Hello. Write your message here. Link text here

Arrow up
Arrow down



Give me just one generation of youth, and I'll transform the whole world.”-Vladimir Lenin


Why Texas Must Adopt An Education Savings Accounts Program

By Carole Hornsby Haynes, Ph.D.  |  September 29, 2016  Education Views

Texans boast that we’re a national leader on many fronts.  However, school choice is not one of them. Half of the states have already enacted school choice while Texas remains entrenched in a 19th century industrial model of education with bureaucrats fighting to preserve their control over how children are educated when it is the right of parents.

The Texas Constitution states that the goal of public education is the protection of rights and liberties through the general diffusion of knowledge.  However, there seems to be little concern for the child to whom this phrase applies.  Instead, we fight over the equality of districts and ignore the Constitutional rights of Texas children.

Today public education is no longer about imparting knowledge to children. It is about education bureaucracy outdoing each other with the biggest stadiums, tying every child to broadband in spite of mountains of research that computer access does not promote student achievement and is actually harmful, and creating massive new debt for open classrooms for 21st century learning – a retread of a failed model from decades gone by.  

The system is devoted to endless testing, data, rubrics, development of standards and objectives,  measurement, data, “Smart” goals, results, data, analysis, data, improvement plans, evidence collecting, data, percentages, alignments, data, core curriculum, cross curriculum, data, accommodations, data, modifications, mounds of paperwork, data, meetings, data, more assessments, accountability, and more data. Where is the teaching?  Where are academics? 

True teaching is no longer a priority in public schools because the focus is new “21st Century” objectives.  We are bombarded with directives to build 21st Century workforce skills yet we are still mired in the 20th century because students have not mastered those. 

How can students develop critical thinking before they have acquired the foundational skills? The classical education model that we once used was an important factor in the rise of America to a super power.  It has given us dynamic citizens whose brilliant innovations are the envy of the world.  We have sent men to the moon. Sadly, the current model has brought us only dumbed down students and jeers in the international academic community. We’re losing sight of what is really important -- teaching our students to walk so they can run.

Much was written by our founding fathers about the necessity of educating citizens to participate in the American democracy. Thomas Jefferson wrote, “An educated citizenry is a vital prerequisite for our survival as a free people.” Yet public education is now focused on workforce training instead of academics.

It seems that most of our political and business leaders have been lulled -- indoctrinated -- into Marc Tucker’s philosophy that public schools exist to train a workforce. Are taxpayers willing to continue paying for schools that are not educating our children to live and participate in the American democracy?  Are they willing to pay for schools to train our citizens to live under socialism – no longer free? 

I speak widely to audiences about various topics in American education.  The message I hear most is the deep anger about children being trapped in traditional public schools where social engineering is a higher priority than academic learning – yes, even in Texas.

After many decades of throwing ever increasing amounts of money toward education, the literacy rate just continues to slide downward.  There are too many who have a high school diploma but lack the academic basics to get into trade school, hold a good job, or handle routine family financial decisions. 

Supporters of traditional public education argue that people have to pay taxes to support public education; therefore, that money belongs to public schools.  It does not!!  That money belongs to the child and his parents for the child’s education! Since we are forced to pay taxes, we should have the right to expect the school receiving that money to provide an academic education for our child. If they fail at that, then we should have the right to take that money and give it to a school that will provide a sound academic education.   Not to allow this means the child is being held hostage by public schools that cannot or will not provide a doctrine free, pro-America, academic education.

Too many educators have lost sight of what they chose for their life’s work:  educating our young to guard our freedom and carry on the great American dream.  If they really care about educating students, they will stop indoctrinating children in left wing collectivism that is destroying our culture and will subject the child to a life without freedom and without the opportunity to live the American dream.

