Browsing articles in "Curriculum + Standards"
May 7, 2011

Important Education Conference Committee Information

The Education Conference Committee has been meeting to discuss the financial and policy provisions of the two versions of the large (omnibus) education finance bill (HF 934/SF 1030) to see where there are differences and similarities.  There have been no real decisions made so far, only discussions regarding what is in each bill, literacy programs, and teacher evaluations.

The reasons for the leisurely pace on the conference committee meetings are both because of differences between the House and the Senate and because the governor is not actively involved in negotiations regarding either the budget or policy.  The governor needs to stop standing on the sidelines and actively engage in the process.  Contact information for the conferees and the governor are as follows:


Senator Gen Olson (Chairwoman) 651-296-1282

Senator Carla Nelson 651-296-4848

Senator Benjamin Kruse 651-296-4154

Senator Dave Thompson 651-296-5252

Senator Pam Wolfe   651-296-2556


Representative Pat Garofalo (Chairman) 651-296-1069

Representative Connie Doepke   651-296-4315

Representative Sondra Erickson 651-296-6746

Representative Dan Fabian 651-296-9635

Representative Tim Kelly 651-296-8635

GOVERNOR MARK DAYTON:  651-201-3400 or

Please consider asking these legislators and the governor to:

1)  Do not spend anything new on education and if possible cut the budget. When every other area of life in Minnesota inside and outside of government has to deal with cuts there is no reason to be adding one BILLION more to the education budget.  Especially in light of the facts that achievement is stagnant and there will have to be more negotiation on other areas of the budget and with the governor.

2) Support the Senate position on early childhood spending. Ask them to not spend another $10 million on early childhood.  Even the scholarships for poor children give parents incentive to have someone else raise and educate their children when these programs at best do not work and at worst cause academic and emotional harm. If they insist on doing this spending for scholarships, at least have them take the funds from already existing, but ineffective programs like Head Start or ECFE.

3) Beware the Senate Language on early childhood quality rating systems (QRS). There is language in the Senate bill that requires new early childhood spending to be research based and implemented based on the quality rating system framework already in statute, which would be a back door way of taking this bureaucratic, small business hampering QRS statewide.  This language should be modified to just say research based programs or removed altogether.

4)  Preserve the autonomy of private schools. Either the mandates in the House voucher provision should be removed or the voucher language should be taken out of the bill altogether and the tuition tax credits in the Senate tax bill should move forward.

5) Not implement the new social studies standards or the common core national standards.  The social studies standards are revisionist, anti-American, and anti-capitalist. The national standards are an unconstitutional, one-size-fits all means of eventual federal control of curriculum.  There is language that prevents implementation of both that should be supported.

May 6, 2011

Comments on US History Standards from an Attorney and Teacher of the Constitution

As promised in our last alert, here are the comments on the high school US History Standards by Education Liberty Watch Board member Marjorie Holsten, an attorney and teacher of the US Constitution for home schooled students.  The third draft of the social studies standards is now available for a final public comment period.  Comments may be submitted here UNTIL MIDNIGHT ON MAY 8TH.


As an Attorney who has taught Constitutional Law to homeschooled high students at local homeschool co-operatives for a number of years, I was anxious to review the content of Minnesota’s new proposed Social Studies Standards for senior high students.  I hoped to see studies of the founding documents of our nation, including discussions of how the checks and balances our founding fathers drafted were intended to limit the power of government to allow people to fully enjoy life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness without governmental interference.  I knew I would be disappointed by the content, but was unprepared to have my breath taken away by the amount of historical revisionism, liberal bias, and politically correct indoctrination.  I cannot help but think of the statement of Hans Schemm from the Nazi Teacher’s League who said, “Those who have the youth on their side control the future.'”

The Social Studies Standards have four sections:  U.S. History, World History, Geography, and Economics.  The U.S. History Section is by far the worst and is the only topic covered in this article.


The word “analyze” appears 26 times in the U.S. History Standards, and the word “evaluate” appears four times.  The acts of “analyzing” and “evaluating” require students not only to learn and understand material, but also to make judgments.  When students are given only a limited amount of information, and what they are given is one-sided, any judgment they make will be skewed.  It is inappropriate to require students to do so much analyzing and evaluating under these circumstances.  In contrast, the World History section uses the word “analyze” only 7 times, and uses the word “describe” 36 times. (Obviously there were two different authors, with the author of the U.S. History being far to the left of the author of the World History Section.)


The first section on U.S. History is appropriately titled, “U.S. History – Beginning to 1620.”  1620 was a landmark year in our nation’s history, as that was when Pilgrims in search of religious freedom landed at Plymouth Rock.   Stunningly, the standards make no mention of the Pilgrims.  Instead, attention is focused on people “forced to relocate to the colonies.”  (§  Students are asked to describe the indigenous peoples before European colonization (§, and then “analyze the consequences of early interactions between Europeans and indigenous nations.”  (§  This is followed by a requirement that students analyze the impacts of colonial government on “enslaved populations.”  (§  Students then study “the exploitation of enslaved people” (§, “the development of non-free labor systems,” and “the experiences of enslaved peoples.”  (§  It gets worse.

Continue reading »

May 6, 2011

Please Comment!! Social Studies Standards Continue Disastrous Course in Final Draft!

The third draft of the social studies standards is now available for a final public comment period.  Comments may be submitted here until May 8th.

Although some good change has come out of the social studies standards process which is now in its final phases, thanks to your good efforts and comments, sadly, many of the same problems plus some others we have found are present since our last report. A more detailed report on the U.S. History strand is coming soon from an attorney who teaches the Constitution.  Below are some highlights and lowlights.

Some Good News:

1)      The Declaration of Independence is now mentioned and discussed at the high school level:

“Analyze the impact of early documents, including the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, on the development of the government of the United States.”

2)      One Declaration principle of “popular sovereignty,” also called “consent of the governed” is specifically mentioned.

3)      Property rights are mentioned in the context of the failure to secure them being an economic problem.

4)      The Second Amendment is mentioned, which is better than the federally subsidized civics textbook. We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution that fails to mention the Second, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments at all.

5)      Capitalism is now mentioned in a neutral context instead of a negative one in economics and the world history strands:

“Compare and contrast the characteristics of traditional, command (planned), market-based (capitalistic), and mixed economic systems.”
“Explain the ideas of capitalism, communism, and socialism and analyze the impact of these beliefs on politics, industry, and labor relations in later 19th-century Europe.”

6)      The United States is still referred to as a republic in the standards and benchmarks:

“The U.S. republic is based on specific principles and beliefs.” (Standard)

Many Grave Causes of Concern – Here is a far from comprehensive list: Continue reading »

Mar 24, 2011

School Choice Testimony

3/14/11 – Dr Effrem testified before the MN House Education Finance Committee in support of the idea of school choice for K-12, but against the mandates placed on the private school in the MN House Education Finance Committee (HF 273 – Woodard) (Audio is available here by following the link for the March 14th hearing starting at 2:02:23)

3/17/11 – Dr. Effrem testified in favor of SF 388 (Nienow), because, because unlike its House counterpart (HF 273 above) it offers school choice without imposing the public school tests and standards and other mandates on the private schools.  (Audio is available here by following the link for the March 17th Education Committee hearing starting at 50:48)