Challenge on Constitutionality of Common Core
In Idaho, a lawyer who was running for Attorney General in the last elections has now filed a lawsuit against the Governor of Idaho (RINO), the Superintendant of Schools, and a few others arguing that Idaho's participation in Common Core violates the Constitution.
Here's his claim: the Constitution specifically states that States may not enter into agreements one with another outside the approval of Congress. Since Congress never voted to approve Common Core, it amounts to an illegal intra-State "treaty".
Your thoughts?
Here's his claim: the Constitution specifically states that States may not enter into agreements one with another outside the approval of Congress. Since Congress never voted to approve Common Core, it amounts to an illegal intra-State "treaty".
Your thoughts?
Article I, Section 8 designates NOTHING regarding Federal power and education. The DOE is clearly unconstitutional.
While I agree, Article I Section 8 must be asserted by the individual States, and they have been loathe to do so. The legal challenge treating Common core as an intra-State treaty is a much more objective standard.
The lawyer bringing the suit is Chris Troupis. Those supporting him include more than 100 private groups who want to get rid of Common Core and return control of education to the State.
My understanding is they are a crony connected Testing business for the idiot leftest creatures that want to track Your child for life.
Seems to me to be a state's right to be stupid and corrupt; never mind creating something beyond useless idiots...
Here is a good question; was the Dept of DeEducation voted into existence by congress?; or was it another executive disorder.
to impose a particular school program on the states
in the first place (though it may authorize the Con-
gress to issue some act to enforce the 14th Amend
-ment when a State is violating it, as in the case
of segregation).
---By the way "intra-State" means within a state;
between two different States, the term is "inter-
state", for instance, in the case of a highway.
You are also correct in that the Constitution doesn't authorize a federal program for education. In fact, in the authorization for the Federal Department of Education it specifically forbids the national program from any kind of dabbling at the State or local level.
Common Core is different, however, because it isn't being pushed by the Federal Government (at least explicitly), but by a coalition that has persuaded the States to sign on as participants - thus they have been able to avoid the challenges of the Federal Courts up to this point.
My public education up until age 13 portrayed America as the general good guys, and didn't focus that much on liberty, although it was certainly mentioned. My partially public education from age 14-17 was more critical of the US and Europe in general. In college my only history was two history of science classes. Oddly, they were the most ideological-- not pro- or anti-US but rather in favor of questioning everything, in a way that bordered on post-modernism, something I now strongly reject.
No. I've only seen a few blog posts written by people feigning outrage over absolutely nothing. If there's something outrageous in the standard, I haven't discovered it yet. My wife and I monitor things closely. If we see this problem, we'll move them. We already have the backup choices planned.
If you want to see just one example of the sheer idiocy that is Common Core, watch this:
http://www.westernjournalism.com/arka...
If the cannot instantly say 54 then I don't bother going any further. If they express how they'll use a calculator I say, "Not for MY horse you won't!"
Anyone who's reached 7th grade and has not learned the multiplication table up to 12x12 (better is 20x20) is not fit to do science or higher math.
My mother-in-law taught kindergartners and she complained to my wife and I numerous times about the stupidity that came with Common Core. I'd suggest that instead of impugning others, you actually LOOK at the curriculum and who it is geared to. Your ivory tower is crumpling.
For starters - Common Core is a full, frontal assault on math. Math is an international language that binds us to reality. Only an evil person would purposely muck it up as is done in Common Core.
"Where there is no mathematics, there is no freedom." - Edward Frenkel
I have seen no evidence of this. I see occasional blog posts with people feigning outrage over worksheets they say are confusing and they say were made confusing to comply with Common Core. Of the ones I've seen, they don't seem that bad, and they're not more confusing than bad worksheets inspired by other standards. I'm always open to new evidence, but I think it's people getting fired up over absolutely nothing, turning a mundane educational standard into an assault on math.
I understand your use of "they don't seem that bad." However, America is rapidly falling behind in the subject of math. I am familiar with the theory behind Common Core math, and I can almost sympathize. It's widely admitted that it was formulated for kids who "struggle with math". Truth be told, math in elementary school isn't complicated. Yet, even in grades 3 or 4 we are having problems getting it taught. Time spent asking, "which division problem doesn't belong" is wasted and should be spent teaching how to divide.
There's nothing wrong with "struggling with math". It should be welcomed as part of the process. I struggled with water skiing...terribly...haha...
You know...come to think of it: I think that one major problem with math in schools is that we aren't spending enough time teaching it. Remember the 3Rs? I don't have the answers, I'll admit. But, I have seen some Common Core material that is really distracting/misleading. I find that upsetting.
I agree with most of what you said, with the exception of a) the idea that Common Core is to blame for a particular confusing question and b) this statement. Kids need to learn both how math works, i.e. what division is about and how to do it, and which questions to ask. There's actually more value in knowing which questions to ask, but you can't do that well without understanding the nuts and bolts.
The industrial revolution created great wealth. Knowing the "3Rs" was key to those jobs. We still have to know the basics, but now there is little value in just being able to work math, spell well, memorize facts. Computers can do those things better than we can. In the modern economy understanding the mechanics of division is critical and so is being able to work out which problems to work and which ones don't belong. I would be surprised if this particular question was generated by the Common Core initiative, but regardless I strongly support this type of question. It sounds like it was causing some struggle, and I wholeheartedly agree there's nothing wrong with struggling with math. It's just like learning a language-- you always struggle at first.
I agree. It's a framework for understanding everything else.