President Trump Has One Day to Veto FEPA Before It Becomes Law

Education Secretary Betsy DeVoss and President Donald Trump at St. Andrew Catholic School in Orlando, FL

If President Donald Trump does not veto The Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act (FEPA) (H.R. 4174) (S 2046) by tomorrow, Saturday, January 12, it becomes law.

Jane Robbins in 2017 provided a great description of what this bill will do. FEPA, she wrote, “encourages all federal agencies to share the data they maintain on American citizens and to make that data available for ‘research’ by outside interests. All this would be done according to rules set by each agency and without the knowledge or consent of the citizens whose data would be disclosed and scrutinized.”

“In a free society, the government is subordinate to the citizen. If it wants to use his data for something he didn’t agree to, it should first obtain his consent. FEPA operates according to the contrary principle – that government is entitled to do whatever it wants with a citizen’s data and shouldn’t be hindered by his objection,” Robbins stated.

What data could that be? Robbins said to consider all of the data collected by the U.S. Department of Education on a FAFSA form for instance which you can see below:

1. Student’s Last Name:
2. Student’s First Name:
3. Student’s Middle Initial:
4. Student’s Permanent Mailing Address:
5. Student’s Permanent City:
6. Student’s Permanent State:
7. Student’s Permanent ZIP Code:
8. Student’s Social Security Number:
9. Student’s Date of Birth:
10. Student’s Telephone Number:
11. Student’s Driver’s License Number:
12. Student’s Driver’s License State:
13. Student’s E-mail Address:
14. Student’s Citizenship Status:
15. Student’s Alien Registration Number:
16. Student’s Marital Status:
17. Student’s Marital Status Date:
18. Student’s State of Legal Residence:
19. Was Student a Legal Resident Before January 1, 2012?
20. Student’s Legal Residence Date:
21. Is the Student Male or Female?
22. Register Student With Selective Service System?
23. Drug Conviction Affecting Eligibility?
24. Parent 1 Educational Level:
25. Parent 2 Educational Level:
26. High School or Equivalent Completed?
27a. Student’s High School Name:
27b. Student’s High School City:
27c. Student’s High School State:
28. First Bachelor’s Degree before 2017-2018 School Year?
29. Student’s Grade Level in College in 2017-2018:
30. Type of Degree/Certificate:
31. Interested in Work-study?
32. Student Filed 2015 Income Tax Return?
33. Student’s Type of 2015 Tax Form Used:
34. Student’s 2015 Tax Return Filing Status:
35. Student Eligible to File a 1040A or 1040EZ?
36. Student’s 2015 Adjusted Gross Income:
37. Student’s 2015 U.S. Income Tax Paid:
38. Student’s 2015 Exemptions Claimed:
39. Student’s 2015 Income Earned from Work:
40. Spouse’s 2015 Income Earned from Work:
41. Student’s Total of Cash, Savings, and Checking Accounts:
42. Student’s Net Worth of Current Investments:
43. Student’s Net Worth of Businesses/Investment Farms:
44a. Student’s Education Credits:
44b. Student’s Child Support Paid:
44c. Student’s Taxable Earnings from Need-Based Employment Programs:
44d. Student’s College Grant and Scholarship Aid Reported in AGI:
44e. Student’s Taxable Combat Pay Reported in AGI:
44f. Student’s Cooperative Education Earnings:
45a. Student’s Payments to Tax-Deferred Pensions & Retirement Savings:
45b. Student’s Deductible Payments to IRA/Keogh/Other:
45c. Student’s Child Support Received:
45d. Student’s Tax Exempt Interest Income:
45e. Student’s Untaxed Portions of IRA Distributions:
45f. Student’s Untaxed Portions of Pensions:
45g. Student’s Housing, Food, & Living Allowances:
45h. Student’s Veterans Noneducation Benefits:
45i. Student’s Other Untaxed Income or Benefits:
45j. Money Received or Paid on Student’s Behalf:
46. Student Born Before January 1, 1994?
47. Is Student Married?
48. Working on Master’s or Doctorate in 2017-2018?
49. Is Student on Active Duty in U.S. Armed Forces?
50. Is Student a Veteran?
