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (which largely underwrote and promoted the top-down Common Core curricular scheme). A division of the conservative Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. built the database infrastructure. A nonprofit startup, “inBloom, Inc.,” evolved out of this strange-bedfellows partnership to operate the invasive database, which is compiling everything from health-care histories, income information, and religious affiliations to voting status, blood types, and homework completion.
Mallory Sauer in the New American writes:
The fact that Common Core Standards require children’s personal information to be provided to a database that can be expected to sell or share the data to unspecified companies is worrisome to many parents and educators. “It leads to total control and total tracking of the child,” said Mary Black, curriculum director for Freedom Project Education, an organization that provides classical K-12 online schooling. “It completely strips the child of his or her own privacy.”
Schools will not only collect objective facts about students but gain a more intimate knowledge as well — even profiles of students’ attitudes and predictions of their futures that could then be used by the schools to shape outcomes. The DOE released a brief in October 2012 entitled “Enhancing, Teaching and Learning Through Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics,” in which the following was stated about data mining procedures:
A student learning database (or other big data repository) stores time-stamped student input and behaviors captured as students work within the system. A predictive model combines demographic data (from an external student information system) and learning/behavior data from the student learning database to track a student’s progress and make predictions about his or her future behaviors or performance, such as future course outcomes and dropouts.
Within the February report, the DOE displayed photographs of the actual technology that will be used on students, if the department’s plan is fully implemented. What they call the “four parallel streams of affective sensors” will be employed to effectively “measure” each child. The “facial expression camera,” for instance, “is a device that can be used to detect emotion…. The camera captures facial expressions, and software on the laptop extracts geometric properties on faces.” Other devices, such as the “posture analysis seat,” “pressure mouse,” and “wireless skin conductance sensor,” which looks like a wide, black bracelet strapped to a child’s wrist, are all designed to collect “physiological response data from a biofeedback apparatus that measures blood volume, pulse, and galvanic skin response to examine student frustration.”
Dr. Sandra Stotsky, in her major study for the Pioneer Institute says: “The Common Core Standards System Intrudes on Student and Family Privacy”
A particularly troubling component of the Common Core Initiative is its
connection to the collection and dissemination of personal student data.
Analysis of this issue reveals how Common Core is merely one part of a much broader plan by the federal government to track individuals from birth
through their participation in the workforce.
Progressive educators and bureaucrats, such as those currently in control in the Department of Education, have long advocated sweeping national control over education as a means of matching the citizenry to the workforce needs of industry. One prominent progressive reformist, Marc Tucker of the National Center on Education and the Economy, described this view in a now-famous letter to Hillary Clinton shortly after the 1992 election. Tucker
promoted what is, to conservatives, a dystopia of authoritarian control: “remold[ing] of the entire American system for human resource development . . . – a seamless system of unending skill development that begins in the home with the very young and continues through school, postsecondary education and
An essential component of creating this “seamless system of unending skill development” is the construction of massive data systems, so that individuals
can be tracked through school and beyond. But a federal statute prohibits
the Department of Education from maintaining a national student database.109
The Administration has discovered a way to evade this prohibition: Coerce the states into building the databases, and then change the law so the data can be shared.
What kinds of data might be included in the SLDS? According to the National Education Data Model,113 a myriad of information such as health-care history, disciplinary record, family income range, family voting statu (PII) from disclosure to outside entities. That changed, however, in January 2012, when the Department issued new regulations eviscerating the protections contained in the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).114 The new regulations allow transmission of students’ PII – without parental consent – to any governmental or private entity designated by the Department and
others as an “authorized representative,” for the purpose of evaluating an
education program. Any PII the Department (or any other educational entity) acquires can now be shared with, for example, labor and public- health agencies. The student’s parents would have no right to object; indeed,
they would probably never know the disclosure had been made. These other
agencies would then have access to a wealth of personal data.
The Department of Labor makes no bones about what these agencies are doing: “developing or improving state workforce longitudinal data systems with
individual level information [and] enabling workforce data to be matched with education data to create longitudinal data systems . . . .
through the Common Core assessments, and with the new regulations
that gut FERPA, the primary “challenges”118 to this effort have been swept
So CCSS database will also be used by the Federal Government to assign a future for Johnny, much like the Soviet Union picked future engineers or salt miners based upon data collected by the time students were ten years old. The Soviets used to call that a “GOSPLAN.” So if you want to open the door for more government harassment or having the Federal Government determine your child’s future, CCSS might be right up your ally. Otherwise beware.