In 2017 more than 20 states are planning for ESAs, the fastest growing type of choice in the past five years.  In January, 2017 the next Texas legislative session will begin.  It’s way past time that Texas lawmakers adopt a universal Education Savings Accounts program -- without loading it down by regulations and restrictions or we’ll be right back to square one.  With ESAs we can protect our children’s education rights under the Texas Constitution.

Legislative Action:

Call your Texas legislators and tell them you want Texas to adopt a universal Education Savings Accounts program to protect children’s education rights under the Texas Constitution.

Texas House             Texas Senate

Texas State Board of Ed to Adopt ‘Common Core-Compliant’ Standards

By Carole Hornsby Haynes, Ph.D. | September 9, 2016   Texas Insider

Review groups were formed by the Texas Education Agency (TEA) to review and simplify the current English/Language Arts/Reading curriculum standards.  However, these teams ignored their mandate and went out on a wild rewriting spree.

Violation of TEA Mandate

The rogue teams changed the centuries-old successful classical teaching philosophy of the current standards to Common Core-compliant standards which will force teachers in every classroom in Texas to teach Common Core. And this change in direction will not stop with ELAR.  This is just the nose of the camel in the proverbial tent of curriculum standards as others come up for review.

Compare the Common Core-compliant handiwork of the “rewrite” teams with the current classical education standards --“Side by Side Documents.”   Overwhelming minutia and endless number of phrases.  So much for simplifying the current standards!

To add further confusion, the rewrite teams changed the clearly worded strands to nebulous phrases that require major mind reading to understand the intent.

Violation of Texas Law

But the teams didn’t stop there.  They added a new strand -- “collaboration.”  Now here is the problem.  They just broke the Texas law!  “Collaboration” is a teaching method.  The Texas Education Code clearly states, the board may not adopt rules that designate the methodology used by a teacher or the time spent by a teacher or a student on a particular task or subject.”

New Strand Is Not Measurable As Required

That brings us to the next violation. The standards must be measurable and collaboration cannot be measured.  What kinds of test questions can be used to measure collaborative skills -- or will the score be merely the opinion of the grader or the teacher?

Proposed TEKS Are Common Core-Compliant

Now here is the next giant boondoggle of the rewriting teams. With the new TEKS, teachers would be required to use the new methodology strand of collaboration.

Now collaboration is not just any old method, mind you; it is a Common Core-compliant strategy!  The new TEKS would force Common Core teaching strategy in every Texas classroom!  Common Core Standards identify collaboration as a 21st century work skill for the global world.  A hot education fad using the collaborative approach is Project Based Learning, an early to mid-20th century Progressive retread touted as a key strategy to develop deeper understanding of content.

However, public schools are still entrenched in the John Dewey philosophy of “learn by doing” instead of academic knowledge.  One cannot have a deeper understanding if there is no foundation of knowledge.  In most PBL models, acquiring knowledge is incidental with the emphasis being on team work and the project. Texas teachers are required by law to teach the curriculum standards (TEKS) to prepare students for the STAAR/End of Course tests.  Because so much class time is wasted on PBL, teachers have very little time to teach the subject content in the standards. To make up for the lost class time, many teachers conduct “crash courses” to try to help their students memorize their way through the STAAR/EOC test questions. The result…lackluster STAAR/EOC test scores that show little-to-no academic achievement progress being made by Texas students.

PBL is the main vehicle for learning in many classrooms.  The teacher becomes the learner while the student becomes the expert.  When slower students are unable to keep up with the pace of the group, the faster students give them the answers to maintain the work pace of the group.  Slower students are then left with big gaps in their acquisition of knowledge and skills. This is a highly critical problem when PBL is employed in the elementary years when children are building their knowledge base.

Students complain frequently about free riders in PBL classes -- a few do the work while others get a free ride.  All too often, the students who work hard to complete their part of the project have to do the work of the laggards so the group won’t fail. Students are given a group grade with laggards receiving unearned credit.  Group projects obviously then don’t reflect individual knowledge.