51. Does Student Have Children He/She Supports?
52. Does Student Have Dependents Other than Children/Spouse?
53. Parents Deceased?/Student Ward of Court?/In Foster Care?
54. Is or Was Student an Emancipated Minor?
55. Is or Was Student in Legal Guardianship?
56. Is Student an Unaccompanied Homeless Youth as Determined by High School/Homeless Liaison?
57. Is Student an Unaccompanied Homeless Youth as Determined by HUD?
58. Is Student an Unaccompanied Homeless Youth as Determined by Director of Homeless Youth Center?
59. Parents’ Marital Status:
60. Parents’ Marital Status Date:
61. Parent 1 (Father’s/Mother’s/Stepparent’s) Social Security Number:
62. Parent 1 (Father’s/Mother’s/Stepparent’s) Last Name:
63. Parent 1 (Father’s/Mother’s/Stepparent’s) First Name Initial:
64. Parent 1 (Father’s/Mother’s/Stepparent’s) Date of Birth:
65. Parent 2 (Father’s/Mother’s/Stepparent’s) Social Security Number:
66. Parent 2 (Father’s/Mother’s/Stepparent’s) Last Name:
67. Parent 2 (Father’s/Mother’s/Stepparent’s) First Name Initial:
68. Parent 2 (Father’s/Mother’s/Stepparent’s) Date of Birth:
69. Parents’ E-mail Address:
70. Parents’ State of Legal Residence:
71. Were Parents Legal Residents Before January 1, 2012?
72. Parents’ Legal Residence Date:
73. Parents’ Number of Family Members in 2017-2018:
74. Parents’ Number in College in 2017-2018 (Parents Excluded):
75. Parents Received Medicaid or Supplemental Security Income?
76. Parents Received SNAP?
77. Parents Received Free/Reduced Price Lunch?
78. Parents Received TANF?
79. Parents Received WIC?
80. Parents Filed 2015 Income Tax Return?
81. Parents’ Type of 2015 Tax Form Used:
82. Parents’ 2015 Tax Return Filing Status:
83. Parents Eligible to File a 1040A or 1040EZ?
84. Is Parent a Dislocated Worker?
85. Parents’ 2015 Adjusted Gross Income:
86. Parents’ 2015 U.S. Income Tax Paid:
87. Parents’ 2015 Exemptions Claimed:
88. Parent 1 (Father’s/Mother’s/Stepparent’s) 2015 Income Earned from Work:
89. Parent 2 (Father’s/Mother’s/Stepparent’s) 2015 Income Earned from Work:
90. Parents’ Total of Cash, Savings, and Checking Accounts:
91. Parents’ Net Worth of Current Investments:
92. Parents’ Net Worth of Businesses/Investment Farms:
93a. Parents’ Education Credits:
93b. Parents’ Child Support Paid:
93c. Parents’ Taxable Earnings from Need-Based Employment Programs:
93d. Parents’ College Grant and Scholarship Aid Reported in AGI:
93e. Parents’ Taxable Combat Pay Reported in AGI:
93f. Parents’ Cooperative Education Earnings:
94a. Parents’ Payments to Tax-Deferred Pensions & Retirement Savings:
94b. Parents’ Deductible Payments to IRA/Keogh/Other:
94c. Parents’ Child Support Received:
94d. Parents’ Tax Exempt Interest Income:
94e. Parents’ Untaxed Portions of IRA Distributions:
94f. Parents’ Untaxed Portions of Pensions:
94g. Parents’ Housing, Food, & Living Allowances:
94h. Parents’ Veterans Noneducation Benefits:
94i. Parents’ Other Untaxed Income or Benefits:
95. Student’s Number of Family Members in 2017-2018:
96. Student’s Number in College in 2017-2018:
97. Student Received Medicaid or Supplemental Security Income?
98. Student Received SNAP?
99. Student Received Free/Reduced Price Lunch?
100. Student Received TANF?
101. Student Received WIC?
102. Is Student or Spouse a Dislocated Worker?
103a. First Federal School Code:
103b. First Housing Plans:
103c. Second Federal School Code:
103d. Second Housing Plans:
103e. Third Federal School Code:
103f. Third Housing Plans:
103g. Fourth Federal School Code:
103h. Fourth Housing Plans:
103i. Fifth Federal School Code:
103j. Fifth Housing Plans:
103k. Sixth Federal School Code:
103l. Sixth Housing Plans:
103m. Seventh Federal School Code:
103n. Seventh Housing Plans:
103o. Eighth Federal School Code:
103p. Eighth Housing Plans:
103q. Ninth Federal School Code:
103r. Ninth Housing Plans:
103s. Tenth Federal School Code:
103t. Tenth Housing Plans:
104. Date Completed:
105. Signed By:
106. Preparer’s Social Security Number:
107. Preparer’s Employer Identification Number (EIN):
108. Preparer’s Signature:

What could possibly go wrong with the federal government sharing that information with various agencies and private entities?

Robbins also recorded this short video for Red Kudzu as a primer in 2018.

Due to the government shutdown, the best way to get President Trump’s attention is to tweet at him – @realDonaldTrump or @POTUS. Use the hashtag #VetoFEPA.

President Trump Says He Will Expand Access to STEM Education

President Donald Trump giving the 2018 State of the Union Address.

The White House released a statement yesterday from President Donald Trump about how he is working to ensure all Americans have access to STEM education. 

“My Administration will do everything possible to provide our children, especially kids in underserved areas, with access to high-quality education in science, technology, engineering, and math,” Trump said.

The Trump administration has swallowed the workforce development model of education hook, line, and sinker. Because of this, I don’t think we can reasonably expect any significant positive changes in education policy. 

The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy released a report by the Committee on STEM Education of the National Science and Technology Council that outlined the Administration’s plan for STEM Education.

They stated three goals:

• Build Strong Foundations for STEM Literacy by ensuring that every American has the opportunity to master basic STEM concepts, including computational thinking, and to become digitally literate. A STEM-literate public will be better equipped to handle rapid technological change and will be better prepared to participate in civil society.
• Increase Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in STEM and provide all Americans with lifelong access to high-quality STEM education, especially those historically underserved and underrepresented in STEM fields and employment. The full benefits of the Nation’s STEM enterprise will not be realized until this goal is achieved.
• Prepare the STEM Workforce for the Future—both college-educated STEM practitioners and those working in skilled trades that do not require a four-year degree—by creating authentic learning experiences that encourage and prepare learners to pursue STEM careers. A diverse talent pool of STEM-literate Americans prepared for the jobs of the future will be essential for maintaining the national innovation base that supports key sectors of the economy and for making the scientific discoveries and creating the technologies of the future.

One of the ways the Trump administration would like to accomplish these goals is through increasing work-based learning:

Strategic partnerships that promote work-based learning (WBL) experiences offer powerful, relevant ways to ensure that STEM learning is authentic and engaging, and that learners are prepared to succeed in the modern workforce. Learners who have access to WBL opportunities—ranging from elementary school workplace visits, to secondary pre-apprenticeships, to skilled trade apprenticeships, to research experiences and internships for undergraduates and graduate students—are better prepared to transition into the skilled workforce. Although WBL policies and practices vary widely across the country, communities can consider adopting components and promising practices that include a consensus definition of WBL, a strategic plan, a coordination entity, outreach strategies, and clear communication.

Read the Trump Administration plan below:

View this document on Scribd

Largest Ever Appropriations for U.S. Department of Education

President Donald Trump giving the 2018 State of the Union Address.

Education Week reports that the FY2019 Appropriations Bill that was passed by Congress and signed by President Donald Trump represents, not counting inflation, the largest appropriations for the U.S. Department of Education. They write:

In total, the bill Trump signed into law sets the department’s budget at $71.5 billion for fiscal 2019, an increase over fiscal 2018 of $581 million, although that figure doesn’t include a rescission of $500 million from Pell Grant reserves. In general, the fiscal 2019 budget impacts education funding for the 2019-20 school year. The spending package largely ignores the push from Trump and DeVos to create new school choice programs, as well as their proposals to cut the Education Department’s overall budget.

