Aug. 6, 2013 @ 6pm: Hearing on Property Tax Increase!!!

Tuesday, Aug. 6, 6pm at the District Office, 575 N. 100 E., American Fork!!!!


Tonight is the final hearing and vote on the tax increase for the district.  While it is a minimal tax increase, scheduled to raise $1.5 M to replace the amount being sent to charter schools by the state, I believe that a tax increase is a measure of last resort.  While we can always find good things to do with that money, the question is whether or not we need that additional amount to fulfill our obligations.

As an example, during June's meeting, we purchased a piece of property from MATC for $1.4M.  This property may be used to move our Adult Services classes for those with disabilities from our Lindon facility to American Fork.  We could also use it to house our At-risk students' alternative High School.  In short, there are many potential uses, but nothing concrete at the moment.  So, do we need to now raise taxes from our patrons for the same amount?  Sure, we can raise taxes and replace carpets and make repairs.  But, we could also not purchase property and do the same thing.  For me, I would have preferred to wait on the property until we were more clear on its use before expending the money. 

Just because our district can use your tax money to do good things, just because it's not a lot of money, does that mean we have a moral imperative to take your money by force?  I think we are under a greater obligation to make sure this is the last possible course of action for educating the kids of our district before we come to you with our hand open.  Property taxes, as I've said before, are the most eggregious form of taxation.  You don't get more money as your property values increase, but you still have to pay the increased taxes.  This places a huge burden on people who are undergoing income difficulties.  There are waivers for the elderly and the disabled, but nothing for a young family that moved into their first home last year and then lost their full-time employment, or a military family affected by the sequester.  While I know we could use the money, I am not convinced that it meets the criteria of being the last, possible resort.  I think it is just simply a matter of wanting to get the amount back that the legislature sent to the charter schools.  I disagree with the legislature on this one, but I'm not comfortable making you pay for their mistake.  For me, showing up the legislature on the backs of our taxpayers isn't what good government means.

Policies: How did we change the district last week?

On July 16, we approved four policies for the district. I ended up voting against two of them, and I think I need to explain why.  To view the four policies go here and click on the 'Meeting Documents' link to download the file. The page numbers are listed below.  The Meeting Documents show the additional words in either red or underlined, with the exception of policy 4056, which has the new policy listed first, and the following page contains the previous policy.

The two I supported were the Fund raising (5148) (pg. 519 of Meeting Documents, see above) and Bullying (5181) (pg. 521 Meeting Documents) policy. Fund-raising simply added a stipulation that if a high school was going to have more than two fund-raisers, it would require written permission from the principal. I think it's fine for the Board to set a district policy limiting the number of fund-raisers but then allow some latitude for individual circumstances in a given school. Also, the Bullying Policy just added parental notification procedures as required by a change in state law. These two, for me, were pretty basic. 

The first policy I opposed was a change to the Wellness Policy (5520) (pg. 523). So, lest anyone says, "You don't like wellness," here's what I really think. I do support wellness.  I want our schools to support parents by not contradicting healthy habits.  I'm glad we strive to have balanced meals served in our cafeterias.  However, I'm not a fan of referencing Federal Law in local policy unless absolutely necessary. 

In 2010, the US Congress passed the "Healthy, Hunger-free Kids Act". This is the law that requires schools to limit calories, based on age, and have every student take a fruit or vegetable, regardless of whether they want it or not. Of all the complaints we heard when school started last Fall, every one had to do with the new school lunch menus, all required by this new Federal law. Some of the consequences of this law have been an increase in cost for food, as well as disposal of all the food the kids aren't eating.   Additionally, kids complain about being hungry.  (Funny YouTube video: We Are Hungry.)  One of the concerns was that, for example, in Middle School, the 7th and 8th graders have a lower calorie allotment than the 9th graders. To handle this, you are given a particular tray color based on your grade. If you are in 9th grade, you can have a cookie. If you are in 7th or 8th grade, you cannot.  The idea that, in Middle School, caloric requirements can be determined by age is wrong.   At any rate, long-story-short, our proposed change to the Wellness Policy modified a few words and then referenced our compliance with the Federal Act. The question was raised whether the Act required us to change our policy or if we could just go along to get the Federal lunch subsidies without specifying the compliance in district policy. It was agreed that we were going to follow Federal Law because we are still taking the lunch subsidies. However, there is no reason why we need to enshrine Federal Law that comes with a large compliance price tag into district policy. For that reason, I voted against the changes to the Wellness Policy. Additionally, I requested that we see if there would be an easy way for parents to opt to pay full-price for their student's lunches should they so choose. Every student lunch is subsidized by both state and federal monies. I would be perfectly happy having my kids eat lunch at school from time to time, if I knew I was paying their way without any subsidy from any of my neighbors. I think this option should be allowed for those parents who feel the same.  I will follow up on this request and let you know. 

