LEGO MOVIE: An Analogy for Stop Common Core?

Went to the new Lego movie tonight with the family. When the villain was introduced as "Mr. Business" I thought, "Oh no, this one is going to be another progressive plot that demonizes business as the root of our problems and subtly suggests to our children that we need Big Government to swoop in and protect us." But as I watched the theme develop, I was surprised that the movie went in a very different direction. It is appropriate that a toy company that has been dedicated to the creative brain development of children for decades produced a movie script that illustrated perfectly the folly of education reform based on a blueprint of standardization.

I thought my fellow Stop Common Core activists would easily see the parallels between the themes in this story and why we so passionately oppose the federal education agenda. The villain in the movie was a great metaphor for the crony partnership between big business and government that is pushing a philosophy of standardization and micro-managed economies under the guise of education reform.

"Mr. Business," the villain in the movie, is also "The President" of their Lego city. I saw President Buisness as a clear symbol for the seamless merging of corporate interests and means with government power and force, essentially the use of private industry to accomplish the means of government. Just like Common Core. This villain wants to impose his "program" on everyone, he writes the instruction manuals, and he forces everyone to follow the instruction manuals with no deviation. Just like Common Core. He stamps out creativity and individuality, to say nothing for freedom. True to life, he uses his power as "the president" to send out his "police" to enforce his will. President Buisness  even calls his police robots his "micro-managers" and sends them out to micro-manage every detail. Just like what people fear will happen as the federal vice grip closes in on education and the federal/corporate union gains control of the instruction manuals in our local schools.

Unlike the standard progressive narrative, in the Lego movie it isn't the government that does the saving, it's the people. In fact the hero of the movie is just an ordinary Lego guy, Emmett, he is marching forward as part of President Buisness's micro-managed workforce, unaware until he falls into the truth and is thrust into action. It's funny when Emmett realizes that the President writes the instruction manuals and builds the voting machines. It's funny how Emmett is at first cheerfully placated by "President Buisness's" charisma and promises of "Taco Tuesdays". It's a spot on analogy for how Americans today have been blinded to the dangers they face.

Like so many hero stories, the villain is set on destroying the world, but it is particularly astute that the way in which he will destroy their world is that he will effectively freeze it in place, stop it's creative motion and movement forward. This is precisely what policies like Common Core will do. When government officials think they can make things "perfect" by micro-managing every detail they effectively freeze the creative endeavors that drive success and the pursuit of happiness in society.

In the end the movie forwards the idea that creativity and individuality are essential, that the enemy to happiness and progress are those who seek to control and "micro-manage" the creative process of individuals and societal development. Emmett learns that everyone is special in some way and that when they aren't limited to the "instruction manual" they can create incredible things. It is a celebration of creativity and uniqueness, the exact opposite of the creativity killing plans that are at the center of the Common Core Agenda.

As the theme applies to educating children day by day, I think the movie demonstrates what every parent instinctively knows and what educrats, politicians, and corporate-crats should wake-up to. It is simply a crime to squash the creativity and play of children in exchange for the promise of "global competitiveness." Like the villain in the movie, the Common Core Agenda seeks to build it's "perfect system" by centrally managing every student until it will destroys those characteristics of education and child development which most contribute to happy children and mature adults. The goal set by the Common Core architects will allude them as they will succeed only in destroying the dynamic, creative, and innovative abilities of a generation, effectively stalling the engine of creative progress and freezing our society in place.

Educating for Human Happiness

A list I revised from a blog post, What Should a 4 Year Old Know, at the blog A Magical Childhood. I was so inspired by this blog post that I decided that I needed to create a list for my Homeschool Planner binder to remind me that everyday my sons education contains these characteristics. It has helped me set my goals and build my curriculum.

Our family Homeschool mission statement was written before I read this post, but these points reinforce our mission:

In the Morgan Family Homeschool we will nurture the natural curiosity, spiritual capacities, and emotional intellect of our children through cultivating a lifelong love of learning in a loving home environment.

