Categorized | commentary

What if the Department of Education Used The Common Core Student Data Like the IRS Used Data to target Obama Enemies?


IRS Targets Obama Enemies

IRS Targets Obama Enemies

By Bill Korach


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

the  workplace.”108

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.


Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Delicious Stumbleupon

This post was written by:

- who has written 964 posts on The Report Card.

Contact the author

Comments are closed.

Click the “LIKE” button below to follow us on Facebook

Donate to The Report Card

Subscribe to Newsletters

Social links powered by Ecreative Internet Marketing