The second Policy was the Personnel Certified (Teachers) Goals and Objectives (pg. 527 Meeting Documents). The previous version of this policy was horrible (pg. 528), so the new version is a great improvement. However, there were two substitute motions to change a few of the words. The first was to state that updating the student grading system (currently Skyward) would be done regularly instead of weekly. This allows individual teachers and principals to manage large projects and individual circumstances with greater local control than at a large district level. I supported this change. I also supported a change to state that our educators accept, not support, the district Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals. Since there has been public concern with the Mission Statement that has not been addressed, I felt it would be inappropriate to ask our teachers to support something that a decent segment of our public doesn't support.   (I, personally, think we could find a Mission Statement with a much wider appeal to our constituents than our current one. I do not support our Mission Statement as it now stands. So, I don't feel comfortable having this 'support' as a basis for employment.) Board Member Paula Hill explained it this way. When visiting a country where head-scarves are appropriate/required for women, Mrs. Hill said she would graciously accept their custom and wear a head-scarf. However, she would not be willing to support the tradition. I agreed with this change, as well. However, because of the way the votes and the substitute motions came about, I ended up voting no on the final vote in order to state my support for the change from weekly updated to regularly updated. Even though, I would have liked the two changes, I find the new policy a great improvement over the old one and am okay with the compromise. But I still do not support the Mission Statement.

Finally, there will be a public hearing on the proposed tax increase on Aug. 6, 2013 at 6pm at the District Office (575 N. 100 E. AF). I hope you will come and express your opinion. Please see my previous blog as to why your opinion makes a difference, even if the outcome may not go your way.

Audio: Every board meeting is recorded.  The audio can be found at the bottom of the agenda under the + sign.  As I write, the Study Session audio is available.  The Board Meeting audio should be available shortly.  You can find it here.

What Did They Used to Say About Common Core? Just Listen!

This video contains actual audio from the beginning of the Common Core standards discussion in Utah. Having listened to these meetings, I wanted to make sure some key points were readily accessible and available to everyone.

As human beings, sometimes it's helpful to go back to original sources instead of listening to talking points.  This information on the Common Core process is invaluable in providing insight from those who were there at the time. What was their perspective, and what was their focus?

Please take a few minutes to watch and to understand what was being said about Common Core from the very beginning, not the least of which was the Utah State Board Agenda Item: "National Common Standards".  Contrast this to the Utah State Office of Ed flyer which states: "Fiction: Utah adopted nationalized education standards that come with federal strings attached."  Then ask these questions:

 

What was the overriding reason for Utah joining in with a group that was developing national, common standards?

 

Was there any federal involvement, real or implied, that motivated the jump into Common Core?

 

With all the public involvement, who do you know who was involved in vetting the Common Core standards?

 

The answers you get may be different from what you are being told.

 

 

 

Links to audio files featured in the video:

 

May 1, 2009 Utah School Board Meeting, Agenda Item: National Common Standards

http://www.schools.utah.gov/board/Meetings/Audiocast/2009.aspx

 

June 17, 2009 Legislative Interim Education Committee Meeting

Quoted audio starts about 27:30

http://utahlegislature.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=17&clip_id=5624

 

July 18, 2011 Alpine School Board Training, select the first audio file, quoted starts about 27:14

http://sbs.alpinedistrict.org/cgi-bin/WebObjects/eAgenda.woa/wa/displayMeeting?meetingID=850

A Million Thank You's: Why Your Involvement in the Budget Approval Matters

Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you!!  To all who came to the budget hearing, and to all who sent emails with your opinions.  I can't thank you enough for your comments and your participation. It makes a HUGE difference!

During the budget hearing on June 18, the Board Room was filled to capacity with people who wanted to comment on the budget and on Common Core.  My guess is around 100 people attended.  I also received many emails from those who were unable to come.  The meeting lasted a record 3.5 hours, with most of that time devoted to public comments.  (Incidentally, board meetings usually last about an hour.)

Although, the budget passed, as proposed, despite the objections of all commenters, I consider it a success, and I can't thank you enough.

I realize those of you who took so much time out of your lives, only to see the budget passed against your wishes feel your involvement wasn't beneficial.  However, I'd like to speak to you because it makes a difference in ways that are not readily apparent.  Please, bear with me, as I make this case.

First, it is important to understand that public officials are just the tip of the spear.  To give any of us leverage, we need the public behind us.  I have been told many times, "It's a good thing you're there."  But, if I don't receive emails supporting my position, if you aren't willing to speak in public hearings, then my opinion can be easily dismissed as just being out of the mainstream.  I can try to make my case, but, in the end, without your input, it is easy to out-vote me on many issues.  I have seen several instances where an email from a consituent changes opinions or buys more time to debate an issue.  And perhaps, more importantly, we are not experts in all areas.  Your particular area of expertise or experience may prove very beneficial in informing our debate.

Second, like it or not, our governmental structure was not designed to work quickly.  Changing the direction of any governmental agency is like moving the Titanic. We are also not designed to be a democracy, where the majority vote of the people wins.  The reason for this is the need to protect inalienable rights with checks and balances, as well as to have time to deliberate.  Dr. Larry Arne of Hillsdale College says,

Representative government places ultimate authority outside the government, which restrains both the government and the governed.  In such a system, citizens have endless opportunity to talk, but they may act only on certain occasions....The same restraints operate inside the government to encourage statesmen and citizens to the same habits [thinking, talking, and deliberating before acting].  (The Founders' Key)

Your participation and comments showed our board there are concerns with tax increases, the budget, and Common Core, not just from a few people or from a few elected representatives.  As people become more aware and informed, they will require more input and accountability from their elected officials.

Third, there is a definite difference in the feeling of a meeting when the public is present--not just in theory, but in practice.  Even though every meeting is recorded, there is something different about actually seeing faces, sensing reactions, and hearing comments.  As a representative, I feel more responsible to fulfill my duty to those who elected me.  I might choose my words more carefully.  And I certainly appreciate the time and effort it takes for those who come.  It is one thing for me to set aside time to attend board meetings.  It's quite another for you to do it.  I am obligated.  You are not.  So, if you are willing to come, it must mean it's important.  I need to pay close attention to that. 

Finally, power abhors a vacuum.  In almost all instances, we have no one attend Board Meetings.  We get no emails or communications about our dealings.  In effect, the lack of public comment, attendance, and involvement says, "Go ahead.  Do what you're doing.  We are okay with it."  So, one meeting will not make a difference when compared with every other meeting or issue.  Also, it is common knowledge that people might get involved for the short-term, but very rarely does anyone stay involved over a long period of time.  There's a reason for that.  We want to have lives. 

So, what's the answer?  How do we hold our elected officials accountable without giving up our entire lives?  Many hands make light work. 

A few years ago, some neighbors of mine decided to start going to City Council meetings.  We had about 12 people who were involved, initially.  We realized, we needed to attend only two meetings every year.  A few hours on two days out of every 365.  If there were a budget hearing or some other major issue, then those few people could be available to comment, write emails, and contact their neighbors.  It was just a little more involvement that paid huge dividends, in fiscal responsibility, in community involvement, in accountability.  (It was pretty easy deciding who to re-elect and who to vote out.)

Interestingly enough, about a month ago, I received an email that pointed me to this website to form the Alpine Parent Society.  http://alpineparentsociety.wordpress.com/  I would encourage you to sign up.  Managing a group like this doesn't take a lot of time, especially in this day and age with internet groups, mass emails, and blogs.  Is one or two evenings a year too much to ask for you to get back in charge of your government?

In the end, education is supposed to be about each parent deciding what is best for his or her child.  Our district is there to support you in your decisions.  As board members, we can only reflect your wishes if:
a) you know what we are wrestling with and
b) we know what you would like us to do on your behalf. 

Too many top-down education initiatives have been put in place because parents have been told to trust the system.  It is our duty, as parents and taxpayers, to not abdicate that responsibility.  You shouldn't abdicate it to me or to anyone else.

