Showing posts with label Texas School Board. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Texas School Board. Show all posts

SAT Scores Up - For Some, WAY Up

The College Board released the annual test results of its three programs—AP, SAT, and PSAT/NMSQT -- all in one report this year. Stacking them together gave interesting comparisons, but the news is fantastic.

An unprecedented number of students, including a large increase in minority and low-income students, participated and succeeded. Of the 1.67 million students who took the SAT, nearly half were minorities and nearly a fourth were low-income students. And the number of high school students who succeeded on at least one AP exam (earning at least a 3 out of 5) doubled in the past year.

The report did reveal a few areas that need attention very soon. First, too many students are missing out on opportunities. Thirty-nine percent of the 684,577 students who showed AP potential (indicated by high PSAT/NMSQT scores) didn’t enroll for a single AP class. Likewise, for SAT takers, 9 percent were close to achieving the college and career readiness benchmark and might have succeeded with less than a year of additional instruction.

I'll take those kind of problems every year, thank you very much. With the reports of the last twelve years, I'm very sure that no one was expecting to see the report show 39% of qualifying students, for one reason or another, didn't take advantage  of the AP courses. There are other College Readiness courses however. AP doesn't have a monopoly by any means (Despite what you may have heard from various groups like the Tea Party). So it would be interesting to see how many of those students made it into other programs.

For twelve years, nothing exciting has come from these reports. Comparatively, it is like these kids were being educated in another country. Since Common Core State Standards were implemented this last year (and for some the year before as well), I don't think it is much of a reach to suggest CCSS had something to do with this drastic change. And let’s note that this testing class is the first to have experienced the full run of No Child Left Behind, since kindergarten, which was supposed to have engineered gains in college readiness. Not so much. But let's do a little digging, just to see if this theory has any merit at all.

First we'll look at the states that didn't go to the Common Core State Standards. That would be (for last year) Texas, Wyoming and Virginia.

Overall, nationwide, 42.6% of SAT takers in the class of 2014 met the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark. This number has remained virtually unchanged over time. Among all U.S. public school test-takers, 39.1% met the benchmark. Some SAT takers are not in public schools, but in other programs.


In Texas, 33.9% of test-takers (60,732 students) met the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark. Among public school students, 31.9% met the benchmark (52,313 students).

The exam, showed that the average score on the math section of the SAT dropped four points from last year to 495. That was the lowest figure since 1992, when Texas students recorded an average score of 493. A perfect score is 800.
In reading, the Class of 2014 in Texas scored an average 476. That was down slightly from last year but still two points better than their worst showing in the past two decades. That occurred in 2012.

In writing, Texas students registered an average 461 for the third year in a row.

State education officials have attributed the declining SAT scores in Texas to an increase in the number of minority students taking the exam. Minorities generally perform worse than white students on standardized achievement tests like the SAT and ACT, the nation’s two leading college entrance exams.

However, California students outperformed Texans by big margins this year — 15 points in math and 22 points in reading. Demographics of the student populations in the two states are similar: California is 52.7 percent Hispanic and 25.5 percent white, while Texas is 51.3 percent Hispanic and 30 percent white.


In Wyoming, 81.4% of test-takers (140 students) met the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark. Among public school students, 85.4% met the benchmark (111 students). Only 3.3% of the students took the test.

I'm not sure that Wyoming helps us with our theory. While 81.4% is amazing, it also opens up a number of question, like, what happen to all of the other students?


In Virginia, 46.6% of test-takers (27,893 students) met the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark. Among public school students, 44.9% met the benchmark (23,603 students).

In 2012, which was a record year for Virginia, 43% made the benchmark.

Thus, Virginia continues to rise -- and with this continued show of growth, I understand why they would be hesitant to take on an "untested in the real world" change like CCSS.

Now let's look at California, Arizona and Washington state.


In California, 42.3% of test-takers (100,231 students) met the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark. Among public school students, 40.0% met the benchmark (82,004 students).

41.9% in the class of 2013. We talked a bit about California's success and challenges above so let's move on to Arizona


In Arizona, 48.5% of test-takers (10,973 students) met the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark. Among public school students, 47.2% met the benchmark (9,309 students).

2013 results show 37.1%. Note that they were very worried about changing over to CCSS would affect this year's results -- in a negative way. This is an amazing jump.


In Washington, 46.2% of test-takers (19,060 students) met the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark. Among public school students, 44.4% met the benchmark (16,148 students).

2013 shows only 39% made it.

NOTE in the report: However, about one in four Washington students in the SAT class of 2014 did not take a core curriculum. The same is true of test-takers overall.

We are missing a great deal. The scores I'm using are as general as you can get. The jumps from last year are affected by many variables, one of which is that the year before for many states was in the record low area, and teachers went to work with greater effort. Parent participation, funding, more parents home from war -- all of these things affect a child, and affect test scores.

No matter what the reasons however, last year, the kids did it right. Hoping for a good year for 2015.

Bully Texas gets the Back of Core's Hand

I recently signed a petition to stop the Texas State Education Board from censoring Climate Change from school books and curriculums. (Yes, Koch is involved, yawda yawda... not the point). The group pushing this effort against the board sent me back a thank you note and a letter of 'reasoning' which I thought was slightly odd, since I already signed the petition. Guessing that I might be missing something, I sipped a bit of coffee, wiped my eyes and took another shot at the email.

The reasoning is ... after reading the message... sent to me because they aren't getting much attention and they want me to post to Facebook with their message that they have designed to encourage the highest rate of success. So, now I have to read the message carefully because my Friends list is filled with writers, artists, business specialist, doctors,and many other intelligent people, and I don't want to look stupid, just to get this group a few more names on the petition.

Their letter isn't bad, and the fangs are interesting:
Texas Board of Education member David Bradley is trying to stop students from learning the facts about climate change. Bradley is pressuring fellow Board members to approve new social studies textbooks for K-12 students that deny the scientific consensus on climate change. 
Since Texas is the nation’s second largest buyer of textbooks, books produced for the state are often sold around the country. Therefore, if the Texas Board of Education approves scientifically inaccurate textbooks, students nationwide will be negatively impacted. 
Bradley said recently, "Whether global warming is a myth or whether it's actually happening, that's very much up for debate. Don't listen to anyone who tells you otherwise.” 
The number one School Text book buyer in the nation is California.

Historically publishers bow to the whims of Texas and California both. The amount of money involved with the state wide purchase of these books is staggering. The publishers charge a fortune for these text books as well. Corporate battles for territory and contracts are fairly famous in the book world. In fact, you will rarely see a demonstration of political war, abominable greed and vicious competition greater than demonstrated by these publishers during the book buying season.

It is true though, that the other states tend to wait to see what Texas and California are going to purchase. Then they add their orders in with one of them, to lower their own costs. So, this part of the claim above has some validity.

Back in 2010 Texas went radical right and took their school system with them. The alterations to the school curriculum standards are staggeringly agenda driven and boarders on indoctrination at a level that is embarrassing to see in the United States. Without a single shred of apology the TEKS standard melds the Bible and Christian Dogma into History, Social Studies and US Government, trampling the First Amendment rights of any non-Christian student and dashing the Texas Constitution against the wall like it was the paper at the bottom of a bird cage.

Their view of history dismisses all historic evidence, laughs at the letters, and journals of the founding fathers, denies any contradiction and boldly states that the Founding Fathers were Christian (everyone of them, and they have the fake quotes to prove it from their heinously concocted history books they had written by real live pseudo-historians) and that Moses, after receiving the Ten Commandments from God, brought to the world the first written form of conduct, and that this was the basis for the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights.

There is so much wrong with that notion I have no clue where to start. I mean, to describe the Constitution as a document which imposes a guide of conduct for the citizens of this country is ludicrous. It is exactly the opposite, in fact, as it mostly focuses on the many ways in which government may not impede on the nations conduct. Free right of assembly, protest, pursuit of happiness, engagement in business, free to speak, free to engage in criticism, absolute freedom from dogmatic, religious or philosophical decrees which do not suit us. And not a single sentence which begins Thou Shalt Not... and curiously no mention of God, Jesus or the bible throughout the whole things.

"Well, what they meant was..." these Mad Hats tell me, to which I say, "No, what they meant was No Part of the Constitution was Based on the Christian Religion!"

And they were wise beyond imagination for keeping the Christian religion out of that document and out of our Government. Christianity is a great servant, but a terrifying master. I defy the recall of a single government whose doctrine was defined by Christianity (any religion really, but we'll stick with this one) which did not, in short order, become twisted, oppressive, and then warish against the rest of the world, destroying not only those they warred against, but their own  citizens.  Nope, don't bring up the city-state of Rome. They are only well behaved because we'll kick their ass, and the first chance they got in centuries for getting in on world domination, they took without hesitation -- when they blessed and partnered up with Hitler during World War II.
say "

No, that experiment is well known, and deeply explored, and found to be the doorway to all things dark and terrible.

And so, thus, we have the State of Texas. And this state Education Board ready to disregard the huge mound of evidence gathered from all over the world, plus the physical evidence and the experience and expertise of every credible group of scientists (which is true by the way. Prior to the adoption of their new statement in 2007, the AAPG was the only major scientific organization that rejected the finding of significant human influence on recent climate. Their new statement recanted that claim and brought in further evidence which changed their minds.) Climate Change is real and we, the human race, are definitely causation for its rapid alteration. Hell, two more years and we won't have a North Pole ice cap.We barely have one now. What are these teachers in Texas going to say then?
It's God's way of telling us that Santa Claus is not the meaning of Christmas.
Setting aside for a moment that I don't believe Belief is a relevant factor in the Climate Change debate, not to teach it at all is a direct assault on those kids. It is the worst kind of censorship.

But, you might ask, wouldn't the people who write these text books, school text books, which are suppose to be factual, put that information in the text books if it was relevant to the lesson?

Answer: no. Texas is such a golden goose that the Publishers will hire a writer willing to put in the text books anything thing Texas decides they want in there. I'm not kidding. Here are reports from professors who have gone through some of the new text books to see if they are inline with the TEKS standards. It will be enough to go through the Executive summary to dash all doubt with disturbing evidence. Those kids are screwed and I'm really hoping that either petitions like this one, or maybe the Blaine Amendment inside the Texas State Constitution will make enough trouble for this Department of Education to unseat them all.

What irks me however, is exactly this problem with the publishers. They should tell Texas to go screw themselves, and they are not in the fiction business, they write, produce and sell  scholastic textbooks, and kids depend on them to get their facts straight. School books are like the highest court of authority when you are in grade school. If it says it in there, it has to be true -- even if it is not. I'm very disgusted at the ease these publishers have discarded this trust of our nations children. Which brings me to Common Core State Standards and my gratitude for their existence.

I do ask that you sign the petition, but my gut tells me that our country is stronger than this school board. That through the powers of our Constitution, and the voting/recall process, this is going to get straightened out and those responsible will be brought to task. It is a shame that this is likely only going to be able to happen, after they use the educational funds to purchase millions of dollars of useless school books. That is going to be a budget shock of dire consequence. Now, if they had enacted and ready the CCSS system, it wouldn't be so bad. How?

New York City, was one of the ground zero testing sites for CCSS. It was a huge project and I've chatted a little with Joel Klein, who was thrown into the position of heading the changes -- having no experience in this area, he was still driven and willing to do a good job, which he did. Changing over was perceived to be a huge undertaking, though the reality proved better than expected. Inside of this project, the EngageNY project was created, which designed, wrote, and published 1000s of resources and books for the whole of New York City, which created specifically to take advantage of the CCSS. What they came up with is of a quality you can't get without serious cash investment. These books and lessons rock -- at least everyone of them I've checked out has exceeded what I expected.

The books are all electronic format. So the school requires readers of some type, which can handle PDF format. Tablets are often the best choice I'm told. But supporting these books are audio lessons and video lessons as well. Like I said, it is a huge scholastic resource.

Yes, all very well and good you say, but how does that help Texas once they come back to reality and find they are broke?

Every book, video, audio, lesson and resource in the EngageNY project is published under the Creative Commons Copyright, and or the TLS/CTAC copyright. In easy-speak this means that no, you can not sell them or use them in a class which you are getting paid to teach (private school), but If you are a teacher of a public school who wants to use these materials for public students.. go for it  No fee, no charge and hey, text us or tweet us if you have questions. Hundreds of teachers in NY used these things every day. Happy to help. 

EngageNY even has Social Studies, Science and Physical Education lessons that are CCSS aligned. Every one of them developed by teams of top educators... none of which would write a single sentence for Texas TEKS. There are somethings you just don't do... which is why I'm not going to be concerned at all, in five or six years, when the School Systems are up and running with CCSS, and teachers have Internet forums, Tweeks, and groups they have created, and sharing lessons , ideas, and methods back and forth with each other -- when they suddenly realize, they don't need these publishers at all, and in fact, there is no way for these publishers to produce the quality of material that a group of teachers and developers online can produce for no cost to the school.