If this exercise in team work is supposed to teach real world skills, then allowing goof-offs to get the same grade/salary as those who work sends the wrong message.  

Additional Tax Burdens on Texans

PBL is an expensive fad because schools must be reconfigured with open-classrooms to accommodate group work.  Many schools have issued multi-million dollar bonds to build new schools or to reconfigure existing spaces. Taxpayers are being saddled with new debt without any idea this is another failed liberal strategy. Since PBL is a retread, knowing the outcome of this destructive education fad does not require a genius brain.

In the 1960s and 1970s the open-classroom education fad swept across America.  In these open classes with large numbers of students, chaos reigned.  Students, especially those at risk, could not hear above the din of noise or focus on the teacher’s lesson or their own reading and writing.  Discipline problems mounted dramatically and students fell behind in their performance and grade levels. Teachers left the public school system in droves to teach in schools that were traditional.  Ultimately, school administrators had to undo their costly mistake – both financial and academic.  Schools had to be reconfigured to get rid of the open-classroom -- at additional expense to taxpayers.         

In the not too distant future, we will see a tide of rage sweeping across the nation as students discover their futures have been sold down the river -- they have great team skills but are poorly prepared for college or trade school and 21st century work challenges. And for Texans, even more of our money will have been wasted.

The SBOE must not be allowed to impose a failed teaching philosophy upon millions of Texas children that will teach them to hate America and our Judeo-Christian values as Common Core surely does.  Texans must take the TEA and SBOE to task and require the review teams to do as mandated -- REVIEW the CURRENT TEKS only to simplify. 

Let your voice be heard! Testify at the next SBOE meeting: Wednesday, September 14th. Call to register from September 9th-12th at (512) 463-9007.


Taxpayer-funded International Baccalaureate Program Undermines U.S. Founding Principles

By Carole Hornsby Haynes, Ph.D.  | September 1, 2016  National Center for Policy Analysis

American taxpayers are funding a public school curriculum commissioned by the United Nations that is at odds with our nation’s founding principles.  According to the International Baccalaureate Organization Subject Guide (1996), “An international education must go well beyond the provision of information and is involved in the development of attitudes and values which transcend barriers of race, class, religion, gender or politics.”

The International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO) was founded in 1968 in Switzerland by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to provide an internationally standardized curricula for the children of diplomats.  It was funded with donations from UNESCO, the Ford Foundation, the Twentieth Century Fund (now the Century Foundation), and many national governments, including the U.S. government. The IBO operates as a nongovernmental organization (NGO) and maintains its ties with UNESCO. Today its base goes beyond the children of diplomats into schools worldwide.

Throughout the three International Baccalaureate (IB) worldwide regions, there are 4,527 schools, of which 1,745 are in the United States. Of the 5,865 worldwide programs, U.S. schools have 57.3 percent — 511 in the Primary Years Program, 632 in the Middle Years Program, and 893 in the Diploma Program.  The students study a standardized IB curriculum taught by IB-trained teachers and take IB standardized tests scored by IB examiners or IB-monitored teachers. The programs are pricey, with application/candidacy fees per school that can range around $15,000, in addition to annual fees, student fees, assessment fees from $10-$89 for each test, and teacher training fees, plus expenses.  Annual fees for U.S. schools in 2016-2017 vary per program:

  • Diploma Program — $11,370
  • Middle Years Program — $9,800
  • Primary Years Program — $8,310
  • Career-related Program* — $1,440 (for schools that offer the DP in conjunction)

An increasing number of U.S. parents are expressing concern over the U.N.-commissioned curriculum.  In 2002 the IB Organization published “A Continuum of International Education,” that indicates the goal of IB to be not merely to impart knowledge but to develop “citizens of the world” with “universal human values.”   Critics contend that the IB curriculum promotes denigration of Western national sovereignty, environmental extremism and promotion of the feminist agenda.  A UNESCO report, “Worldwide Action in Education,” refers to a seamless education system “aimed at two essential goals” — socialization and training for a global workforce.  Workforce training is now the goal of American public education rather than academics.  Another controversial flap has been the past IB endorsement of the Earth Charter, which advocates the redistribution of wealth among and within nations, population-control policies, and military disarmament.  Due to an outburst of public disapproval, the IB withdrew its endorsement.