For those who came on June 18, I say, "Thank you!"  For you and for everyone else, I say, "Please come.  Please email.  Please take your role as the ultimate authority for our district seriously, and weigh in."  Board members, parents, and taxpayers can do more together than we, as a Board, ever could without you.

June 18, 2013: The Most Important Meeting for YOU to attend this year

How do you decide whether to raise property taxes or not?

Please take time to come to our Board Meeting next Tuesday, June 18, 2013.  We will be approving the annual budget for 2013-14, which is more than a Half Billion Dollars: $500,000,000!!!

The budget can be found here.

Budget Hearing and Property Tax Rate Increase
The meeting is at 6pm at the District Office (575N 100E, American Fork).  The required budget hearing (which is an open forum for all budget-related comments) begins shortly thereafter, maybe around 6:15 or 6:30pm.  In my previous two years, I have not seen anyone speak during the formal budget hearing.  I have been told that this is consistent over the past decade.  I will give my opinion, of course, but it will mean more coming from you.

Part of the budget will be a property tax-rate increase.  A Truth in Taxation hearing will occur on August 6, but, if you want to have an impact, you need to speak up PRIOR to the budget being adopted--that means June 18.  (Don't complain to me; complain to the legislature.  This is how they've set it up.)  The fiscal year starts on July 1.  So, a full month of expenses will have occurred prior to the Truth in Taxation hearing in August.  The reasons for the tax-rate increase are: 'to raise an additional $1.5 million to provide additional "pay as you go" resources, allow less future debt and recover the charter school offset.'  I'll go into each of these reasons in a moment.  The estimated cost on a $250,000 home will be in the range of $12-$15/year.  Business or rental property will be almost double that amount.

The study session begins at 4pm.  We will discuss the Common Core trainings that occurred last week with approximately 2000 employees attending.  We will also get an overview of the budget.

The formal Board Meeting/Budget Hearing will begin around 6pm.  It will also include: a) Approval of Association Contracts for Teachers (Certified), Classified (e.g. Nurses, Bus Drivers, Secretaries, Custodians, etc), and Administrators, b) Approval of Trustlands Plans, c) Four additional Board Policies, d) Property Purchase, e) 2015 Calendar.

Pay As You Go
The Board has indicated a desire to get out of the bonding cycle and begin using existing funds to purchase and maintain property, etc.  Our last bond was for $210 million for projects over five years.  Our principal and interest payments are about $45 million/year.  So, if we were able to stop bonding, we could hold on to that $45 million and use it to pay for the bonded expenses, and still have about $15 million left over after the five years.  This is a great idea, and the less indebtedness that we can incur, the better, in my opinion.  However, I am unsure that levying a property tax increase to garner an additional $1.5 million is the best option. 

Allow Less Future Debt
This is really the same thing as Pay As You Go.  If you spend more cash and less on credit, then you reduce your debt later on.

Charter School Offset
Essentially, when charter schools were created, all funding came through income tax.  Several years ago, the law was changed to allow for an additional "offset" for charter schools, based on property tax amounts in each district.  (See below for the math*.)

When the law was first passed, it amounted to less than $500,000.  Now it's about $1.4 million.  As we increase property taxes and as charter school enrollment increases, that "offset" amount increases.  Most school districts increased their tax rates right after the law went into affect.  However, since Alpine was looking at bonding, it was decided the timing wasn't right.  Essentially, the legislature didn't want to raise income taxes, so they left it to the local districts to raise property taxes to help pay for the additional amounts going to charter schools.

So, the question is whether or not you want your property taxes increased.  And if not, why not?  If so, why?

What Else is in the Budget?
Some other things you may be interested in.  The following were included in the budget prior to any discussion of a tax-rate increase.

• Additional 10 teachers (FTE's) to help reduce class size.  This is in addition to those teachers being hired due to approximately 2500 additional students coming to ASD in the fall.
• 1% permanent salary increase for teachers and staff: ASD has a salary schedule that pays you based on years of service and education level.  This is referred to as "Step and Lane". 
• One-time 1% bonus for employees to be paid in November.
• $25,000 for membership in the BYU-Public School Partnership
• Dues and fees paid for association membership for the School Board, Administrators, Accountants, and other 'specialty' fields.  Association fees are not being paid by taxpayers for teachers. 

Additionally, the budget includes:

• An increase of $1000 for board salaries, from $215,335 to $224,788 for the Superintendent and, from $174,526 to $189,998 for the Business Administrator.

