From the March 2005 Idaho Observer:

TIA from conception to grave

After reading the article below, your resolve to oppose the true purpose of modern public instruction will find new life.

by The Idaho Observer

Do you remember back in the good old days when we attended public elementary schools? Early dismissals would happen a couple times a year for parent/teacher conferences. Remember when your children (or your grandchildren) seemed to enjoy many early dismissals and days off for teacher "in-service" days? Did you ever wonder what that was all about?

It’s data entry. Today’s elementary school teacher is a data entry technician whose main function is to know everything there is to know about a child so he can be pigeonholed appropriately for adulthood.

Long gone are the days when teachers prepared America’s children for the next grade in their education and onward until graduation when they would have mastered the skills necessary to make their way in life, on their own power, making their own decisions.

Books written on the pros and cons of state-controlled public instruction date back to 800 BC and Ancient Greece. In more modern times we have at our disposal Brave New Schools by Berit Kjose and America 2000/Goals 2000—Moving the Nation Educationally to a New World Order," compiled and edited by James Patrick.

These books prove that the same goals of state-controlled education present in Ancient Greece are the same goals in place today: Teaching children to be dependent, malleable tools of the state with minimal critical thinking skills.

"Outcomes-based education" and the federal "Goals 2000" education agenda came with the phrase, "Education from cradle to grave."

But its 2005 now. With the power of supercomputers and advances in the ability to retrieve information electronically stored within an intricate web of networked databases came the bureaucratic desire to collect all information about everyone—total information awareness (TIA) from conception to grave.

You can no longer pretend that our childrens’ schools are giving them an education intended to prepare them for pursuing the American Dream. Our childrens’ schools are teaching the government what it needs to know about them so that it can program them with the right dreams—or nightmares.

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) periodically updates its "Student Data Handbook for Elementary, Secondary and Early Childhood Education," as computer memory, database connectivity and government priorities allow for more detailed collection of information about the children attending schools.

Keep in mind that all public schools must comply with state and federal curriculum and data collection requirements or face losing accreditation and/or funding. Though many teachers and administrators do not agree with the new way of doing things, their only option is to find another job.

In 1998 the state of Oregon decided to place "special" needs kids in the same classroom with children of normal behavior and learning abilities. "What we used to cover by Christmas break takes all year now," said a fourth grade teacher in a small, eastern Oregon town. About 10 of his 27 students were either perpetually disruptive to the rest of the class or were unable to keep up with the other students.

This school let out at noon every Friday so the teachers could spend three-to-five hours each week updating their students’ electronic records for the state and federal government.

Frustrated, he was happy to be retiring after one more year. "Have you ever seen the movie ‘Harrison Bergeron?’" he asked. "Well, that is what is happening here—children come to school so their brains can be handicapped and dumbed down to the lowest possible denominator," he said, hardly believing that his 24 years as a teacher would end like this.

The first clue as to the mindset of those who prepare and enforce the data collection aspect of contemporary public instruction is found in the executive summary of the Student Data Handbook. The one which is referred to here is dated 2001 and can be found online at the NCES website at

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2000/2000343r.pdf

The NCES acknowledges that "...most education systems have moved from paper documents in filing cabinets to automated student information systems."

That statement is practical and consistent with most people who collect and file information.

But, we are talking about our children here. Those are the small people to whom we give birth and raise in faith that our love will help them realize their dreams as they grow up; hoping they will, in turn, fall in love and have children of their own someday.

Continuing with the summary, "These systems provide teachers and others concerned with effective program design with day-to-day access to information about the students’ background, learning experiences and performance. They also provide the flexibility necessary to supply aggregate data to school boards, state and federal governments, and other interested parties; and to conduct program evaluations."

Student’s used to attend classes and then go home with the only "data" collected being their grades and perhaps a few handwritten observations from teachers and principles regarding learning, disciplinary or attendance issues involved—all of which were kept on file at the school. Records transferred when students moved.

The collection of data has become a manic obsession. "To be effective....these systems must record data accurately and comparably for all students, in all places, and at all times," wrote the NCES executives in their summary.

The purpose of the handbook is to provide a uniform set of instructions for the "consistent maintenance of student information.

"This handbook is useful to public and private education agencies, schools, early childhood centers, and other educational institutions, as well as to researchers involved in the collections of student data. In addition, the handbook may be useful to elected officials and members of the public interested in student information."

The list above indicates that the reams of personal (possibly subjective and biased) information being collected on our children, without our knowledge or consent, will be made available to just about anyone who "may have an interest."

The executives claim that the handbook itself is not a data collection instrument and "does not reflect any type of federal data maintenance requirements."

Then, in the next paragraph, the executives state that the handbook was "developed with the assistance of local, state and federal education representatives and researchers," and that the definitions are consistent with "...most federal reporting requirements."

"Data elements" are collected in nine areas:

1. Personal information: Over 100 areas detailing homelife, citizenship, government assistance, family social status and income.

2. Enrollment: Attendance records, types of schools, financial assistance.

3. School participation and activities: Details of grades, clubs, sports and other activities that indicate aptitudes.

4. Non-school and post-school experiences: Work, hobbies and other outside interests.

5. Assessment: Outside assessments, competency and "special" needs.

6. Transportation: Special bussing needs, car make, model, license number and ownership status.

7. Health conditions: Over 200 categories here that include prenatal info (difficult pregnancy, government assistance), vaccination records, physical characteristics (ht., wt., eye/hair color, birthmarks), oral health, blood type, physical health, illnesses, chronic conditions and disabilities.

8. Special program participation and student support services: Self explanatory.

9. Discipline: Arrests, convictions, school records.

The executives admit that some of the information is "sensitive." But believe that the collection of such information is necessary due to "...the complexities of the school environment and the need for essential information for making instructional placement and student service decisions."

Also mentioned was that data collection must meet state, local and federal requirements.

The data collection priority is further proof that your children belong to the state—that you are only "allowed" to parent them during good behavior as defined by the state.