UNDERSTANDING OUTCOME BASED EDUCATION PART II BY MARY MCGARR:
An Explanation of Outcome Based Education
by Mary McGarr
Often I am asked why I am so persistent in challenging every single
thing the Katy Independent School District does.
The answer to that question lies in my belief that the effort to reform
and restructure public education includes an agenda that if everyone understood,
there would be rioting in the streets. The restructuring of education manifests
itself in all sorts of ways, and some are quite obvious, and others are obscure.
Suffice it to say that I believe that just about ALL school district matters are
tied to this restructuring effort. Opposing bond initiatives is important to me
because so much of the bond money winds up supporting and perpetuating
activities that are not revealed to the public and which instead enable the
dumbing down of our children.
It is my sincere belief that there are those who have joined together to take away from our young people the right to an academic education. I have seen proof of that effort in many places. Some who are pushing this agenda are deliberate and guilty. Others are just witless pawns. Together these people have manipulated the system and are already successful in their efforts. I, however, cannot simply let it go. I am compelled to fight them on every front. I have worked on my explanation of the agenda for a long time. It begins with my attempt to explain what it is that has been changed over the years so that parents and students can understand what is wrong. The Katy Independent School District is a microcosm of the national and international agenda and is analogous to the larger systemic change. The fact that our school board hired a superintendent whose college education suggests that he can teach reading to elementary school children and can work with Special Education students tells me that our Board was NOT interested in academics for all children when they hired him!
There are many components to the OBE agenda.
It includes curriculum which is primary, but it also includes funding,
and building construction, and taxing, and legislation, and political beliefs,
and power, and greed.
An effort to briefly explain Outcome Based Education (OBE) is not
an easy task. (Outcome Based Education is the system of education that we now
have in our Katy schools.) Whatever components are explained only create more
questions and requests for additional information. However, to help parents with
understanding, one must start somewhere.
The term “outcome based education” was created by William Spady, a
social scientist who never taught school. His idea for changing education was
originally phrased in terms of mastery/non-mastery learning, but when the public
realized the significance of that concept, Spady changed the term to OBE. Since
OBE has become anathema to parents, other terms have been created by
educationists. Restructured education, educational reform, competency based education,
Mastery Learning, and outcome
derivatives are all examples. The list is endless, but the message and the
meaning are the same.
The idea for outcome based education is a rehash of secular
progressive educational initiatives that have been tried in our country and
others for decades. OBE ideas were tried in the '20's, ‘30’s, the '50’s, the
‘70’s. They didn’t work then; they were discarded, and now they are being
recycled. Those who want this agenda never give up because it is crucial to
their agenda of creating a "New World Order."
Outcome based education is a catch-all phrase that PARENTS choose
to keep because it encompasses a great many ideas and factors that have come
together to influence education. The ideas have been around for a long time.
Putting them in place in public (government) schools has only been possible in
the last twenty years. The initiative from the federal government began anew in
the 1980’s with the writing of A Nation At Risk
and was followed in 1989 with the National Governor’s Conference which was
controlled by Bill Clinton, then governor of Arkansas. Additionally these ideas
are being pushed by such groups as the Carnegie Foundation, the National Education
Association, the Annenberg
Foundation, the Texas Sid Richardson Foundation, the American Association of
School Administrators, the Association of Secondary School Principals, the
Parent Teacher Association, the National School Boards Association, and the
Texas Business and Education Council. Their boards are populated by liberal
thinkers who embrace in varying degrees, among other ideas, one-worldism or
globalism, environmental extremism, global warming, multiculturalism, population control,
radical feminism, acceptance of lifestyles that most people believe are immoral,
and the development of a socialized workforce and health care system.
In addition to these foundations a group calling itself the
Business Roundtable is also supporting these ideas. Among the members of this
elitist group are most of the major oil companies and most major corporations in
the US. The group operates at the CEO level, and so most employees do not
realize their company’s efforts or the effects of those efforts. These companies
selectively indoctrinate certain employees at the manager level or above, and
utilize them to further the Business Roundtable’s agenda. The Katy ISD has had a
Business Roundtable employee on its Board for over fifteen years, and candidates
who work for Business Roundtable companies are always trying to get elected to
the Board. It is difficult for the one who is there to retire until someone is
elected to take his place. Business Roundtable employees also populate most
Board committees in sufficient numbers to steer and direct activities.