It's important to note that an increase in salaries increases the amount in benefits, specifically the retirement benefits.

It's Just...
It's just $13.48 per year for the Board's proposed property tax increase.  It's just $7.11 per year the legislature has increased property taxes.  It's just $24.00 this year and a total of $36.00 per year next year for the bond.  It's just more for the Vineyard RDA from 2011. 

Every taxing entity justifies its tax increases with those words: "It's just".  Do I think ASD will be able to put the $1.4M to good use?  I do.  However, that really shouldn't be the question before us.  The questions every elected official should grapple with are:

"Is this the BEST use of that money?" 
"Is a tax increase the only way we can fulfill our obligation to the public?"

As many a wise person has said before me, "The power to tax is the power to destroy."  What we see (the good that ASD can do with the money) must be balanced against what we don't see (families struggling to stay in their homes, decreased revenues due to increased tax rates).  Property taxes are especially eggregious because property doesn't generate income unless you sell it.  Your home value is dependent on everyone else who is selling around you.  But you will not see a dime of that supposed increased value until you sell.  So, unlike income taxes, where the taxation is actually based on money you are earning, property tax is based on money other people are earning on their homes.  It is entirely possible to price people out of their homes with property taxes.

Another justification is the "fairness" of what we spend on ASD students vs. what the charter schools spend on theirs.  According to the Utah Taxpayers' Association, ASD receives the least amount per student of every district or charter school in Utah.  So, in order to be fair, this amount is being levied so we can bring our revenue up to that of the charters in our area.  The problem with that is, we are "balancing" this fairness out on the backs of our taxpayers.  If we don't like the way the legislation is written, we need to take it up with the Legislature, not use our power to tax to create "equality".  I, personally, look on our status as the lowest funded as a badge of honor.  Our students do well.  We have great teachers.  We are trying to do well by our teachers and staff.  And yet, we are trying to keep costs down.  Why must we seek to "Keep up with the Joneses?"

It is the job of our district administration to make recommendations to the Board.  It is the job of the Board to properly balance those recommendations with the burden it will place on our taxpayers and our obligation to educate the students in our district properly.  It is a very difficult task, and a solemn one, at that.  One, I do not take lightly.

While I can see the benefit of having an additional $1.5 million to make repairs and to save for the future, I am not convinced that our community and our students will be better served by that money being transferred from you to the district.  It is a balancing act.  And I am choosing to wait for a greater need.

It's just... 

It's just your money, and we shouldn't take it except as a last resort.


*[Here's the charter school offset math: If you take all the local property tax ASD receives and divide it by the total number of all district and charter school students, that is the property tax per student amount. Then you take the number of charter school students multiplied by that per student amount and then divide by 4 (25%).  That is the amount that ASD doesn't get from the state in income tax funds. Property Taxes / (charter + district students) * charter students*25% = amount ASD doesn't get from the state, but that the state sends to the charter schools in our area.] 

Data on my kid? Who Cares? How Will They Get It?

First, you are invited to attend a meeting with Utah State Office of Education employees on Thursday, April 11, 2013 at 4pm at the Alpine District Offices (575 E. 100 N, American Fork).  They will be presenting information on the new testing (really called 'assessment') system for the state, provided by the American Institutes for Research (AIR).  If you never attend another meeting about relating to the schools, PLEASE come to this one!

A couple of pieces of information, I will link to the research on AIR that my fellow board member, Brian Halladay has done below.  AIR is a behavioral research organization not an academic assessment company.  Additionally, the legislature, at some point, created a law that allows testing companies to use "student behavior indicators in assessing student performance."  So, since AIR's mission isn't academics and the state is allowing them to use behavior indicators, why is this a problem?

This goes back to our board discussion on Feb. 26, and a follow-up presentation in our March 12 Meeting... in a word, DATA, your child's personally identifiable information (PII).

Our board reviewed a speech given by US Sec. of Education, Arne Duncan in 2009 hailing the use of "robust data" and how that applies to the new Common Core standards and the ARRA 2009 Stimulus money.  One board member identified that at one point in the speech, Sec. Duncan talks about needing to close and reopen schools and assess teacher performance, as well as student performance, and at another point he says they don't want to use it to fire teachers or to shut down schools.  Incidentally, the No Child Left Behind waiver that Utah received has language about the state taking control of "failing schools".   In short, no local control, but I digress.  The overall tone of the discussion was that we, as the representatives, needed to be on guard in protecting and doing all in our power to make sure our students' data is safe.