WHAT LITTLE CHILDREN SHOULD KNOW:

HE should know that he is loved wholly and unconditionally, all of the time.

HE should know that he is safe and he should know that he can trust his instincts about people and that he never has to do something that doesn't feel right, no matter who is asking.

HE should know how to laugh, act silly, be goofy and use his imagination.

HE should know his own interests and be encouraged to follow them. If he couldn’t care less about learning his numbers, his parents should realize he’ll learn them accidentally soon enough and let him immerse himself instead in rocket ships, drawing, dinosaurs or playing in the mud.

HE should know that the world is magical and that so is he.

He should know that he’s wonderful, brilliant, creative, compassionate and marvelous.

HE should know that it’s just as worthy to spend the day outside making daisy chains, mud pies and fairy houses as it is to practice phonics. Scratch that– way more worthy.

WHAT EVERY PARENT SHOULD KNOW:

Every child learns at his own pace: children learn to walk, talk, read and do algebra at his own pace and that it will have no bearing on how well he walks, talks, reads or does algebra.

Take the time every day to sit and read them wonderful books. The single biggest predictor of high academic achievement and high ACT scores is reading to children. Not flash cards, not workbooks, not fancy preschools, not blinking toys or computers.

One of the biggest advantages we can give our children is a simple, carefree childhood. That being the smartest or most accomplished kid has never had any bearing on being the happiest. We are so caught up in trying to give our children “advantages” that we’re giving them lives as multi-tasked and stressful as ours.

Our children deserve to be surrounded by books, nature, art supplies and the freedom to explore them. -- Building toys, art materials, musical instruments, dress up clothes, and books, books, books. They need to have the freedom to explore – to play with scoops of dried beans, to knead bread and make messes, to use paint and play dough and glitter, to have a spot in the yard where it’s absolutely fine to dig a mud pit.

Our children need more of us. They deserve to know that they’re a priority for us and that we truly love to be with them. Our children don’t need Nintendos, computers, after school activities, ballet lessons, play groups and soccer practice nearly as much as they need US. They need fathers who sit and listen to their days, mothers who join in and make crafts with them, parents who take the time to read them stories and act like idiots with them. They need us to take slow walks with them. They deserve to help us make supper even though it takes twice as long and makes it twice as much work.

Frozen Fans Get Stuck on the Wrong Message

First off understand me, I loved the movie Frozen, it may even be my favorite Disney movie to date. I loved the movie because of the beautiful message that in love is the power to overcoming our challenges. I loved the layers of spiritual truth in the story and the opportunity that it presents to use the appealing movie to teach my children timeless truths.

What is bugging me is that so many people I observe on social media and in my personal acquaintance seem to be latching on to the absolute wrong message from the story. Rather than perceiving the transcendent truth that we are all flawed individuals whose weaknesses are only overcome through love and faith, it appears that many are caught up in the message of the title song that celebrates a deceptive freedom that comes from "testing the limits" where there is "no right, no wrong, and no rules." I understand why the song is so popular, it is very catchy, and really fun to sing; one of those songs that just gets stuck in your head and you can't stop singing it. Perhaps that's another reason it bugs me.

Unlike other Disney movies, the evil the heroines fight in this movie is much more like that which each of us fight within ourselves in real life. It is not a fire breathing dragon, a wicked sorcerer, or an evil witch, rather it is the subtle lies of the devil that cause us to respond to our human weakness by turning away from faith, obedience, and the love of God. Elsa has an extraordinary power that is also a great challenge to her and her family. Afraid of her strength her parents teach her to hide away and fear her power.

We are all like Elsa in a way, we all have God given gifts (talents) that used properly give us extraordinary power and bring great joy to us. What is also true is that most often our greatest strengths are on the flip side our greatest weakness. My mom used to say that these talents are like coins with a heads side and a tales side. Too often we focus on the tails side, the down side, and wish we could eliminate it because we fear that we will never overcome or learn to control our weakness. Too often we respond to this weakness by attempting to throw out the whole coin. Unfortunately, when we do, we throw out the good with the bad. As a result our personal growth is stunted, not only do we never learn how to control our "flip-side", we don't develop our strength. We succeed only in making ourselves miserable and pushing away the people we love as we lose what we love most about ourselves. This is what happens to Elsa as she responds to her power and weakness by hiding in fear.