Perhaps the reader has noted the increased influence of businesses
in public schools. While I was a member of the Katy ISD board, business members
were placed on Campus Action Teams, and by law (when counting the business and
community members) there are as many of them as there are parents. (Remember
that school “law” in Texas is pretty
much generated by the vested interest lobbyists representing school
administrators.) The business members of the CAT also do not even have to reside
in the school district! In Katy ISD there has also been created the Partners in
Education Group which includes business members who are solicited to become very
involved in our schools, and there too, the members do not even have to live in
our school district. KISD has also created the Katy Business Promise with
funding from Shell Oil. Corporate business people also are encouraged to become
“mentors” for students. The mentoring program was begun when I was on the School
Board. I objected to the program
because the superintendent at the time refused to allow the names of the
corporate mentors to be released to the parents of the students who were being
mentored. I personally would not
have wanted someone spending time with one of my children if I couldn’t even
know his/her name.
These groups are generally perceived as something worthwhile, but
if one reads the fine print, understands who is involved and what their agenda
is, one might not be so excited about their initiatives. In my opinion they are
not in our schools to help with academic learning, but instead are there to
manipulate belief systems.
Parents need to step back and think about this influx of businesses
in public schools. What businesses
were involved in YOUR public school when you were a child?
Schools have always been the purview of a principal, the teachers and the
parents of the students. Why should
that situation have changed? What
benefit is there for school children to have “businesses” directing their
traffic? How did we let these people
into our schools? Their interests are not altruistic.
They have placed themselves in our midst because financially they have a
vested interest, and that interest is self-serving and not wholesome in my view.
In addition to these well-funded private groups, the National
Education Association (NEA) as well as state teacher’s colleges have been
instrumental in bringing this initiative together. The NEA and the teacher’s
colleges have the motivating force of job protection at their core. It is always
wise to follow the money when this type of movement appears. Textbook and software
publishers, and school equipment vendors also have a vested interest in this
movement.
These groups have been able to initiate the idea of OBE through the
federal Department of Education. Certain states were targeted initially to begin
this process. Among these states were California, Illinois, Colorado, Oregon,
Washington, North Carolina, Kentucky, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania,
Virginia, and
Arkansas. Some of these states, like Kentucky, were very unwise and bought into
this agenda wholesale. In no state were parents and others, who understood the
initiative, able to permanently stop it.
(Please read Educating for the New World Order by Bev Eakman, or
The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America by Charlotte Iserbyt, or Brave
New Schools by Berit Kjos for more information about federal involvement and
the federal government’s influence on the curriculum in individual states.)
Texas Democrat Governor Mark White and his Select Committee on
Education (SCOPE) (chaired by none other than Ross Perot) began this movement in
Texas. The essential elements called for in 1984 were the beginning of the
effort to dumb down Texas public education and ultimately our children.
Initially his initiative was able to grow under a Republican
governor who apparently did not understand the movement.(At least I like to
think he was naive!) Democrat Governor Ann Richards gave it new impetus by
bringing in Skip Meno ( a New Yorker schooled in the process) as the Texas
Commissioner of Education. In March 1991 the State Board of Education developed
the “Long-Range Plan for Public Education.” Our elected State Board of Education
member and a Republican, Jack Christie, helped develop the plan. It is chock
full of OBE ideas. The long range plan that was approved in 1996 for the next
five years was simply a continuation of this same bunch of junk. There is most
certainly another one or two that have taken
the place of the 1996 plan. Don Mercer, the curriculum director in KISD under
Superintendent Hugh Hayes, admitted to a KISD board member that he and the
superintendent, Hugh Hayes, were told to implement OBE in Katy schools by the
Texas Education Agency. Does anyone have any reason to believe that the TEA did
not keep issuing the same orders, even though we now have a different
superintendent and a different head of curriculum? Even though the School Board
in 1995 was very clear when they hired Leonard Merrell that they wanted to get
rid of OBE and all that it entails, Dr. Merrell and his administrators that he
has brought in from the outside at every opportunity, have totally implemented
the OBE agenda in all Katy ISD schools.
Outcome Based Education is the means by which the School To Work
agenda has been implemented in our public schools. The School to Work Act was
passed, implemented and sunseted so that it’s purposes and intent would become
obscure. It is difficult now to even find a copy of this Federal legislation! If
you wish to see the STW legislation go to this website:
http://members.aol.com/eddocweekly/4U.html The School to Work Act along with others that are part of this
process are listed on the left of the site. If you have further interest in this
subject, there are more articles there. STW attempts to provide some form of
vocational training for all students while they are still in public school.
Various excuses are given for the impetus, but mostly when children are not
academically educated, vocational training is their last resort for obtaining a
lifetime job skill.
Make no mistake; the agenda is to dumb down 80 to 85% of all
children. As our State Board of
Education member, Jack Christie, said, “We don’t need Shakespearean educated
students any more. They can’t get a
job. We need vocationally trained
people.”
He’s talking about YOUR children!