Not adjusting for inflation, the $71.5 billion budget is the largest-ever appropriation from Congress for the Education Department.

But never fear! The spending increase is smaller compared to last year’s!

Compared to last year, the Education Department’s funding increase is smaller—when Trump signed the fiscal 2018 spending bill into law last March, it gave the department a $2.6 billion boost. 

This budget is what reducing the federal footprint in education is supposed to look like? I don’t know about you, but I’m disgusted. Education Week offers a chart that compares the FY18 education spending to the FY19 appropriations. For instance:

• Title I Funding for school districts increases by $100 Million.
• Title IV-A (Student Support and Academic Enrichment Block Grants) get a $70 million increase.
• There is a $100 million increase in special education grants.
• Charter school grants see an increase of $40 million.
• 21st Century Community Learning Centers (After-School Programs) see a $10 million boost.
• The Office for Civil Rights receives $8 million more.
• School Safety National Activities sees a $5 million bump.
• There is $10 million more budgeted for Education Innovation and Research along with $2 million for the Institute of Education Sciences.
• Career-Tech Grants receive $70 million more in appropriations.
• Head Start will receive $240 million more in FY19.

Just awesome.

Parents Group Calls on President Trump to Fire Betsy DeVos

On Tuesday, U.S. Parents Involved in Education (USPIE) released an open letter to President Donald Trump urging him to fire Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos. You can read it below.

Dear Mr. President, 

United States Parents Involved in Education (USPIE), a nationwide grassroots organization of parents and education advocates regularly conveys concerns to you and other elected officials about the negative effect of Federal government intrusion in education. 

USPIE calls for Congress to abide by the Constitutional structure for education, for the elimination of the U.S. Department of Education, for ending all Federal education programs, and for returning the control of education to parents and local communities. USPIE developed a Blueprint based on references from CATO Institute and The Independent Institute to provide clear reasons and steps to achieving these goals. The Blueprint has been shared extensively with elected officials in Washington D.C. 

As USPIE communicated to you previously, we were hopeful, with some reservations regarding the nomination of Mrs. DeVos for Secretary of Education. USPIE believed you would instruct Secretary DeVos to be laser focused on fulfilling your campaign promises to eliminate Common Core, however rebranded, and begin to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education. 

Since her appointment, Secretary DeVos has used the hammer of the Federal government to broaden its authority and disregard the rights of states and parents. Three actions in particular demonstrate this disregard:

• threatening states abiding by state parental rights laws through the ESSA plan approval process,
• recommending the merger of the Departments of Education and Labor fundamentally shifting the purpose of education to “workforce development”,
• and now, endorsing the G20’s Declaration enshrining the UN’s education agenda, which undermines not only parents and states, but the fundamental sovereignty of the United States.

We do not believe these actions are consistent with your “America First” philosophy nor your campaign promises that generated so much enthusiasm.
As one of the nation’s largest collaboration of parents, and grassroots education advocates, we are committed to the goal of truly improving education for all of America’s children, which begins with reinstating parental authority and control, and ending Federal meddling in education. We continue to be available to assist in this effort.

Given these concerns, we call for the immediate dismissal of Secretary DeVos and for the appointment of an American education leader who will prioritize the fulfillment of your campaign promises.

Sincerely,
U.S. Parents Involved in Education

Will Utah Fight for Parental Control After Feds Deny ESSA Opt-Out Waiver?

So much for returning educational autonomy to the states.

In his inaugural address, President Trump sounded a clarion call for transferring power from the federal government to the people:

[T]oday we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another, or from one party to another – but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the American People.  What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people. January 20, 2017 will be remembered as the day the people became rulers of this nation again. The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.

Fine words, but they haven’t been put into action with respect to education policy. 