When we respond to our challenges and weaknesses the way that Elsa learns to it almost always leads to disaster. Elsa meets that disaster when she seeks "freedom" from years of confusion by turning her back on her home and any sense of obligation. Here is where the title song "Let it Go", that is propelling a pop culture sensation over the movie Frozen, steps into the story. In Elsa's desperation to feel in control of her power she succumbs to a subtle lie, the lie that you can be free by simply throwing off the confines of right and wrong and letting go of your obligations and concerns. She turns her back on her sister's love, her obligations to her kingdom, and her home and runs away. The song that describes this moment of emotional release from her burdens has become a hit. I understand why the sense of liberation and freedom is appealing, but I think most people don't realize when their singing the song and feeling triumphant about it that they are celebrating a true deception. Perhaps they do not internalize the lyrics as I do.

Here are some choice words from the song:

Be the good girl you always have to be. [implying that being "good" is an unwanted obligation]
Conceal don't feel, don't let them know... [representing the way her parents wrongfully taught her to respond to her challenges]

Let it go, let it go.
Turn away and slam the door. [representing her choice to turn away from her home]
I don't care what they're going to say.
Let the storm rage on.
The cold never bothered me anyway... [making a choice to ignore the pain her actions will cause to those who love her most]

It's time to see what I can do,
to test the limits and break through.
No right, no wrong, no rules for me. I'm free!... [The ultimate lie. That life with no right, wrong, and rules is true freedom]

My soul is spiraling in frozen fractals all around... [Captures the truth of what happens when we throw off our moral compass]
I'm never going back...

That perfect girl is gone...
Let the storm rage on!
The cold never bothered me anyway.

When I watched the movie this song stirred painful memories of my own poor choices to rebel in my youth, to turn my back on my faith and my family, and to pretend it didn't "bother me anyway". It was a time in my youth when I didn't understand how to access the grace of Christ in tackling human weakness and was tired of trying to be a "good girl". I bought into the lie that turning my back on my moral compass and my family obligations would set me free. For a short time I felt a sense of liberation but that feeling was fleeting and empty and the result of my choice was the greatest misery I have every known. So I hope you can understand why it is so disturbing that this song was chosen by the producers as the title song, the song to represent the message of the movie, and marketed to be a smash hit when in reality it represents the evil that threatens to tear us away from that which matters most.

I understand why my four year old latches naively onto the title song but how can so many adults I know seem to miss the meaning of this song? The words "Let it Go" by themselves could in some context be good but in the context of the story one should ask, "What is Elsa letting go of and whether it in reality will set her free?" The pop version of the song has 49+ million views on YouTube, is nominated for an academy award, and it's deceptive message is glorified in posters that race around social media as a song of triumphant liberation.

The tragedy of it all is that the beautiful truths in the story are lost in an almost singular focus on the wrong message. Elsa's little sister never gives up on her, she embarks on a perilous journey to bring her home, to show her she is loved. Her character is a symbol of Christ's love that is ever constant, ever knocking at the door. Elsa learns that her challenges can be faced and conquered because of that love and in the end she chooses love and faith over fear and doubt. There are deep spiritual messages and Christian themes in this wonderful story and for that reason it is very disappointing to see so many people fail to realize these themes and instead pick out the lie and take it for truth.

For this reason I wonder about the intent behind the marketing of this catchy song as the title song. Every time I hear my four year old singing the impressionable tune and belting out the words, "no right, no wrong, no rules for me, I'm free!" I wish the producers had not chosen to sell this message so craftily. For parents wondering how to help their little children pick up on the moral of the story, there is another song in the movie that is worth celebrating, the song "Fixer Upper". These lyrics are worth repeating over and over.

