By Anita B. Hoge:
Education Daily February. 25, 2015, quotes Secretary Duncan,
“Duncan: ‘Hard to fathom’ compromise with GOP on Title I portability.”
Let’s shine a little light on this. This was the same portability when the Senate Democrats were in power. Their version of the Reauthorization of ESEA in 2013 was called SB 1094. The only COMPROMISE was to get Democrats on board with CHOICE for all private and religious schools. Title I portability (all children are at-risk) and “direct student services” (meaningful choice funded by IDEA for all at-risk children) is embedded in the 2015 HR 5 and Alexander’s ESEA with convoluted definitions and mandates for all public, charter, private, Christian, and Catholic schools. See HR 5 Bastardizes Title I and IDEA: http://abcsofdumbdown.blogspot.com/2015/03/hr-5-bastardiizes-title-1-and-idea.html
[Background: In the older Reauthorization of ESEA legislation, SB 1094 and HR 5 from 2013, there was language in the bills and amendments that were submitted for Title I portability by both Democrats and Republicans. Democrats were having a hard time agreeing to choice for private and religious schools. Senator Reid never brought this bill to the floor for a vote when it was released out of committee. Why? The Republican version passed the House with flying colors…passed without a whimper. So, why did Reid hold up the vote in 2013 to Reauthorize ESEA? They didn’t have the votes. It looks worse now that parents know the content of the 2015 Reauthorization of ESEA bills.]
Title I funds “following the child” is not a new phenonoma. In fact, former Governor Mitt Romney and Republican candidate for President, had the exact same agenda for Title I and IDEA in 2012. Read closely: http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campaign-k-12/2012/05/romney_to_call_for_using_title.html
Romney Calls for Using Title I, IDEA Funds for School Choice
“Republicans in Washington have long been attracted to proposals to use federal funds for school vouchers, and in that context, Romney’s proposal is not unusual, Michael J. Petrilli, a vice president at the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. He described the Republican candidate’s school choice proposal as “an interesting idea,” though he said it could be difficult to implement, for a variety of reasons.
Federal per-student Title I and special-education funds, on their own, are probably not sufficient to cover many private school costs, though they could help if combined with state voucher money, Petrilli said. The broader challenge is that federal funding formulas currently do not distribute Title I and other funds in ways that make it easy to give it out individually among qualified students.
On the other hand, if the federal funding stream could be overhauled so that each qualified student was given a “backpack” of funding to carry to ANY school,…. Petrilli said.” (Emphasis added)
This is the agenda. Overhaul federal funding formulas and distribute these federal-per-student Title I funds and IDEA funds that would follow all children in a “backpack” of funding that would go to any public, charter, private, or religious school.
Who is a “qualified” student for choice?
How will private and religious schools pay for these services?
…since these funds “are probably not sufficient to cover many private school costs.” (Petrilli)
The devil is in the definitions. The definitions of at-risk and disabilities that go with Title I and IDEA have changed. You no longer have to be poor or handicapped. “Direct student services” are the psychological interventions and remediations for Common Core. Are private and religious schools taking into account that a choice child is at-risk of failing for not meeting Common Core psychological mental health standards (standards in the affective domain defined as attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions)? Do they realize that all schools will be mandated to deliver mental health interventions and remediation through IDEA? Are they willing and able to hire the social workers, psychologists, and psychiatrists that are mandated for these services? Is this choice?
In order for Obama and Duncan to get TOTAL control of ALL education in the United States, they need CHOICE called TITLE I PORTABILITY (where the money ‘follows the at-risk child’) and “DIRECT STUDENT SERVICES” (psychological interventions and remediation funded by IDEA that will “follow the at risk child.”) This was his equity in education plan, For Each and Every Child. http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report.pdf (Also see Compendium: https://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/eec/equity-excellence-commission-report-compendium.pdf )
Yes, Title I portability is for every child. This is the equitable education and equitable funding that Obama promised. Every child will be taught the same Common Core psychological standards, every child will be funded exactly the same, and every child will be remediated with psychological interventions exactly the same, with integrity and “fidelity.” (Teachers are retrained to deliver and teach EXACTLY as the scientifically evidence-based techniques were designed. (Response to Interventions, RTI) See graph below) http://www.rtinetwork.org/getstarted/evaluate/treatment-integrity-ensuring-the-i-in-rti and
What is not being discussed is, What will be measured and how will these non-academic standards like interpersonal skills, responsibility, honesty and integrity, or grit, be scored? Pennsylvania parents know because these social, emotional, and behavioral standards (attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions) were researched and piloted in our state assessment by NAEP, National Assessment of Educational Progress. NAEP and the ESEA Flexibility Waivers have incorporated these social, emotional, and behavioral standards into the Common Core standards. The Hoge complaint forced Pennsylvania Department of Education to remove the state assessment (EQA, Educational Quality Assessment) because the test was violating federal law, the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, PPRA. In October, 2014, former Governor Corbett expunged the Pennsylvania website portal of ALL the Interpersonal Skills Standards that were in the affective domain in order to hide them; however they remain in the model curriculum.
How much honesty does a student need in order to graduate? How do you score honesty? Is your child proficient in interpersonal skills? What about the violations of privacy in data tracking and trafficking of this personally identifiable information? Are these children coded for mental health disabilities? Will schools bill MEDICAID and expect the states to pick up the tab? Are DSM codes (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Health Disorders) used for billing? Will these codes affect your child in the future for having a mental health disability? Are these mental health wrap-around EPSDT services? (Early Periodic Screening and Diagnostic Testing) (See Pennsylvania House Select Committee Investigation on school based mental health services and MEDICAID billing: HR 37, Representative Sam Rohrer, Chairman, 1995: http://pahousearchives.org/?p=collections/findingaid&id=281&disabletheme=1 )
Congressman Kline and Senator Alexander have a lot to explain about their legislation.
UPDATE: Backroom Politics With Senators Alexander and Murray
So what’s happening with the deals in the backroom for the Reauthorization of ESEA?
Did we say COMPROMISE?
” A bipartisan deal to overhaul the No Child Left Behind education law is nearly complete and will be ready for a committee vote on April 13, two key Senate lawmakers said Monday.
“Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions committee, has been working with the top Democrat on the panel, Sen. Patty Murray of Washington.
“We are making significant progress in our negotiations,” the pair said in a joint statement.
“The committee has held several hearings, and staff continue to negotiate behind the scenes on a proposal designed to win support from Republicans and Democrats in the Senate.”
Do you like this “behind the scenes negotiating?” Do you like this CHOICE? This Reauthorization of ESEA will nationalize education. This is a federal power grab. This is government controlled “big brother.” Plus, these mental health DSM codes on every student will eventually eliminate the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution, through the backdoor. NRA, YOU BETTER PAY ATTENTION.
This is not the choice you want.
Vote NO on HR 5!
Vote NO on Alexander’s ESEA!
Vote NO on Obama’s Choice!
Stop ESEA Reauthorization!
(Source: Intensive Intervention;
© Copyright by Anita B. Hoge, 2015. All rights reserved.