IB has aligned its United States curricula with Common Core. This is yet another reason why school choice is gaining momentum across the nation.

Texas Schools Rush into the ‘New Common Core’

By Carole Hornsby Haynes, Ph.D.  August 8, 2016   Education Views

Texas declined the federal government’s efforts to force Common Core Standards into its schools.  Yet now Texas is rushing headlong into implementing the ‘New Common Core.’

During the U.S. House proceedings for Every Student Succeeds Act that replaced No Child Left Behind, Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, made the stunning statement that Common Core is being redefined as social-emotional learning (SEL), which must come first in the learning hierarchy -- with academics ranking second!  

Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, confirmed in a prepared statement that he was proud “the legislation includes language to help expand and make the teaching of social and emotional learning [Common Core] more effective!” 

SEL is a dominant feature in the recent federal legislation, Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which replaced No Child Left Behind.  The federal focus on education has shifted from academic learning to the “affective domain” -- feelings and emotions -- with requirements to measure progress.

Teaching character has been an important lesson in American public education until recent years. Students learned to be polite, honest, independent, resilient, and respectful of others.  They learned to exhibit self-control, accept challenges and personal responsibility, value family and self, show empathy for and get along with others.  There were no tests to measure their progress.  No funding was required for additional teachers, textbooks, materials, and special teacher workshops.

However, the purpose of public education shifted under John Dewey’s teaching philosophy which is embedded in every government school.  The focus on academic learning has turned to non-academic learning with the classroom serving as the engine for social and political change.  Moral relativism replaced the teaching of character with its emphasis on ethics and morality.  Love of America and pride in our national heritage were replaced with hatred for America, its Judeo-Christian heritage, and its traditional family values.  With the loss of a moral compass, the school climate has turned deadly as students become violent, disrespectful for others, lacking in self control, and irresponsible.

After decades of being used as social engineering tools, students are so emotionally fragile that, as they enter college, many cannot cope with the rigors of the university and demand “safe spaces” where they can flee from reality.

Now in an effort to “fix” the problems that the public schools have created, the latest education fad of social and emotional learning is sweeping the nation.  

In some independent school districts entire social and emotional department have already been created.  The social engineering officially continues, now under the guise of “teaching the whole child.”  

In the Austin, Texas independent school district, skills such as understanding and managing emotions, forming positive relationships, solving problems, and being optimistic have been integrated into the curriculum.   Teachers are asked to spend 30-45 minutes a week teaching a lesson on an explicit skill.  They have hired expensive consultants and created new programs and materials to formally teach what we once did for free.

In Dallas, Texas the Dallas Morning News (DMN) reports that the Dallas Independent School Board (DISD) has “…quietly passed a policy pushed by trustee Dan Micciche that requires social and emotional learning -- already used informally in some schools – to be taught in all classrooms over the next 10 years.”  The DISD notes the program will follow that of the Austin ISD and questions whether federal funding can be obtained.

ESSA requires that at least one non-cognitive trait be assessed by the states and incorporated into their accountability systems.  The dilemma is how to measure the progress.  

Already policy makers and corporate leaders are demanding measurement.  If a school district uses any taxpayer funding for their SEL program, they will be required to file more reports and to collect more highly personal information for student permanent records.  Government-appropriate thoughts and behavior will be taught by the latest round of “experts.”

Already new consulting groups are hawking their wares and profiting handsomely at the expense of children who are labeled “human capital.”

Under ESSA, there will be even more federal controls despite what our Congress promised us.

