Pages 62 and 807 ESEA Re-Authorization mandates ‘Universal Design for Learning’
There is an incredible group of moms and dads working diligently as we read every word of the just released- yesterday, (Nov. 30, 2015) language of the ESEA re-authorization, now known as ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act,) that could be voted on as early as tomorrow, Dec. 2nd, 2015.
My assigned pages were 801 to 810, which clearly show Anita Hoge has been right all along.
Read below and then Contact ASAP by all means possible……
* Paul Ryan Speaker Paul Ryan’s contact info: @SpeakerRyan Phone: 202-225-3031
* Contact your state Rep at White House Switchboard to ask for your Congressional Representative:
* Contact Freedom Caucus Members – ask them to vote as a group
Here is a great link by PJNET’s list of Freedom Caucus Members with Preloaded Tweets. Freedom Caucus PJNET Action Page
On pages 62 and 807 mandates ‘Universal Design for Learning’
SEN. ALEXANDER’S S.1177 is NOT about teaching academics!
True academic standards have been replaced with tests, curriculum, and remediation that include COMMON CORE psychological, social, emotional, behavioral, and mental health outcomes that each student must meet in a personalized career pathway. These soft skill outcomes might sound great until you realize these areas cannot be tested, scored, or remediated without psychological or psychiatric interventions. These standards include things like honesty, integrity, ethical responsibility, self-efficacy, grit, interpersonal skills, or cooperative learning, etc. Note that the definition of “healthy” in each one of these is prescribed by the government. The government will identify subjective and vague “correct” attitudes, values, beliefs, and dispositions for your child that will then be scored and remediated to the government’s objectives, which are called minimum positive attitudes. Parents must ask questions such as: “How do you define, measure and remediate ‘integrity’?”
These subjective objectives are based Benjamin Bloom’s “whole child” education theory of what a child thinks, feels, and acts. This is referred to in S. 1177 as “Universal Design for Learning.” This ominously encompasses cognitive brain research about how the “whole child” learns, his/her beliefs, and what a parent teaches the child in their home. The Department of Labor SCANS Reports (Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills) explains clearly that these children are to be re-educated from what has been taught by their parents in the home: “The common image of the learner is that of the blank slate. However, the more appropriate image of learning is replacing what is already on the slate.” [Source: (Berryman member of SCANS) Source: 1990]
In sum, a child’s feelings, attitudes, or affect, and his/her behavior, or how the child acts, including the moral and spiritual domains of the child, will be invaded, assessed, and ultimately supplanted. [Source: See Wrap-Around Services]
In order to change a child’s beliefs, values, or dispositions, the child is pressured to “change or alter” his/her personally held beliefs, attitudes and values. This is accomplished through artificially induced cognitive conflicts (dissonance), stress induced through values clarification activities, and/or evidence-based techniques “scientifically” developed to create change in a student through repetitive interventions. [Source: See Penn Resiliency Project that was referenced on the Pennsylvania Department of Education portal to teach interpersonal skills.]
These psycho-social techniques can be dangerous and can cause emotional distress, depression, as well as conflicts with parents and authority figures. These sophisticated, psychological techniques must be stopped. Parents are demanding an investigation into the adverse impact of forcing this psychological manipulation on a captive child in the classroom – a harmful and manipulative process that challenges a child’s fixed beliefs, attitudes, values, and dispositions. [Source: Universal Design for Learning (UDL): pp. 42, 181, 200; Non-academic measurement: pp. 27, 128, 159, 231, Personalized learning p. 551]