The most recent example comes from Utah. In early May the Utah State Board of Education requested a waiver, which U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos is statutorily empowered to grant, from a federal testing requirement under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). That mandate is that states include at least 95% of their students in the statewide tests. This provision is intended to ensuring the reliability of federally mandated accountability measures (notice how often the words “require” and “mandate” come up in discussions of the supposedly state-empowering ESSA). If its testing participation rate drops below 95%, the state must count every non-tested student as zero or non-proficient. Although highly misleading, this calculation ratchets down the state’s “academic achievement indicator” and can result in various negative federal consequences.

Utah requested the waiver because state law specifically protects the rights of parents to opt their children out of statewide assessments. It also forbids the State Board of Education from imposing negative consequences on schools or employees because of the number of opt-outs. 

One reason for the rising opt-out numbers is discontent with the SAGE (Student Assessment for Growth and Excellence) test. SAGE was developed for Utah by the American Institutes for Research, which is not an academic-assessment company but rather a behavioral-research organization. In increasing numbers, parents have concluded they don’t want their children subjected to problem-riddled testing that hasn’t been proven academically valid – especially when, as shown by Dr. Christopher Tienken, Common Core testing is designed more to centralize control over education policy than to benefit student learning.

The clash here, then, was between parents’ inherent right to govern their children’s education and indeed protect them from harm, as explicitly protected by state law, and federal mandates. Guess which won?

On May 31 the U.S. Department of Education (USED) denied the request for a waiver. USED found that a waiver wouldn’t “advance academic achievement” as required by the statutory waiver provision, because failure to force test participation would mean not all students were subjected to federally incentivized standards and federally mandated tests. 

Significantly, the denial letter came from Jason Botel, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, appointed to that position by DeVos. Mr. Botel is a shining example of the problematic personnel she has brought to the department – he publicly praised Common Core (which DeVos’s boss vigorously opposes), he supports a strong federal role in education, and he has spoken favorably of the radical group Black Lives Matter. His pro-federal-power predilections are clear in this dismissal of the Utah waiver request. 

Utah isn’t the only state to be slapped down by federal bureaucrats over the test-participation mandate. Colorado suffered the same fate until it reached a compromise with USED in early May, essentially establishing two different accountability systems – one state, one federal. And rather than fight for state and parental rights, Colorado educrats agreed to come up with more incentives to lure students into the statewide assessments.

The question is, will the Utah State Board of Education wilt under federal pressure, or will it stand and fight? At a hearing on this issue, local school board member Wendy Hart pointed out what’s at stake here – if the State Board backs down, thus forcing more students to undergo behavioral assessment aligned with Common Core, it will fail to uphold not only state law and the 10^th Amendment to the federal Constitution but also the fundamental right of parents to educate and protect their children. 

Utah law is clear about who’s in charge of education: “A student’s parent or guardian is the primary person responsible for the education of the student, and the state is in a secondary and supportive role to the parent or guardian.” The Utah Supreme Court has identified “parents’ inherent right and authority to rear their own children” as “fundamental to our society and . . . basic to our constitutional order. . . .” In other words, what President Trump promised at his inauguration has actual statutory and judicial force in Utah.

Will the State Board of Education stand on these principles? Will Betsy DeVos? If not, both of them should be called to account. This should be a YUGE issue in Utah political races in November.

President Trump Calls for a Review of FERPA

Photo credit: Nick Youngson (CC BY-SA 3.0)

On Monday, the White House announced that President Donald Trump’s school security plan also includes a review of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

It falls under his mental health reform proposal part of the plan. He is “proposing an expansion and reform of mental health programs, including those that help identify and treat individuals who may be a threat to themselves or others.”

The plan includes “increased integration of mental health, primary care, and family services, as well as support for programs that utilize court-ordered treatment.”

Along with FERPA he is calling for a review of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and other statutory and regulatory privacy protections.

The White House said, “Reviews will determine if any changes or clarifications are needed to improve coordination between mental health and other healthcare professionals, school officials, and law enforcement personnel.”

There are obvious privacy concerns. FERPA needs to be strengthened and the White House’s goal is the opposite of that.