But can social and emotional traits such as character be measured?  Should we turn social and emotional learning into high stakes metrics for high stakes accountability?  Not according to noted character psychologist, Angela Duckworth, who wrote, “But we’re nowhere near ready -- and perhaps never will be -- to use feedback on character as a metric for judging the effectiveness of teachers and schools. We shouldn’t be rewarding or punishing schools for how students perform on these measures.”

What once was free and inherently taught now will cost the taxpayer billions of dollars while the students are psychologically manipulated to alter their beliefs, values, and world views and forced to take psychological assessments. In a nutshell, their mental health will be evaluated according to government standards.

ESSA is an unconstitutional piece of legislation that is very dangerous for our American freedoms.  Parents must demand that their state legislators stop the implementation of ESSA.  Having one’s child psychologically profiled is yet another reason why school choice is sweeping across the nation.

Donald Trump, Jr. Was Right About American Public Education

By Carole Hornsby Haynes, Ph.D. |  August 3, 2016  Education Views

Donald Trump, Jr., son of the Republican presidential candidate, had the audacity to be political incorrect at the recent Republican convention when he described American public education as being fundamentally flawed, “Our schools used to be an elevator to the middle class. Now they’re stalled on the ground floor. They’re like Soviet-era department stores that are run for the benefit of the clerks and not the customers, for the teachers and the administrators and not the students.”

This was foreseen by the renowned nineteenth century philosopher, John Stuart Mill, who had warned about government schools in his 1859 treatise On Liberty“A general State education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another…it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by a natural tendency to one over the body.”

As history shows, Trump’s speech only mirrored what American Federation for Teachers president, Albert Shanker, wrote in 1989 about public education.

It’s time to admit that public education operates like a planned economy, a bureaucratic system in which everybody’s role is spelled out in advance and there are few incentives for innovation and productivity. It’s no surprise that our school system doesn’t improve: It more resembles the communist economy than our own market economy….

After decades of economic failure, even the Soviet bloc seems to have concluded that only markets work, that a system without incentives and rewards drives out the good and favors the mediocre.

Shanker questioned why education leaders had allowed the situation to get so far and why they were not taking the lead in correcting the problems.  He predicted that, “Unless we change for the better -- and soon -- policymakers are going to find a cure that will be painful and radical.”

He saw that change was already coming.

Milton Friedman, who won the 1976 American Nobel Memorial Prize winner in Economic Sciences, was the twentieth century's most prominent advocate of free markets.  In 1980 he wrote that public schools were suffering from the malady of “an over-governed society,” describing the American public school system as “an island of socialism in a free-market sea.”  He and wife Rose, who was also a free-market economist, established the Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice in 1996 to educate parents about the benefits of free market for schools.

As the public anger toward the dismal output of education grows, those bureaucrats in control react by forcing schools to comply with yet more federal mandates where special interest groups battle for education resources.  The goal is to spend more money – not to solve the problem.

The federal government has mandated a rapid fire implementation of the new education bill, Every Student Succeeds Act, over a short span of just a few months -- thus effecting cramming the massive piece of legislation and additional expense down the throats of Americans.  Very soon taxpayers are going to wake up and realize they have been shafted yet again by political hacks at both the federal and state levels.

Although defenders of the status quo shriek about how charter schools and vouchers are killing public schools, they never mention the cause of the problem or that it should be eradicated.  Nor do they seem willing to take the lead in solving the problem.  No, they will not take the lead because they are feeding at the public trough and, thereby, serving as accomplices in using public schools as the engine to drive political and social change.

The public is reacting to this bureaucratic arrogance by demanding that their state legislatures pass more school choice programs so their children can exit traditional public schools.  There are now 29 states that offer school choice with a total of 60 school choice programs in the U.S. with more expected to come.

Collapse of the American public school system as we know it is now inevitable.

Why Are the Feds Psychologically Profiling Your Child?