We also addressed two other issues, briefly.

1) The change in privacy regulations on a Federal level, known as FERPA (Federal Education Rights and Privacy Act).  These changes did not go through Congress, and they essentially allow any educational entity (schools, districts, state boards) to share personal student information with any other government entity or private organization that has an educational interest.  This is something that I would be very opposed to.

2) The 2009 Stimulus package also included grants for every state to develop a Statewide Longitudinal Database (SLDS) which means your child is tracked at the state level from Preschool (or as early as they have data) through age 20 or into Workforce Services.  As a condition of this grant, the database has to be able to share/include data from other state agencies, like Workforce Services or Dept of Health etc., and the database must be able to share data with other states' databases, as well.  Incidentally, in the Duncan speech, he praises Utah's database efforts as one of six states that had all the elements required by the Data Quality Campaign.  For more information on assessments, read my previous blog here.   

So, based on those items, the desire of the US Secretary of Education to have robust data collection, his change to the privacy regulations, and the State database that Utah has on all our publicly schooled children, the idea of what and how much can be collected and shared is an actual concern to the board. 

On March 12, our data services director, David Smith, presented on how Alpine uses data collection and what information is shared and with whom.  While I was very pleased to hear about a lot of the hoops that we use to make sure private information isn't shared, there is one weak link: the State.  Because of State Law, we are obligated to administer the state tests and to have that data analyzed and computed to both assess student performance and to grade our schools.  So, when a class, say Mrs. A's third grade, is supposed to take the state math test, then our district sends the state office a file of all the students in Mrs. A's third grade class.  This data includes the child's name, unique student id, birthdate, grade, Mrs. A's name, school, and some demographic info.  Then the child takes the tests, they are scored and compared with other students across the state and sent back to the school.  So, at a minimum, your child's name, id, birthdate, demographics and test scores are in the state database, ready to be shared with whomever they choose. 

So, go back to the link above about allowing behavioral indicators to be used in the tests.  So, aside from testing math and English, they can test behaviors. 

Having said all of this, I am concerned by this intrusion into my kids' personal information. 

I don't know if you will be allowed to ask questions at the April 11 meeting, but it makes a huge difference to show elected officials that you are concerned.    Please make sure you clear your calendar for 4pm on Thursday, April 11.  If you can't make it, there are other meetings being held around the state.  Click here for a schedule. 

****************************
Board Member Brian Halladay's research on AIR and the upcoming meeting

Next Thursday, April 11th, you are invited to participate in the SAGE assessment System presentation at 4pm at the Alpine School District Office Building.

SAGE is the acronym for the common core testing system that will be collecting data from our children.

I think it’s important for all of us to know before the meeting what SAGE is and it’s implications for our children, our privacy, and our school district.
...
Student Assessment for Growth and Excellence (“SAGE (http://www.schools.utah.gov/assessment/Adaptive-Assessment-System.aspx) ”) is being developed for Utah by the American Institutes for Research (AIR (http://www.air.org/about/) ). SAGE is Utah’s comprehensive adaptive assessment system, or the testing mechanism that will replace the CRTs. It is designed to replace and expand UTIPS, and provides the test delivery and administration of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium.

So, who is AIR? AIR is not an academic assessment company - it is a behavioral research organization. AIR has been around for over 60 years. Their founder, John Flanagan, a psychologist, started AIR by developing the “critical incident technique (http://www.apa.org/pubs/databases/psycinfo/cit-article.pdf) ” one of the most widely used behavioral methods that is even now used in assessment models today.

In 1960, AIR initiated “Project Talent (http://www.projecttalent.org/docs/Designing_the_Study_(1960).pdf) ,” a research project administered by John Flanagan and a group of other behavioral scientists involving 440,000 high school students, collecting information on “aptitudes, abilities, knowledge, interests, activities, and backgrounds” of each student. These questions included questions about “hobbies, organizational and club memberships, dating and work experiences. There were questions about students’ health and about their school and study habits. Students were asked about their fathers’ occupations, parents’ education, financial situations, etc.” One question asked was, “How many children do you expect to have after you marry?” and “How old were you when you first started dating?”

