Deliberate Dumbing Down of America Public Education

221

The "Effective" Eighties : c. 1985

Although excellent regulations were drafted in 1982 by conservatives in the Office of the General Counsel (who have been subsequently fired by Secretary Bell), they have not seen the light of day since Bell doesn’t like them and he also does not want to offend his educa tionist friends by signing off on regulations that will disturb their modus operandi—their persistent efforts to change the values, attitudes and beliefs of students to conform with those necessary to bring about a socialist/humanist one world government. As Iserbyt clearly saw, it is through regulations that responsibilities become clarified, procedures for grievance and redress established, and penalties for non-compliance stated. Therefore, the importance of regulations cannot be overstated.... Interestingly, Iserbyt had notification of the proposed regulations prior to 10 January as evidenced by an Urgent Alert she sent to her “Education Group Leader Activists.” Her guidance... included suggestions related to the scope of the soon-to-be published regulations. She argued: It was the intent of Congress to cover all the mindbending techniques and materials used in our children’s classrooms, in special education and guidance, not just the narrow and difficult to define areas of psychological and psychiatric testing or treatment. She provided a set of quotable commentaries for her contacts as they prepared oral or written testimony.... Some people who testified argued that the techniques being used in our schools can be likened to those used in Russia, Red China, and Nazi Germany.... A potentially major educational change has occurred, and the education profession failed to block it. [Ed. Note: Anyone following or involved with the Anita Hoge/ Pennsylvania case will tell you that the U.S. Department of Education—under Secretaries of Education William Bennett and Lamar Alexander—pulled out all the stops, at every level, to thwart Hoge’s efforts and those of other parents who tried to use this law. Such an assault on those who paid the bills—and provided the children (“resources”) upon whom they experiment even today—was, and is, criminal.]

1985

O N M ARCH 6, 1985 E DUCATION W EEK PUBLISHED AN ARTICLE ENTITLED “H ALF OF C HI cago Students Drop Out, Study Finds: Problem Called Enormous Human Tragedy.” (Return to 1968 Learning and Instruction entry for details of the Chicago Mastery Learning debacle.)

E FFECTIVE S CHOOLS D EVELOPMENT IN E DUCATION A CT WAS INTRODUCED INTO C ONGRESS on March 8, 1985. An excerpt from the Extension of Remarks in the House of Representatives by Hon. Augustus F. Hawkins of California follows: Mr. Hawkins: Mr. Speaker, there are public schools in this Nation which evidence continuous improvement and growth in the academic achievement levels of their students, for each day that these students are in the school.... Where are these public schools? They are in Jackson, MS; Spencerport, NY; Los Angeles, CA; New York City; Glendale, AZ; Richmond, VA; Pitts burgh, PA; Hartford, CT; Portland,OR; and many other cities throughout the Nation. What they have in common is a determination to improve pupil performance, pupil