Currently, according to the U.S. Department of Education,  FERPA allows schools to disclose a student’s education records, without parental consent, to the following parties or under the following conditions (34 CFR § 99.31):

• School officials with legitimate educational interest;
• Other schools to which a student is transferring;
• Specified officials for audit or evaluation purposes;
• Appropriate parties in connection with financial aid to a student;
• Organizations conducting certain studies for or on behalf of the school;
• Accrediting organizations;
• To comply with a judicial order or lawfully issued subpoena;
• Appropriate officials in cases of health and safety emergencies; and
• State and local authorities, within a juvenile justice system, pursuant to specific State law.

They are also allowed to share “directory” information such as: a student’s name, address, telephone number, date and place of birth, honors and awards, and dates of attendance without parental consent.

Under FERPA, schools must tell parents and eligible students about that directory information and allow parents and eligible students a reasonable amount of time to request that the school not disclose directory information about them.

Trump’s FY19 Education Budget Proposes an $8.1 Billion Cut

President Donald Trump giving the 2018 State of the Union Address.

President Donald Trump released his proposed FY19 budget this week and it proposes cutting $8.1 billion from the U.S. Department of Education’s discretionary spending compared to what the department received from the annualized FY18  continuing resolutions. $6.6 billion of those cuts come in the departments discretionary funding.

The budget proposes several program eliminations:

The second largest program to be eliminated is the 21st Century Community Learning Centers which accounts for just over $1.1 billion. They explain in President Trump’s FY19 major savings and reforms document:

The 21st CCLC program, authorized under the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, enables communities to establish or expand centers that provide additional student learning opportunities through before- and after-school programs, and summer school programs, aimed at improving student academic outcomes. While research has demonstrated positive findings on the impact of afterschool programs overall, the subset of afterschool programs funded by 21st CCLC are not, on the whole, helping students meet challenging State academic standards. For example, on average, from 2013 to 2015, less than 20 percent of program participants improved from not proficient to proficient or above on State assessments in reading and mathematics. Additionally, student improvement in academic grades was limited, with States reporting higher math and English grades for less than half of regular program participants. These recent results are consistent with findings of the last rigorous national evaluation of the program, conducted in 2005, which also found the program had limited academic impact. Additionally, nearly 60 percent of students attend 21st CCLC for fewer than 30 days a year, suggesting that the majority of families with participating students do not use the program for childcare.

These data strongly suggest that the 21st CCLC is not generating the benefits commensurate with an annual investment of more than $1 billion in limited Federal education funds. Moreover, the provision of before- and after-school academic enrichment opportunities may be better supported with other Federal, State, local, or private funds, including the $15 billion Title I Grants to Local Educational Agencies program.

The largest program to be eliminated is the Supporting Effective Instruction State Grants which was funded at just over $2 billion dollars. They said:

The Budget proposes to eliminate the Supporting Effective Instruction (SEI) State Grants program. While the SEI State Grants program authorizes a wide range of activities, in school year 2015-2016, 52 percent of funds were used for PD and 25 percent were used for class-size reduction. A Local Educational Agency that identifies either activity as a key strategy for responding to a comprehensive needs assessment may use Title I, Part A funds for the same purpose. Title I funds also may be used to recruit and retain effective teachers. In addition, PD as currently provided, has shown limited impact on student achievement. For example, a recent evaluation of an intensive elementary school mathematics PD program found that while the PD improved teacher knowledge and led to improvements in teachers’ use and quality of explanation in the classroom, there was no difference in student achievement test scores on either the State assessment or on a study-administered math test. Additional Department of Education-funded studies of PD have found similar results. While class size reduction has been shown to increase student achievement, school districts used SEI State Grant funds to pay the salaries of an estimated 8,000 teachers in school year 2015-2016, out of a total nationwide teacher workforce of roughly three million teachers. These data suggest that eliminating the program would likely have minimal impact on class sizes or teacher staffing levels.

They also eliminated $32 million for statewide longitundinal database systems, but, unfortunately, the only reason that was done was because the work it funded had been completed.