"Everyone’s a bit of a fixer-upper,
That’s what it’s all about!
Father!
Sister!
Brother!
We need each other to raise
Us up and round us out.

Everyone’s a bit of a fixer-upper,
But when push comes to shove.
The only fixer-upper fixer
That can fix up a fixer-upper is
True! true!
True, true, true!
Love (True love)"



Like I said, Frozen may be my favorite Disney movie of all time, the story tackles the true enemy we all face, an enemy that seeks to confuse us and twist truth until we throw away those that have the power to help us realize our true potential. I only hope that the depth of this story isn't lost on a pop culture infatuation with a hollow feeling stirred up by the false freedom of "letting go" of what matters most.

How Common Core’s More Rigorous Standards Dumb Kids Down?

There is a strange phenomenon apparent in how parents talk about the effects of Common Core standards on their children -- some parents see their once happy learners struggling to grasp the curriculum while others parents say the curriculum is too easy and is not challenging their child -- Can they both be right? This is a question I often get from parents researching Common Core and running into this contradiction. Those who are pushing the Common Core know how hard it is for parents to make sense of it and that works to their benefit. I will attempt to answer this question as simply as I can, so stay with me.

The problems with the Common Core Standards start with, and stem from, the fact that they were not developed with careful attention to what is developmentally appropriate for children. You might ask, how this could possibly happen. Hundreds of high profile leaders have said that the standards were developed by hundreds of experts. I too think it is shocking that the Federal Department of Education would push national standards that are fundamentally flawed. However, despite some warnings from early childhood development specialist, the committee of teachers and curriculum experts devising the standards did so “with no input from early childhood educators, only a few elementary school teachers, and no child development specialists, phychologist, pediatricians, or neuro-psychologist… There was no inter-disciplinary input on the committee; and it isn't apparent that the standards were tied to any research. "Normally when you see something this important, you see citations after it that indicate the research the standards are based on. Surely you would think that the academic standards for a nation of children would be based on research." 1

Since the standards were completely unknown to the general public until after they were introduced in the classroom, it has only been since there introduction into the schools that independent experts in the fields of early childhood development have had opportunity to examine the standards. I would encourage parents to read and participate in the lectures that have been presented by these experts that discuss the developmentally inappropriate nature of the Common Core and the harmful effects of the assessments being developed. Here is some of what we are learning about the standards.

"Being developmentally appropriate requires an understanding of how a child's mind is developing and then presenting information based on that." 1 So to understand how Common Core standards are developmentally inappropriate, let’s do a quick crash course in the stages of childhood development and use a widely accepted theory, Piaget's theory of cognitive development.

Kindergarteners are in a developmental period known as “pre-operational” (2-7 years old), this is because they cannot yet understand operational changes. For example, when you show them a picture of two cookies + three cookies = five cookies, they are going to struggle to understand how these two smaller groups can change to become a larger one, but if you wait just a little bit longer till they are in the “concrete operational” (7-11 years) period this kind of instruction becomes much easier and this is the optimal age for developing mastery in math facts and basic language skills. Children don’t begin to think logically and abstractly until the “formal operational” period (11-adult), this is the period where they are able to comprehend logically and grasp algebraic concepts which are abstract in nature. 1

Below is a look at how a typical 5/6 year old is developing:

· Practicing Being Independent
· Exhibiting Creativity
· Focused on how things look
· Thinks that others see things the way they do
· Can't understand another's perspective
· Can't reflect upon their own thinking
· Semi-logical
· Cannot think abstractly
· Confuses reality and fantasy

Below are a set of mathematical practices that Common Core Standards expect students from Kindergarten to 12th grade to exhibit. Based on the cognitive abilities shown above you should be able to pick out the practices that are developmentally inappropriate for K-3rd?

· Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them.
· Reason abstractly and quantitatively.
· Construct viable arguments and critique the reasoning of others.
· Model with mathematics.
· Use appropriate tools strategically.
· Attend to precision.

After reviewing the Common Core Standards, Child Psychologist Dr. Megan Koschnick, concluded that the developers of the Standards saw this collage and career ready goal and they backed the standards down all the way to Kindergarten. So instead of thinking about what is developmentally appropriate for a Kindergartener, they are thinking about where they want that kindergartener to end up, “let's track this all back down to kindergarten and have them work on those skills in a kindergarten way"… There are some major flaws with that. "There're trying to push down heavier higher level things on the lower grades." This will take a lot of time that is wasted at the expense of more basic skills and other crucial areas of a child's learning: active, hands-on exploration, and developing social, emotional, problem-solving, and self-regulation skills.

Below are some specific examples of standards that are developmentally inappropriate:

1) Behavioral and Social Standards housed under writing for Kindergarten students: With guidance and support from adults, respond to questions and suggestions from peers and add details to strengthen writing as needed. "So instead of proposing something that would be more in line with a Kindergartener’s goal of exploring, being creative, and independent they've suggested the social and emotional goal of being dependent on other people." 1

2) Math Standard for Kindergarten: “Require kids in Kindergarten to learn addition and subtraction within 5,” which doesn't seem like a lot, but they are in the pre-operational period and because their brains are not ready for operational concepts these will require lessons and strategies, such as "drill and kill" methods, to program Kindergarteners to test proficient on the math facts."

3) ELA Standard for 1st graders: Distinguish shades of meaning among related words and describe states of mind or degrees of certainty (e.g. knew, believed, suspected, heard, and wondered). Here they are not looking for concrete definitions but rather to understand the nuances of the words which requires abstract thought. This is a cognitive ability not developed in a 1st grader.

So, why does it matter if the standards are developmentally appropriate? And how does that effect the student as they reach higher level courses?

"Kids that are subjected to standards that are inappropriate will be more stressed, this has been proven to be true in research... stress, anxiety, depression, physical hostility, nervousness, physical aches and pains” will all present in a greater number of children. Thus Common Core is causing parents to see their once bright engaged child withdraw from classroom instruction and sink in test performance, giving the impression that the standards are too hard.

Proponents of the Common Core standards say that they “are fewer but deeper,” but what this means in real terms is they will spend more years trying to teach children what they are not ready for while ignoring critical steps in their development. Then when they are ready for concrete operations, for example, they delay them in exchange for what is being called "fuzzy math" pushing off concrete mastery of the language of math and reliable algorithms even further. One math teacher described this insane practice as trying to "make little mathematicians who have no hope of being able to do math."

Dr. James Milgram, Professor of Mathematics at Stanford University, has extensive experience developing mathematics standards throughout the nation and served on the Validation Committee for the Common Core Standards. Regarding the math standards, Dr. James Milgram (the only person with an advanced degree in mathematics on the Validation Committee) refused to sign off on the standards because he concluded that they would place American students at least two years behind those of high-achieving countries by 8th grade. So while some of my friends have little children who are struggling in K-3 many opponents are focusing on the delay in algebra onward and the decrease in quality literary study that as evidence that the standards are "dumbing students down". Thus the apparent contradiction between parents who say their bright kids are struggling and others who say the standards are a step down, isn’t a contradiction at all. It’s the natural effect of standards designed to turn education on its head.

The proponents of Common Core are using this misunderstood contradiction to discredit what parents are experiencing. This was exactly the approach Arne Duncan took recently when he said that parental backlash over Common Core was coming from "white moms" who realized all of the sudden their child wasn't "as brilliant" as they thought they were. The real contradiction is the one Arne Duncan and the private backers of Common Core are selling American parents. That is that the standards are rigorous and go deeper to develop higher level thinking. It’s true that they are rigorous, extreme, and inflexible during the most fragile stages of brain development but it is also true that they foolishly attempt to make adults of 5 year olds while setting seniors years behind their international peers. Sure we will train some students to answer test questions proficiently, we can even train a second grader to answer abstract questions, but we will not have changed the internal process of understanding abstractly. While some students may seem to master the skills there will be many more who throw up the white flag and surrender.