What is AIR doing today? AIR is currently working with multiple partners, including the Department of Education, United Nations (http://www.air.org/focus-area/international-development/) , the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Open Society Institute (George Soros), (http://www.air.org/about/?fa=viewContent&content_id=351) to “conduct and apply the best behavioral and social science research evaluation towards improving peoples’ lives, with a special emphasis on the disadvantaged.” AIR prides itself on its "long history of contributing to evidence-based social change."

What does this mean for the Alpine School District, or even the State of Utah? In 2012 USOE developed the USOE Technology Standards 2012 (http://www.setda.org/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=169&name=DLFE-1560.pdf) . One of the standards is to have a network-enabled computing device capable of providing access to the school’s technology resources. A purpose of this is for the understanding “human, cultural, and societal issues related to technology and practice legal and ethical behavior.” I don’t think it’s a stretch to think that AIR will be heavily involved with this.

AIR will be developing these assessments, which will include behavioral questions. It’s what they do. One of their primary objectives is to use this data not only in collaboration with other states in relation to common core, but also in collaboration with the United Nations.

With the recent amendments to the FERPA laws, the question becomes what will we as parents do right now to protect the privacy of our children?

Come to the meeting next Thursday at 4pm at the Alpine School District Office Building and get informed!

Database: What Information is there on Your Child?

Database
On Tuesday, Feb. 26, our board professional development will be on the use of data and how that relates to Common Core.  At 4pm at Mountain View High School, I will be leading the discussion, based on the 2009 speech from Secretary Arne Duncan.  You can read it here. 

You need to understand that as part of the 2009 ARRA Stimulus money, the Federal Department of Education created grants for each and every state to set up a Statewide Longitudinal Database (SLDS).  Essentially, this database allows each individual child to be tracked from preschool through work and every stage in between (that's what longitudinal means).  Utah's database was praised in this speech by Sec. Duncan, as follows:

The Data Quality Campaign, DQC, lists 10 elements of a good data system. Six states, Alabama, Arizona, Delaware, Florida, Louisiana, and Utah, have all 10 elements. Other states are also making progress. For example, Arkansas has a data warehouse that integrates school fiscal information, teacher credentials, and student coursework, assessments, and even extracurricular activities.[emphasis mine]

As part of the these grants, "[t]he system must facilitate and enable the exchange of data among agencies and institutions within the State and between States so that data may be used to inform policy and practice." (pp.4)

A few more pieces of information for those who are interested:

Effective, Jan. 3, 2012, the US Dept of Education modified its regulations dealing with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA, originally enacted by Congress in 1974). If you like, you may read the changes from the Federal Register here: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-12-02/html/2011-30683.htm.  Arguably, these changes violate Utah's version of the FERPA law, as well.

An organization called EPIC (Electronic Privacy Information Center) has filed a lawsuit against the US Government regarding these changes by the Dept of Ed. http://epic.org/apa/ferpa/default.html

The National Education Data Model has proposed the information contained at this site be included in any educational database: http://nces.sifinfo.org/datamodel/eiebrowser/techview.aspx?instance=studentPostsecondary Obviously, we can choose to populate the information or not, but it is important to know this is what is being suggested.

Finally, I just received a link from an out-of-state friend on this publication from the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (wiche) of which Utah is a member.  It is entitled "Framework for a Multi-State Human Capital Development Data System".  (No, that Orwellian name really is the title of the paper.)  I am happy to know that our children are reduced to "the stock and flow of human capital".  The conclusion states, in part:

A multi-state data exchange – what we have chosen to call a human capital development data system – that enables policymakers to look comprehensively at the stock and flow of human capital has become essential for effective policymaking and planning in the globalized knowledge economy.

The security of our students' data and parental oversight in the sharing of this data is one of my highest priorities.  As those responsible for watching over our school district, it is our responsibility, as a board, to take great care to protect this information.  Since data protection was one of the issues from our board priority discussion that received high marks, I think it is appropriate for you to be aware of the concerns I have with this database.

Oak Canyon JH Boundary Changes
The only action item for the Board Meeting will be the proposed boundary changes to Oak Canyon Junior High in Pleasant Grove. 

Everyone is welcome to attend the study session at 4pm, as it is a public meeting.  No comments will be taken at this time.  Public comments are always welcome at the 6pm formal board meeting.