By Dr. Carole Hornsby Haynes  |  July 29, 2016    Education Views

John Stuart Mill, nineteenth century philosopher, characterized government schools in his 1859 treatise On Liberty“A general State education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another…it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by a natural tendency to one over the body.”

That 19th century description fits 21st century American government schools.  In U.S. national education policy, increasing attention is being paid to “21st century competencies” which encompass a range of non-cognitive learning factors including grit, self and social awareness, self-control, empathy, trust, social awareness, and conflict resolution.  This signals a shift from academic learning to the “affective domain” -- feelings and emotions.

The latest idiotic fad in American education is “social and emotional learning” (SEL) with knowledge being passe′ -- we can Google for facts.  However, the underlying purpose is that, through SEL, the U.S. government is attempting to mold the minds of American students.  This is evidenced with SEL being a dominant feature of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which became law with President Obama’s signature in December 2015.   (Click here for House votes – Click here for Senate votes)


ESSA requires states to include at least one non-academic measure in judging school performance. “Grit” is the latest buzzword by education “experts” for social and emotional learning.Diane Ravitch, noted education historian, wrote in the New York Times, “Grading schools and teachers by their students’ “grit” borders on lunacy.”

Good teachers have always strived to instill good citizenship and good character in their students, says Ravitch.

Teaching children to persevere, to complete their work on time, to act courteously toward others, to accept success and defeat with equanimity is part of the everyday life of teaching and learning. It is not a separate subject.

Testing whether children are experiencing joy or learning “grit” is sheer nonsense. If by “grit” we mean resilience, that is best taught informally, in the classroom, at home, on the playing fields, in the hallways, in the lunch room.


ESSA created in federal law a $250 million program of competitive grants for state pre-K initiatives.  This is “Baby Common Core” with its own Race-to-the-Top funding. With these grants come the ESSA requirement to align the pre-K program to Head Start and Child Development Block Grants which are tied to national preschool standards and social emotional standards. The federal government now controls state pre-K programs – and assessments -- in addition to K-12.  This is the “cradle-to-grave” vision of Marc Tucker and Hillary Clinton in 1992.

Family Engagement Program

Title IV of ESSA mandates a Family Engagement program in each state that subordinates parents to the government in the rearing of their own children. There are SEL requirements as well as home visitations by government officials to determine how parents are caring for their children. Reports will be included in the child’s permanent record.During the U.S. House proceedings prior to the ESSA vote, Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Ohio, made the stunning statement that Common Core is being redefined as social-emotional learning, which must come first in the learning hierarchy -- with academics ranking second!  

Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, confirmed in a prepared statement that he was proud “the legislation includes language to help expand and make the teaching of social and emotional learning [Common Core] more effective!” 

This is a violation of the 4th Amendment right’s to privacy as well as the Supreme Court cases of Pierce v. Society of Sisters and Meyers v. Nebraska.  Both have affirmed the constitutional right of parent to direct the education and upbringing of their children.


SEL is also included in Bill S. 227, Strengthening Research Through Education Act (SETRA), a proposed reauthorization of the Education Sciences Reform Act.  That legislation created bureaucracies and funding for education research that includes collection of personal student data. The SETRA bill was passed in the U.S. Senate and referred to the House in December, 2015 where it is still pending.  If SETRA is passed, federal education research will be expanded to include social and emotional learning.


Beginning in 2017, the affective domain also will be assessed by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), often dubbed the “nation’s report card,” in a background survey.

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) has been weakened through regulatory fiat to strip consent requirements and broaden access to sensitive data by the federal government and private third parties without prior written parental approval.  

The student’s information is expected to be lodged in a permanent file via federally required state longitudinal databases. 

There is already much evidence that the government is trying to control how children believe, think, and behave through Common Core and Competency Based Learning.  

There is no constitutional or statutory authority or moral right for the government to collect data on any of these highly personal aspects of children. 