EngageNY is only one resource library. PBS has a huge collection of lesson and activities. In fact there was a call out the other day for anyone who might have a lesson dealing with Ebola. A bit of looking, maybe an hour, and I found one on the PBS site. After taking a bit to go through the material to see that it was par for class room standards, I shot the link over to the teacher who asked about it and close to 30 others picked up on the tweet. Can't get that from a publisher.

And when these Judas who would take their silver at the injury of our nation's kids, because of a few very silly people wave some cash, when these greedy men fall into bankruptcy, I'll probably have a beer and toast the failing of their sun.

No... What the Founding Fathers Meant Was....

George Washington at a Masonic Lodge
I fell into a conversation regarding the educational abuse that Texas has brought down on its children tonight -- and was assaulted by such arrogant ignorance that I could barely think. Apparently there lives in several minds the belief that Moses was the inspiration for the Constitution of the United States and even though the founding Fathers carefully debated, and the strongly opposed putting "God" in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights, or the Manga Carter ... I was told bold faced by several people that --. The Founding Fathers were so deeply Christian that God was Assumed to be in there. 

I stuttered in amazement at the audacity of this statement, and the depth of its error. The statement is so utterly untrue, insulting and ... well.. un-American.

I really do not believe that they understand the depth of error they have stumbled into. The Constitution was not unique, really, in that it gave all men their freedom of choice regarding religion. It could be argued that several other governments allowed this before the Founding Fathers crafted those words. What was unique in this regard was that the Freedom of Religion they crafted also protected a citizen's right of "No Religion." The right not to chose was globally unique. No citizen was restricted by his unbelief from any office or any profession. And this is expressed not only as "permission" but as a protected right. If there is cause for the Exceptionalist to crow American values, this is definitely one of the most uniquely American descriptors.

I would also like to point out, that every time this line has been challenged and a molecule of favor to any one religion or another has been gained by hook and crook -- between the time of victory and the moment that victory was smashed by constitutional protection, there has always been shown by these radical and un-American Christians a devastating example of why we don't go there.

It is seriously doubtful that all of the Founding Fathers were Christian. Jefferson wasn't. There is tons of documentation supporting this fact, from his own letters and journals to the preachers of that time who campaigned against him because he was an atheist.

Ben Franklin the first American was not Christian either, again, plenty of documentation for that.

George Washington was private about his worship, but it is fairly clear that he was a Deistic, and a Freemason. There is tons of evidence for this, including the writings of preachers he befriended, and other good friends.

I'm not a historian, but I do know how to follow and look up references. This is a page I found, which did quite a bit of work:  Founding Fathers were Christian at all.

"... wish to return this country to its beginnings, so be it... because it was a climate of Freethought.  The Founders were students of the European Enlightenment. Half a century after the establishment of the United States, clergymen complained that no president up to that date had been a Christian.  In a sermon that was reported in newspapers, Episcopal minister Bird Wilson of Albany, New York, protested in October 1831: "Among all our presidents from Washington downward, not one was a professor of religion, at least not of more than Unitarianism." 
There is a small problem with that quote. It is highly possible that Bird Wilson wasn't actually the one who wrote and performed that sermon, but it was actually delivered by James Renwick Willson, a Reformed Presbyterian or Covenanter. This error of attribute is everywhere, even as far back as Paul Boller's book on Washington's religion,
It is a little telling -- regarding the vehemence of the Covenanters -- that the British during WWII named one of their most fierce tanks the same name. Perhaps also telling was that the design was prone to overheating, and was soon discontinued
Willson's sermon was still largely accurate, but it lacks the authority of being by James Wilson's son. The story of all of this is here, and though it changes nothing, I include it for accuracy. I would like to add something from that page however, just in case you decide not to follow the link, about James Renwick Wilson:
Finally, note that Rev. Willson was an early prominent member of the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Covenanted and they were notable dissidents on the US Constitution. They believed its lack of supplication to God, absence of a religious test, and absence of explicit covenant with the Triune God of the Bible made it a document, at the very least, inconsistent with their view of covenant theology and civil government. (At the worst it is an anti-Christian, infidel document). This is the very group to whom Gary North dedicates his ebook. And though North doesn't cite Rev. Willson, many of Willson's same arguments against the US Constitution are fleshed out in detail in North's book.
Rev. Willson was a true "dominionist," and he should remind the Reconstructionists that a dominionist theology is inconsistent with the US Constitution.
This is a far cry from Moses being on everyone's mind as they hid the word of God inside the text of the Constitution of the United States.