The U.S. Department of Education highlighted their priorities in the FY19 budget:

• $1 billion increase for public and private school choice through the new Opportunity Grants program
• $200 million dedicated to STEM education
• More than $13 billion to maintain the Federal investment in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act State formula and discretionary grants
• $15.5 billion to maintain the Federal investment in Title I grants to Local Educational Agencies (LEAs)
• $43 million for School Climate Transformation grants to help States and LEAs mitigate the impacts of the opioid epidemic on students and schools

“The president’s budget request expands education freedom for America’s families while protecting our nation’s most vulnerable students,” U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos said. “The budget also reflects our commitment to spending taxpayer dollars wisely and efficiently by consolidating and eliminating duplicative and ineffective federal programs that are better handled at the state or local level. I look forward to working with Congress to pass a budget that puts students first and returns power in education to where it belongs: with states, districts and families.”

No Mention of K-12 Education in Trump’s First SOTU Address

President Donald Trump did not explicitly address K-12 education in his first State of the Union address last night and had very little to say about education in general. He briefly plugged an investment in workforce development.

He said:

As tax cuts create new jobs, let us invest in workforce development and job training.  Let us open great vocational schools so our future workers can learn a craft and realize their full potential.

Out of one hour and twenty minutes or so that is it.

While workforce development has been tied to K-12 education, his focus appears to be on vocational schools which could impact K-12 education but will probably have to do with post-high school education opportunities. Based on what he said it is hard to discern what the particular policy will look like.

Then we have Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’ statement after the State of the Union address.

“America must do better to prepare our students for success in the 21st-century economy. I join the President in calling on Congress to act in the best interest of students and expand access to more education pathways,” she said.

It was probably difficult for her communications team to find anything to say about his State of the Union address. I’m surprised he didn’t make even a brief comment about school choice.

On one hand, this could be seen as a good sign. K-12 education should NOT be a priority for the President or the federal government.

On the other hand, I would have appreciated comments from President Trump about how he planned to further cut down the federal regulatory environment that burdens public schools. I also would have appreciated comments about how he planned to return more power back to states and local school boards.

I’m afraid his silence means further status quo.

Team Jeb! Grows Bigger and Stronger at U.S. Department of Education

Frank Brogan was appointed the assistant secretary of education for elementary and secondary education.

Team Jeb! grows bigger and stronger at the U.S. Department of Education (USED). The key position of assistant secretary of education for elementary and secondary education has gone to Frank Brogan, a longtime Bush ally from Florida. We don’t know who recommended Brogan, but we do know who appointed him – President Trump. Does this move snuff out the last hope that Trump will keep his campaign promises to stop federal support of Common Core and return control over education to the states and the people?

As soon as Trump appointed Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary, concern surfaced about her history of supporting the one education policy that Trump railed against during the campaign: the Common Core national standards (though she backtracked, sort of, when appointed). DeVos also apparently embraced the Bush worldview on education – centralized control with benefits distributed to various corporate and other stakeholders. Her strong and longstanding ties to Team Bush include donating to and serving on the board of Jeb’s Foundation for Excellence in Education, which pushes policies such as so-called competency-based education, digital training, increased data-collection on students, and government preschool.

All of these policies were favored by the Obama education establishment as well (the only significant difference between Obama and Bush on education issues concerns school choice).  DeVos’s selection thus signaled a continuation of most policies of the last eight years.

Unsurprisingly, DeVos has now surrounded herself not with representatives of the pro-constitutionalist, anti-Common Core wing of education but with Bush acolytes such as Carlos Muniz as USED general counsel. But the USED position of most interest to parent activists throughout the country — assistant secretary for K-12 education – remained to be filled. Giving that job to a proven anti-Common Core warrior would rekindle hope for some change in USED’s trajectory. But Trump gave the job to Frank Brogan.

Brogan’s ties to Bush run deep. He spent most of his career in Florida, as a teacher, school administrator, and then the state’s Commissioner of Education. When Bush ran for governor in 1998, he chose Brogan as his Lieutenant Governor running mate. Brogan served eight years in that position until he moved into higher education, first in Florida and most recently in Pennsylvania.

Common Core is a good litmus test for ascertaining one’s education worldview generally. If he’s sympathetic to the idea of having national standards created by a central, unelected, unaccountable authority and “incentivizing” states to adopt them and the aligned national tests, then there’s no serious argument he’ll stand strongly for state and local autonomy. Brogan doesn’t pass the test.