States and schools have a constitutional duty to provide an academic education.  They do not have a right to engage in psychological testing and manipulation of children.  Under the 10th Amendment, education lies solely with the states.  The federal government has no grounds for its role in education for any reason including standards, assessments, accountability and requiring the implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act. 

SEL is another insane education fad that is going to end badly, but not before much irreversible damage is created…to be followed by yet another dangerous fad -- “reform” – to resolve the  damage already caused – which will come with protests that more spending is needed.

Parents are already outraged with public education.  As they become more aware of the psychosocial mandate by ESSA, there will be increased test opt outs, widespread protests, greater demands on state legislatures for school choice, and an increase in home schooling.

NAEP To Psychologically Profile Students On 2017 Test

By Carole H. Haynes | July 14, 2016  Education Views

John Stuart Mill, called the “most influential English-speaking philosopher of the nineteenth century," characterized government schools in his 1859 treatise On Liberty.

A general State education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another; and as the mould in which it casts them is that which pleases the dominant power in the government, whether this be a monarch, an aristocracy, or a majority of the existing generation; in proportion as it is efficient and successful, it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by a natural tendency to one over the body.

Dallas Police Exiting in Droves…Will There Be A National Force?

By Carole Hornsby Haynes  |  July 12, 2016  Daily Caller

On the evening of July 7 following the Black Lives Matter rally in Dallas, Texas, a coordinated attack killed five police officers and wounded seven others.  The gunman, Micah Johnson, was a black military veteran with radical left leanings who said his goal was to kill white officers.

This was the deadliest single day for police officers since the terrorist attacks on September 9, 2011.  Because this massacre specifically targeted police officers as have others across the nation, the question becomes:  Is this part of a larger plan to kill police officers and, if so, who is behind it? What is the end goal?

Buffalo Teachers Union Continues Gouge of Taxpayers for Tummy Tucks…Buffalo Board Further Privatizes

By Carole Hornsby Haynes  July 11, 2016   Education Reviews

Since 2004 when the Buffalo Teachers Federation signed a new contract with the Buffalo Board of Education (BOE), which oversees New York State’s second largest school district outside of New York City, teachers have been gouging taxpayers for cosmetic surgery.  Yet there has been a lack of basic resources to satisfy minimum state requirements for the high poverty area schools.

Making K-12 Less Expensive:  Fire the Teachers!

By Carole Hornsby Haynes, Ph.D. | June 17, 2016  Education Views

National outrage over the status of public education continues to mount as taxpayers realize they are paying more and getting less.

According to the National Center for Education Statistics, total expenditures for public elementary and secondary schools in the United States amounted to $621 billion in 2011–12, or $12,401 per public school student enrolled in the fall (in constant 2013–14 dollars, based on the Consumer Price Index).

New K-12 Law’s Heavy Handiness in Testing Sparks More Public Outrage

By Carole Hornsby Haynes, Ph.D.  |  June 1, 2016   Daily Caller

Congress replaced No Child Left Behind with Every Student Succeeds Act, promising to return control to the states.  However, with the federal government loath to give up power over telling states and districts what they must do, there are signals that we can expect a showdown as states begin the implementation of ESSA. 

Will Texas End Federal Control Over Education?

By Carole Hornsby Haynes, Ph.D.  | May 23, 2016  Daily Caller  

Texas is leading the charge against the Obama administration’s May 13th directive that transgender students must be allowed to use the restrooms and locker rooms of their choice or face the loss of federal funding under Title IX.  Put simply, the federal government will withhold funding for breakfast and lunch programs for poor children if this directive is not followed.

Standardized Test Discontent Spreads the Nation

By Carole Hornsby Haynes, Ph.D.  | April 21, 2016   National Center for Policy Analysis

As the nation moves into the peak weeks of the 2016 standardized exam season, the backlash against standardized tests is escalating sharply with opt-outs and protests being staged in many states.

joomla visitor