Further on, in that same sermon :

When the war was over and the victory over our enemies won, and the blessings and happiness of liberty and peace were secured, the Constitution was framed and God was neglected. He was not merely forgotten. He was absolutely voted out of the Constitution. The proceedings, as published by Thompson, the secretary, and the history of the day, show that the question was gravely debated whether God should be in the Constitution or not, and after a solemn debate he was deliberately voted out of it.... There is not only in the theory of our government no recognition of God's laws and sovereignty, but its practical operation, its administration, has been conformable to its theory. Those who have been called to administer the government have not been men making any public profession of Christianity.... Washington was a man of valor and wisdom. He was esteemed by the whole world as a great and good man; but he was not a professing Christian (quoted by Remsberg, pp. 120-121,).

So, that is a great deal to think about on his topic and certainly there are many references both given and named which have backed up this sermon's accusations.

In research you find quickly, that on any topic of significance there are always two or more sides. I find the topics with three sides to be the most interesting myself. As research is being done, points of interest and events are located. When a point is suspected of being of major significance to the topic, supporting documentation is then searched out to validate the point. Each of these discovered documents are then judge for validity and then appraised as "weight" This appraisal includes matters such as "who wrote it?" like I pointed out that this particular sermon would have more value if it was written by Bird, instead of James, because of the connections and position Bird had. Other factors include where was it found? Is it supported by other documentation? Was it published or private? And so on.

A prime factor, and one I always give a great deal of weight to, is when I discover that one of the contesting sides has ancestor witnesses who decry present day belief. We have that here.

The Christians of that time, and nearly every outspoken Minister of every sect,  of every state in the union, is reported by sermon, membership diary, newspaper article or non-fiction account of the day in book form to have denounced the lack of Christianity incorporated in their Government. Going so far as to condemn the government. The accusation is incessant in fact. The accounts of heathenism, barbarism, heresy and even public protests are all over the place.

This suggests to me, a strong indication that the Founding Fathers were not publically believed to be religious. A few of them, in private letters and journals suggested more than a nodding dedication to Christianity, but also these same express a strong need not to publicly demonstrate their beliefs, as it could be used by others to give them a foothold into government preference of Christianity over other religions. Indeed, the protestations of modern Christians demonstrate their fears to be all too true.

From this point however... I'l let the great men of our nation speak for themselves.

Krieger, Robbins and Koch -- To Defile your High School

In answer to :

New College Board US History Framework Defames America
Posted on 18 September 2014.
By Larry Krieger and Jane Robbins

3rd person present: defames
  1. damage the good reputation of (someone); slander or libel.

By Krieger's own admission, there is nothing false or misleading or untrue inside the AP material. So,like the rest of the article -- his Title is designed to create an insult where none exists, and then fan the flames. If you read his article, you will find that he often incites hatred and division without cause or actual fact. His rhetoric is confused, and misleading -- with all the dazzle of a con-man. But we need to keep in mind that Larry Krieger owns InsiderPrep, which is a business that creates and sells books and materials to help a student prep for the AP classes and tests. -- Well, it did. See, Larry's Prep course is based on the old study methods, where memorizing is more important than critical thinking. The AP History program has changed drastically, in that it is only a Framework now, not a full course like it was in the past. So, there is no ...series of chronological chapters that match the sequence of topics in the College Board’s official APUSH Course Description booklet. Which is how Larry Krieger's program is developed. No. Now it is a comprehensive, adaptable Framework.

The Course and Exam Description (.pdf/1.81MB) includes the concept outline, curriculum framework, and sample exam questions. These resources, alongside state and local requirements for American history courses, help teachers build their syllabi. 
A new Curriculum Framework Evidence Planner helps teachers customize the framework by specifying the historical content selected for student focus. It can also be provided to students to track the historical evidence examined for each concept and as review for the AP Exam. 
Schools and teachers develop their own curriculum for AP courses. Submitting a syllabus to the AP Course Audit ensures teachers have a thorough understanding of AP U.S. History course requirements and are authorized to teach AP.