1. Lecture by Dr. Megan Koschnick on how Common Core is Developmentally Inappropriate: http://youtu.be/vrQbJlmVJZo

There is No Place Like Home

In 2009 Obama's education secretary Arne Duncan, in all seriousness, shared his vision of American schools as the center of community life and I dare say family life. He said, “I think schools should be open 12, 13, 14 hours a day, seven days a week, 11-12 months of the year.” The federal education agendas for decades have encouraged and even mandated that schools "increase instructional time" which is a term that disguises the real purpose behind increasing school hours and school years -- which is to replace family free time with an institutionalized childhood.

A news story out of Colorado today is only one of dozens of stories from across the country reporting significant increases in school hours for especially our youngest children. While living in Nebraska I organized several grassroots organization (here, and here) with the purpose of defending the integrity of the family, the innocence of children, and preserving the role of parents in directing the upbringing and education of their children. "Instructional time" and "attendance" agendas linked to federal education mandates and "initiatives" were of great concern because they challenged the central role of parents in nurturing and raising children. I wrote several articles warning parents of the damages children and family life suffer from the agenda to lengthen school calendars (here, here, here, and here).

The American Academy of Pediatrics released a report in 2007 warning parents of the relationship between increased depression and anxiety in children and the lack of the simple childhood pleasure of play. The report states that "the national trend, to focus on the academic fundamentals... has decreased time left for recess, creative arts, and physical education" at school and has "further diminished the child-driven play that is essential to the cognitive, physical, social, and emotional well-being of children and youth" that happens at home. Compound that with extended hours in after-school programs that emphasize academics, the hours of unsupervised video gaming and constant T.V. and you have a recipe for a nation that cannot create, work, or think.

It is not surprising, but no less disappointing, when I hear mothers complain that the precious little time they have with their children at home is further diminished by these national policies. It saddens me to hear so many parents complaining about stressed out kids who have no time to play and who feel their children are loosing their childhood to the ill conceived notions of "educational rigor". Like states across the country, my own county in Maryland has steadily increased school hours (primarily in elementary school) and they are even sending buses out earlier to make sure kids get to school for breakfast. A friend of mine complained that when she tries to make sure her kids are fed breakfast before they leave for school they say, "Oh mom, they feed us at school." She resents the loss of this family time and she should. Schools are encroaching on the role of parents to nurture and care for their young children to the great determent of the bonds between parent and child.

When your school board proposes an increases in the length of the school day and says they have to do it for "instructional" purposes be VERY suspicious! Even the Colorado story admits that this increased time will not be used for "typical course work" but for is an "extra 300 hours a year for things that usually don't fit in a regular school day, such as using personalized software or learning about world cultures, healthy living and even scrapbooking." After supporting the increased time for educational reasons, parents in Nebraska were surprised to find out that the 30 minutes added to the elementary day and 15 minutes added to middle school day was not used for instruction time but even if it were, the truth is that very young children tune out after about 2 o'clock and any instructional time after that is a complete waste.

When the School Board says they have "no choice" but to increase the school day and year because of state and federal mandates remember that in most states local school boards have constitutional powers over these choices. When the education "experts" tell you your kids need more "instructional time" for them to meet the new "rigorous" standards at school remember that though the school days and years have continually increased over the past four decades scores have remained flat.

If that doesn't convince you that these policies are wasteful and damaging to children and their families, if you are like many parents today who welcome these changes because it makes your work schedule easier, is lighter on the daycare pocketbook, or you simply believe this extra time is benefiting their child's learning. I would encourage you to read about the importance of unstructured free play and the detrimental effects of hyper-schooling on the developing mind and character of your child, you may conclude that the extra money for daycare (where at least they can run and play) is well worth it.

Arne Duncan's vision for a school centered culture rather than a family centered one is quickly becoming a reality and unless that is the world you want for your kids and grand-kids it is time for you to oppose these policies and persuade your friends that these changes are seriously harmful to their children. There really is "No Place Like Home" and there is no adequate substitute in a child's development for the nurture of a parent and the freedom of play.