0140_Why to vote no on 3A and 3B_2016-08-8 –“The Latest Big Education Fad, Social-Emotional Learning [SEL], Is As Bad As It Sounds” By Jane Robbins–Townhall.com

Donna Jack
September 30, 2016/October 4, 2016 version

At this moment, in Jefferson County Colorado, the school district administration, superintendent, all 5 current school board members (who are all union-supported), the education unions, and “education experts”, are pushing for us to cough up more money in November.  They are mistaken to think that this will help or fix declining education.  3A and 3B ask us to finance their failing policies — and to expand them.

On this November’s ballot, VOTE NO ON 3A AND 3B.
— More money to the schools will only make worse
the serious problems we have in education.

[See post 0139 of this blog for an introduction to SEL (Social-Emotional Learning)
and other information.]


For Jane Robbins’ Aug. 8, 2016 article on SEL– look later in this blog or go directly to it here:

“The Latest Big Education Fad, Social-Emotional Learning, Is As Bad As It Sounds”
By Jane Robbins —
U.S. Department of Education (USED), longs to plumb the psyches of our children


From Donna Jack:

Everyone who pays taxes is paying for SEL, which is a bad NEW WAY to “eliminate the emotional suffering” that students are mysteriously plagued with these days.  To find one of the biggest causes of the mysterious increase in emotional suffering among people in schools. click here.

The Negative Factor —

My school district (and others in Colorado) always have a sad story about how underfunded they are, and claim they have been cheated out of hundreds of thousands of dollars that they should have received.  They also insist that we (taxpayers) have to make up for that “lost money” (they call it the “negative factor.”)

In business, does it make sense for employees to insist they get past “lost pay” that was cut because “the boss” didn’t have enough profit to pay all of their salary or wages?  Is it right they insist he must still make up for that cut  now, plus increase salaries higher than the previous salaries?  Is it right to demand to be “repaid” for those times when he couldn’t pay you what you felt you deserved?  Will “the boss” be repaid for losses during a recession — for losses in the past?  Should “the boss” keep such ungrateful hostile employees on his payroll?

What a strange, shallow, uninformed, selfish mentality.  That is what is being taught in our schools, and touted by employees of school districts in Colorado.  It is Karl Marx’s mentality that bosses should get no profit, but the workers should share all profit with each other.

Actually this “missing amount of money” in Colorado, was what our state legislature could not pay, because we were in a recession, and the amount of money collected in taxes had diminished — the money wasn’t there.  School districts are being “piggy”  (selfish – only thinking of themselves over everybody else in Colorado).  All the rest of us in Colorado have to pick up where we are after a recession.

Even during the recession, the overall school district allocations were not cut — just the increases they wanted in their overall allocations of tax money.  Additionally they continued to get increases in health care, got increases in  retirement benefits (PERA).  Their pay was not cut, it didn’t increase. The board that was recalled was the first board to give increases to teachers in many previous several years.  The amount of money coming into the school district didn’t diminish, but the way it was distributoogle ed in the school district changed, and the increases were less.  People outside the school district were having real overall cuts in their incomes — cuts that were permanent losses.


School Districts want to increase spending in order to increase what they do,
and to do more things.

The school districts want to increase spending on many things, one of which is a large increase in staff and programs to deal with all these psychological maladies that are blossoming, at an increasing rate, in the schools.  They want to “treat” students that have been flagged — and give more intensive social and emotional training to more students.  Look at the previous blog piece, 0139, for supplemental thoughts on this subject of treatment/mind control.  Also look at http://www.psychquotes.com/ to see who is considered in need of treatment.  This is a link to some of the “services” SEL will find funding for, under the new 2015 re-authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which is called Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

What is causing this epidemic of psychological illness?
Is there also treatment of healthy students taking place?
It depends on your definitions.

Question:  Schools have children almost all of their waking moments (and certainly during most of the best waking moments of their lives).  Could it be possible that what is taught and done in the schools, is the greatest contributor to the explosive increase in the percentages of emotional wrecks that are in the schools?

Could some of these “emotional/psychological problems”
actually be made up of students who will not conform
to what is wrongly being forced on them?

Go to this link to read how in 2003 the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF), defined mental illness (or how they define being mentally disturbed).  It is important to note that these people (the NIMH and NSF) have had for a long time, and continue to have, great influence on the training of people who work in the schools (teachers, counselors, administrators, etc.)  These “professionally-trained” people are administering the schooling that our children are receiving.   [Here is the link in case the link above is dead: http://www.psychquotes.com/]

Just one example from the above-mentioned site:

Psychiatry’s Views on Education

“Every child in America entering school at the age of five is insane because he comes to school with certain allegiances to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents, toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these sick children well – by creating the international child of the future”
Dr. Chester M. Pierce, Psychiatrist, address to the Childhood International Education Seminar, 1973


The NEA’s requested more federal education laws.

Link to see the National Education Association’s  (NEA’s) requests for things to be included
in the new ESSA federal law, that was  signed by Obama November 2015.  They called their requests an Opportunity Dashboard.