Oops!  Since Every school, indeed every teacher can create her own syllabi, paying attention to areas and focuses of history which are most in line with the state and local focus-- Larry Krieger's chapter by chapter Insider program, is no longer useful.  So Larry has nothing to sell and his publications are no longer marketable. -- Unless he talks you into believing that the new AP Framework design is somehow bad. This is very difficult to do, because there is nothing false, misleading or wrong with the facts or the framework. So, he has to go after something with a lot of emotion behind it, something that will cut through logic and the extra cost of putting together their own AP classes.

Thus begins Larry's impassioned campaign against AP History, where he takes out the examples of the New AP, twists some things up, reads a little too much into what is not really there -- since none of it has to be there, it is all up to the teacher and the school what to build with the Framework -- and begins screaming Leftist Democrats!

To Larry Krieger and Jane Robbins,

After reading your article New College Board US History Framework Defames America, I'm appalled by your actions and your rhetoric. If the student doesn't already know and understand the points of history that you keep harping on, she's not going to be in an AP class, is she? Is there any way -- using any stretch of the imagination -- that a student who is ready for Advance Placement isn't going to know who George Washington was and what he was to our country? Or about the soldiers in WWII? Or about Martin Luther King Jr.? Your arguments are blatant falsehoods.

It is, however, very likely that she will have not been introduced to the full scope of slavery, or to the existence of the Black Panthers. Or to the fact that American citizens who were Japanese were put into camps during WWII, and all of their businesses and lands seized.

Advanced Placement (AP) is a program in the United States and Canada, created by the College Board, which offers college-level curricula and examinations to high school students. American colleges and universities often grant placement and course credit to students who obtain high scores on the examinations.

The College Board collected criteria from 3000+ colleges and universities. Using those combined criteria they created a test. Passing that test fulfills what the 3000+ universities and colleges expected a student to know.  Who gave them the authority?  That question can only be to incite fear, doubt and distrust. It's dishonesty is bitter.

The College Board is a mission-driven not-for-profit organization that connects students to college success and opportunity. 
Founded in 1900, the College Board was created to expand access to higher education. Today, the membership association is made up of over 6,000 of the world’s leading educational institutions and is dedicated to promoting excellence and equity in education.
Each year, the College Board helps more than seven million students prepare for a successful transition to college through programs and services in college readiness and college success — including the SAT and the Advanced Placement Program. The organization also serves the education community through research and advocacy on behalf of students, educators and schools.
You know these facts, and that is the damming part of everything. It is obvious that your intention is not what is best for the students, or the country. Your primary purpose is to cause dissent. You are inciting parents and school boards with meaningless verbiage. City upon the hill?

(1) Diversity among people allows for a variety of ways in which God may be honored. (2) Acts of kindness by the rich toward the poor - and a spirit of obedience by the poor toward the rich - further manifest the spirit of ideal public life. (3) Common need among individuals with different qualities is necessary to society.
...soe the way to drawe men to the workes of mercy is not by force of Argument from the goodness or necessity of the worke for though this course may enforce a rationall minde to some present Act of mercy as is frequent in experience, yet it cannot worke such a habit in a Soule as shall make it prompt upon all occasions to produce the same effect but by frameing these affeccions of love in the hearte which will as naturally bring forthe the other, as any cause doth produce the effect.
"History will not judge our endeavors—and a government cannot be selected—merely on the basis of color or creed or even party affiliation. Neither will competence and loyalty and stature, while essential to the utmost, suffice in times such as these. For of those to whom much is given, much is required... " -- JFK

I read your examples in the News Week. It was like listening to con-man, or a fortune teller.  as you stretched your illogical explanations to fit across the test questions and 'wrong answers' to make a drum to beat on. You are not a teacher. Teachers care about their student's future. You only care about your past. You offer only  a scam, and you are spreading fear and intolerance where none exists.

This part really gave me a laugh:
To his continued horror, Manifest Destiny suffered the same fate as the Founders. An idea Krieger taught for years as “the belief that America had a mission to spread democracy and new technology across the continent” was described in the framework as “built on a belief in white racial superiority and a sense of American cultural superiority.”
Which from the outset Manifest Destiny—vast in program, in its sense of continentalism—was slight in support. It lacked national, sectional, or party following commensurate with its magnitude. The reason was it did not reflect the national spirit. The thesis that it embodied nationalism, found in much historical writing, is backed by little real supporting evidence In 1845 John L. O'Sullivan coined the term "manifest destiny" in reference to a growing conviction that the United States was preordained by God to expand throughout North America and exercise hegemony over its neighbors. In the United States Magazine and Democratic Review (July–August 1845, p. 5) he argued for "the fulfillment of our manifest destiny to overspread the continent allotted by Providence for the free development of our yearly multiplying millions.

O'Sullivan's original conception of manifest destiny was not a call for territorial expansion by force. He believed that the expansion of U.S.-style democracy was inevitable, and would happen without military involvement as whites (or "Anglo-Saxons") emigrated to new regions. O'Sullivan  described the agency of Manifest Destiny as a "irresistible army of Anglo-Saxon emigration," supported the Confederacy and the idea that slavery was the only way for whites and blacks to live together. I'd say the current AP characterization is pretty accurate.

So.. what part of "built on a belief in white racial superiority and a sense of American cultural superiority" is mis-represented? It sounds more like you have been teaching this wrong to hundreds of students for your whole career, and now you wish to compound that misguided definition even further.
They also disagreed with the College Board over how children should learn, with Krieger and his allies preferring a curriculum based on memorizing facts to one based on critical thinking.
I'm not going to even try to make that statement anything other than it is -- robot non-thinkers are your goal. But I forget. You aren't a historian, you are a high school teacher. You are not an expert in education, or someone qualified to actually judge a full curriculum. You are only qualified to follow one, and from all that you have said, you aren't very good at that either.

Your partner, Jane Robbins, has used this statement several times:
Defenses of the College Board's revised Advanced Placement U.S. History (APUSH) Curriculum Framework have ranged from "it's a balanced document" to "teachers will have flexibility" to "what's wrong with a leftist slant?" None of these defenses should be acceptable.
Except she's lying. Flat out lying, like she does many times in her writing. "What's wrong with a leftist slant" is never said by the College Board. The Framework can just as easily be used to create a Far Right Conservative course. Again,your statement is only there to incite, to cause anger about something that doesn't exist. Also, just because you don't like the answer "teachers will have flexibility" does not make it invalid or unacceptable, and having you say this over and over, doesn't make it any more valid.

Heartland Institute is the hand puppets of the Koch brothers. That's all this is -- another Koch brother propaganda machine. Their goal, which they have stated proudly, several times, is the removal of the Department of Education, and to push publish schools out of existence. More here. This alteration you are promoting is designed to diminish the ability of public schools so that they become ineffectual.

You are making this a political agenda, when it has nothing to do with politics. The College Board is not a government agency. They are a business. A business which is offering students a step up into college. They are professionals who gathered the criteria and made the program to fit that criteria.

History will remember this: the propaganda, the Koch brothers, you and the false front businesses and groups you have created. That list of people you have in this article? I've researched them all. I'm amazed they haven't run you out of the state.

The students will remember this, and they will not remember you kindly, when they achieve no credit, no placement and arrive to college unprepared.

Rick Perry - Neutered Koch Drone

I'm seriously appalled that a Republican candidate for President whose platform includes doing away with the Department of Education was at the top of the polls last month. Rick Perry wants to do away with Commerce, Education and Energy. Could it be possible that he is a Mouth Piece Drone for the Koch brothers? He deferentially acts like a mouth piece drone. Cracks under pressure too.
Other frightening aspects of Perry include - he is for the idea of people beating children. He sees a world where everyone is free to pray to his god in school. In fact that should be mandatory. His state (TX) has the worst school performance in the country and he cut huge amounts away from the schools. Then he turned down $700 Million in Federal aid for the schools of his state, because he didn't want to bring his schools up to the standards set by the Federal Education.. like getting the right books for kids to learn from and stuff.
This man.. this man who is a direct adversary against your child's ability to gain a basic education in public schools was at the TOP OF THE POLLS last month.
I'm not sure what TV Ads are telling you about Perry, or Obama or any candidate, but I'm very sure, they are lying to you. Find Facts! It's not that hard on the Internet. Seriously. Websites like the one I have above are very easy to locate and deal with direct quotes about the issues. I have several good research web sites listed on the side bar of this blog. Check them out. 


*NOTE : This was written before I realized that TEKS was already in place, and the State Board of Education had already fallen into the hands of extremist. My reaction to Perry at the time of this writing was Deep Concern and Caution. Now that I've learned more about his actions, goals and about the current status of his State, my reaction has leveled out at Horrified. 

Dance of the Dead, by Goethe

The poem  Dance of the Dead, by Goethe  is a chilling and vivid depiction of a supernatural dance of the dead, an eerie scene where the dead...