As he left his position as Chancellor of the Florida State University System in 2013, Brogan was asked about Common Core. He responded, “The standards are basically completed, and most people seem to suggest that they’re fair, they’re rigorous and they’re clear.” He then pivoted to the question of a national Common Core assessment, urging states to take their time. He recommended that policymakers focus on “giving teachers a chance to build curriculum at the local level around those new standards” and to “give school districts and parents the opportunity to understand those standards” before implementing assessments.

Note the Clintonian hedging about the quality of Common Core: “most people” “seem to suggest” it’s fine. (This man has a bright future in Washington.) But his failure to acknowledge the withering criticism of Common Core, even among expert academics who are intimately familiar with it (see here, here, and here), gives away the game. And his mentioning “local” curriculum and better “understanding” for parents falls flat. Curriculum is being churned out by national and international companies, not local teachers, and the more parents “understand” Common Core, the more they hate it.

The pool of strong anti-Common Core, constitutionalist candidates for this position was deep. Trump could have fundamentally altered the landscape by choosing Bill Evers or Sandra Stotsky or Peg Luksik, just to name a few. Such a choice would have energized the parent-activist base that has become demoralized by DeVos’s decisions.

But Trump’s last chance to affect education policy with personnel seems to have slipped away. Perhaps he got bad advice from DeVos, Vice President Pence, or other denizens or defenders of the education swamp. Maybe he doesn’t understand that Common Core is a continuing threat or that there really is something the federal government could do about it. Maybe he’s too busy. Or maybe he just doesn’t care about education.

In any event, congratulations, Jeb! Your consolation prize was the Department of Education.

Zais Appointed as Deputy Secretary of Education

Photo credit: Milken Family Foundation

Former South Carolina Superintendent of Education Mick Zais was appointed by President Donald Trump as Deputy Secretary of Education.

The White House announcement reads:

Mitchell Zais of South Carolina to be Deputy Secretary of Education.  Most recently, Mr. Zais served as South Carolina’s elected State Superintendent of Education.  During his term in office, the department’s budget was reduced while on-time high school graduation rates increased every year to an all-time high.  The number of public charter schools increased 78 percent, the number of public charter school students increased 155 percent, and the number of students taking online courses grew 130 percent.  Prior to that, he served 10 years as president of Newberry College in South Carolina.  The College was recognized for the first time by U.S. News as one of “America’s Best Colleges.”  He served 31 years as an infantry soldier in the U.S. Army.  He retired as a Brigadier General.  Mr. Zais holds a B.S. in engineering from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, an M.A. degree in military history, plus M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in organizational behavior and social psychology from the University of Washington.  He served as South Carolina Commissioner of Higher Education and is a recipient of the Order of the Palmetto, the states’ highest civilian award.

Zais campaigned against Common Core when he was first elected. A year into his term he appeared to make some headway rejecting one-time federal education dollars including Race to the Top funds.

“We don’t have a shortage of dollars in South Carolina’s schools, we have a shortage of accountability, competition, and incentives,” Zais said to Ben Velderman in an interview.

“If South Carolina had accepted its slice of the Race to the Top pie, it would equal $2.22 per student per year, for four years,” Zais said. “The idea that $2.22 would make a big difference is just nonsense. That’s not even a rounding error.”

He said he wanted to fight against the “education industrial complex.”

That sounds good. Unfortunately, in 2014 the South Carolina Legislature passed a rebrand of Common Core instead of a repeal that was signed by then Governor Nikki Haley.

The rewrite process was sketchy, and Zais oversaw a rebranding of the Common Core even though he claimed that was not going to happen.

I’ve not seen one independent analysis of South Carolina’s standards showing they are significantly different than the Common Core State Standards.

He was also an advocate of education as workforce development and didn’t have a problem accepting a federal workforce development grant.

He did, however, reject the Next Generation Science Standards so I’ll give him that.

He may be better than some of President Trump’s other picks for the Department of Education, but we can’t call him an anti-Common Core warrior. His rhetoric doesn’t match his record.