A quotation of one of the “socialistic” recommendations in the above linked request:

“Equitable does not mean the same.
Equitable means resources according to need.
The greater the need, the greater the resources.”
Below is a redistribution of wealth slogan taken from
the 1839 socialist movement – Karl Marx began using it in 1875:
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
This is not the goal of the America that our Founders intended – nor the America I grew up in.  The America that the Founders put in place rewarded hard work.  The NEA wants to have the government take financial resources from all those who have worked hard for them — forcing them to finance everyone who has less.  Everybody is to be equally poor, except for those who rule us.
This is socialism, which is the last step before Communism.
Here are two quotations from the Quotations page of www.jeffcoeducationtruth.com.

  1. You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands.” — Nikita Khrushchev – 1959
  2. Definition of socialism:
    1 :  any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
    2a :  a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
    b :  a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
    3 :  a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
    There are many other very troubling statements in the above-linked NEA document.
    Simple Definition of Marxism

    •  the political, economic, and social theories of Karl Marx including the belief that the struggle between social classes is a major force in history and that there should eventually be a society in which there are no classes


[Donna Garner sent out an email with the following article by Jane Robbins.  You can read here how Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) provides funding for Social and Emotional
Learning (SEL).]

8.8.16 – Townhall.com

 “The Latest Big Education Fad, Social-Emotional Learning, Is As Bad As It Sounds”
By Jane Robbins


The U.S. Department of Education (USED) longs to plumb the psyches of our children (as its own reports reveal – see here and here), and it enjoys the eager complicity of state education establishments. As reported by Education Week, the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) recently announced that eight states will “work collaboratively to create and implement plans to encourage social-emotional learning in their schools.” These states are jumping on a bandwagon that threatens to roll over innocent children and their privacy.

CASEL is the big gorilla in the zoo of social-emotional learning, or SEL. Having proved so adept at (or perhaps having given up on) teaching students English, math, science, and history, state progressive-education establishments are joining CASEL to explore more esoteric pursuits. Better to diminish academic content knowledge and push SEL: “self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making.”

The average parent might object, “Wait, that’s what my child learns from me and from Sunday school.” But CASEL & Co. believe the government should take over in case the parents and church don’t do it right — perhaps teaching the wrong attitudes and mindsets.

Suppose the government decides a child will be a more acceptable student, citizen, and worker bee if he learns to acquiesce to the “consensus” of the group, regardless of his own moral standards, or if she learns to accept that all commands of the government must be obeyed. The student may fulfill the standard by developing the correct attitudes, but under whose authority does the government presume to instill attitudes that may conflict with parents’ desires?

These eight states (California, Georgia, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Washington) have thus joined a few others in assuming the right to substitute their authority for the parents’ in children’s most intimate and personal development, from pre-K through graduation. In doing so, the nanny states are acting in the spirit of the new federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which encourages rating of schools based partly on“nonacademic” factors that may include measures of SEL, and which provides funding for a range of potentially SEL programs. Thank you, Speaker Ryan, for ramming this bill through.

Assessment and development of students’ social and emotional skills is risky business. What kind of training will teachers or other school personnel have for this responsibility? Psychologist Dr. Gary Thompson points out the extremely sensitive nature of evaluating children’s social-emotional makeup and warns about having inadequately trained personnel implementing plans designed to alter students’ psyches.

When non-psychologists dabble in these murky waters, the result is tremendously subjective analyses of what a child is thinking or feeling as opposed to what the government thinks he should be thinking or feeling. Dr. Karen Effrem, who has researched and written extensively about the issue of SEL, warns about the subjectivity of this kind of analysis, particularly with young children.

Even prominent SEL proponents caution that assessing students on SEL standards, especially with the common mechanism of student surveys, can be a shot in the dark. Researchers Angela Duckworth and David Yeager have said that “perfectly unbiased, unfakeable, and error-free measures are an ideal, not a reality.”

Dr. Effrem and Dr. Thompson both warn also about the extraordinary threat to student privacy that implementation of SEL standards would present. With states’ building longitudinal student databases that track children from cradle to career, it’s inevitable that data collected from observing and analyzing children’s emotional states will be preserved . . . forever. And because USED has gutted federal student-privacy law to allow sharing of personally identifiable information on students with almost anyone the government wants, that data is likely to be widely disclosed – without parental consent.

If a child’s school dossier says he doesn’t meet an SEL standard for, say, anger-management, could that come back to haunt him? Maybe when he applies to college, or for a job, or enlists in the military, or . . . goes on trial for a crime?

Dr. Thompson points out, as well, that these records (containing what is rightly considered medical information) would be characterized as education records and therefore not protected by HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act). “Placed in the wrong hands,” he warns, “psychological testing can ruin lives as well as cause psychological trauma to people” if the results are misused.

According to the monolithic progressive-education establishment in this country, SEL is the next big thing to fix the problems with public education. The same was true of outcome-based education, and Common Core, and fads infinitum. But this fad isn’t just ineffective, it’s dangerous. Parents should demand a halt to pseudo-psychology – and a restoration of their autonomy in raising their children.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *