Ryan Walters has caused many headlines since becoming superintendent of schools in Oklahoma. This time there are some consequences to him tweaking the curriculum. Jonathan has the story.
Ryan Waters is the Oklahoma state Supervisor of Elections and he's trying his best to lie about the performance of the Oklahoma schools. First, he claimed he had nothing to do with lowering the standards on state boosting scores by thirty three percent, basically falsely. His underlings admitted that they closely supervised the revision process and did not allow any public comment, did not inform the school districts, and sought no public input Sadly, the boost and proficiency was a lie.
When tested by the standards set to comply before the change that were set to comply with the federal standards, it is lower than ever. Oklahoma's forty ninth in education in the United States. They're only better than New Mexico and Alabama is actually better than them. It's like not a good seat, not a good site, not a good look for them. And this is an indirect attempt to destroy public education in Oklahoma and do it without anybody noticing.
They're meeting their objective. As I said, they are forty ninth and the K through twelve, and not just overall education, but also in K through twelve. So a lot of times the universities bring that number up but not but not in the K through twelve here. So this story is by Noria Martinez Kiel the Oklahoma Voice and printed in the Oklahoma on eight twenty three, twenty twenty four. I yield to the panel discussion.
Well, actually I was going to come to you, Jonathan at first, since you introduced the story. How does the lack of transparency in the changes to the test scoring effect public trust in educational assessments and government agents.
Well, it obviously isn't good. But the problems, you know, the problem of lying this much about it, and this on the heels of his story. We also already covered about his putting a Bible in every classroom kind of puts his and as we know, conservatives hate public education. It doesn't serve their needs at all. It tends to teach people how to think, and they don't want anybody to think. They want them to just follow the propaganda and not actually think for themselves. But this is that attempt.
But it's fraudulent, and it's going to end up really irritating a lot of parents who now have to contend with a school system that is not working for their children because they're deliberately trying to sabotage it. They're in a related move that we're not covering necessarily. But there's another action that mister Walters did was to tie the
school's accreditation to the state to the test scores. So though this will help them with their accreditation, there are a lot of new rules underneath all these that well, let's just say, is backed by churches but opposed by teachers. So the checklist that they of these items is mandatory, or the school gets a deficiency on their accreditation, many deficiencies, and the school can be closed or taken over by
the state. So this is setting up local school districts to fail, and they want them to fail because they'd rather have them all going to religious schools privately. So this is really a serious issue that we kind of cover in a lot of our stories. But how long are the parents of these kids going to tolerate this kind of stuff. Eventually it's going to reach critical mass, and I don't think they're going to like the results of that. Well, and that's kind of what I have to say on it.
Yeah.
Well, you know, I'm always like a person that supports a critical mass to make chain. But I don't know if Oklahoma, or maybe the constituency there is really organizing to do that. I but then again, you know, I'm just expressing my ignorance because I really don't know what the advocacy and the activism on the ground to push back against some of the policies that Ryan Walters is pushing.
But you know, Scott, I'm coming to you because you're an educator and you've been an educator for quite a time, and you know, I would like you just to, you know, answer, what are the implications of loring performance standards on long term educational outcomes for students that happen to be in Oklahoma?
Well, I mean, if he had gotten away with it, the short term impact would have been to artificially inflate the effectiveness of their current policies.
Scott, I have to say it.
I do apologize he wi was gotten away with it if it wasn't for those meddling kids, those kids, it's.
Old man Mahoney at the Haunted Good amusement park.
Right.
Exactly, go ahead, continue.
So he's artificially I mean it's it's a misrepresentation, obviously, but it's it's a deceit at the at the deepest level. He's you know, Jonathan was talking about how he's deceiving the public.
Right.
They they lower the standard to make it look like they're being more effective. And I think I'm presuming here, I don't know this for a fact, but I'm presuming that it's too prop a up the other changes that they're doing to say, Look how effective we are now. Look how effective book banning is doing. Look how effective it is now that we have the Ten Commandments in the in the classrooms. Look how effective we are now that we're incorporating Bible stories into our day to day
lessons and that kind of thing. And so it's just artificial inflation. What does the effect that What effect does
that have on the education? It gives it. First of all, it guts one of the main tools that educators have to assess themselves and to assess how effective they are with their students, and that is assessments rights, its responses from testing, whether it be standardized testing, whether it be testing in the classroom, whether it be written paper tests, or whether it be activities or you know, it's just
totally invalidating all of those efforts to improve. I think I don't think I'm going out on a limb here when I say that educators generally go into the field because they care, because they want to do well. They want to do they want to help children, they want to empower children, they want to you know, teach them things.
They want them to be in an enlightened and educated citizenry. Right, it's good for the country, it's good for the individuals, it's good for the neighborhoods, it's good for the local government, it's good for it's good for everybody. And so so what this is doing is it's just taking away the effectiveness of those of those methods. As teachers, we like
to talk about critical reflection. We want we want to look back at ourselves, we want to look back at what we're doing, and if we can change things to make them better then we can't, then we do that. And so this is not only is this covering up a problem that was there. I think Jonathan said they were forty ninth in the state. Yeah, rah rah, right, and so it's covering up a problem that was there, but it's also making the problem look like it's a
good thing. And so it's kind of giving them a free path, or it would have, if it had worked, given him a pass to incorporate more of these changes that will also undermine the educational system even further. And like you both mentioned, I would have to assume that part of the goal at least is to get rid
of public education. And so it's it's I mean, it's very callous, and it's very devious, and you know, it's almost almost too cruel to imagine to do something like to to take away a child's ability to become a better human being, to learn how to become a more productive member of society, to take away their power to make their lives better. And that's really what it's doing.
That's the ultimate cost that education can pay can pay here is we will lose the effectiveness of the educational system we have, and we will in fact even roll back even further and make it even less effective.
Well, Cindy, you are on the outside looking in, all safe and tucked away in a different country, but I know that you definitely pay attention to a lot of the things that are going on here in the good old us of a American apple pie the four by four. So anyway, forget the guns, Jesus, guns and babies, right, Yeah,
gotta get that straight, my bad guys. But you know, Sindy, I'm just wondering because, like you know, since you like pay attention to a lot of these things that's going on, what do you really think I think that you know, Scott alluded to it a bit, but can you expand on really what the motivation is behind the I call the Shenanigans in Old Colahoma. I'm not going to sing the rest of the song because I don't know the rest of the words, so I'm just not going to do it and embarrass myself.
But what is it?
What is the motivation behind, you know, doing the things that they are doing when it's quite obvious that well, I guess to us that happens to be on the other side of the looking class. This is detrimental and harmful to the kid.
Yeah, on top of everything that Scott said, and I think was very very much on point, there's another side of this. Let's say that this worked and nobody noticed what happens to the students once they leave those schools and go to a university, they will be behind everyone else because they think they did very good and they think they have the level to be in a university
and they don't. And what happens they feel like they don't belong here, and they feel bad about themselves, and then they feel like they're stupid and not deserving of more education. And I'm wondering if it's an intended purpose or if it's just a sad consequence. But I think that's something we need to take a look at, because if this keeps going in the future, whether it's this specific action or any other that's the Republican r are taking, the United States is going to be very very much
behind in terms of workforce. In terms of education, of course, which is already the case, but yeah, workforce economics, because economics are linked to the workforce, which is linked to the education. And so I think it was a couple of years ago that China to the first place in terms of scientific commulications, and I don't see that specific story helping in this situation. So yeah, I think, as as Scott said, the Republicans survive on an uneducated base.
That's how they've been surviving in the last two years, and so they do everything they can to keep that going.
Last fifty years.
Yeah, I was very much. I would say that's even longer.
Well, you know, guys, this is not in my notes, but I did read this little document called Project twenty twenty.
And one.
There are nine hundred and twenty five pages.
Yes, well, I'm not going to say that I read through all nine hundred twenty five pages, but I did go through the contents, and I would go back and forth and skip and skim and things of that nature. But you know, one of the things that is in Project twenty twenty five, and it's also on you know, on the on the darket as far as like you know, platform items for people who happen to be conservative on the right is to get rid of the Department of Education.
And I'm always like concerned because like one of the talking points is let's get rid of the Department of Education on the federal level and lead the decisions on how to run schools to the state, including having parents be able to utilize I guess text dollars to do
school choice. But you know, I'm curious and to know, and especially since we're looking at stories like this from a person, a superintendent that has clearly demonstrated and said out of his mouth that he is a Christian national what type of really horrible, horrendous implications could this have if there is no oversight or regulatory body over education on the federal level.
And do you all see.
His actions kind of fulfilling that that wishless that the that the project has implicated. Jonathan, I'm going to start with you, and then Scott and then Cindy. I would like to hear your thoughts.
Well.
First off, this is this is a process that they've been already implementing. As we see here the UH the accredit accreditation changes I look through kind of indicate this. So it would penalize districts that maintain active employment of teachers under investigation for certificate or vocation. That's one thing. There's quite a few. I'm going to skip some of them.
But the other thing it would do is districts would not be able to receive state funding if they support or maintain certain diversity you know, DEI programs.
UH.
And so that means that kind of tells you where they're going with.
The moment, John, I just want to actually tell the audience for those who do not know what de I means, that needs diversity, equity and inclusion.
Continue.
Please, yes, my brain had a hole for that just and would subject teachers to potential dismissal for sexual acts and this is not in school. This is sexual acts or acts that appeal to the period interest in sex as found by the average person applying contemporary community standards, or acts that excessively promote sexuality. They can be refused. Employment critics say it could be used as grounds to terminate teachers who engage in after hours activities like drag performances,
if those performances were recorded and put online. And there are some people who say that that, you know, in my comments, I said, you know, this could mean that if somebody happens to catch you at home watching Rupe Paul's drag race, they could fire, you know, if they could twist this to make it firable New America.
Welcome to America. Freedom to do.
What you want in your own time, or they catch you watching a porn channel or something. You know, none of those things.
I lived in Oklahoma.
They would have fired me a long time ago, because I love that damn show. But you know, Jonathan, can you spend this a little bit, because it almost sounds like that what you're saying is that they're trying to penalize you for either being allied or being part of the LGBTQ community and also living your troop out lot.
Is that what That's what I'm That's.
What I'm they want to they want to suppress that, I'm quite sure because these rules are rather draconian if you think about it, And if districts fail to comply after receiving notice from the department, they will receive an accreditation deficiency as well. So it's like, you know, uh, it would strike from existing rules on local school boards that board members shall refrain from involvement or interference with
the administrative functions of the school. That means the school boards could come around and say, you can't do that, No, we want it this way. Take the power out of the principle and the teachers and start my managing what's going on. And so yeah, yes, you want.
To well follow, do you want to follow what gets worth? Sure? Sure?
Yeah, okay, So let me give me a second here, I gotta catch my breath. Okay, all right too. So so you were asking about I'm sorry, could you repeat the question.
Yeah, basically I was asking, you know, with Project twenty twenty five and the right basically allowing themselves to get rid of the Department of Education on the federal level. Yeah, what kind of implications could this have? Like detrimental implications could this have, you know, on kids, you know, especially who happened to attend public schools.
I think that attacking the indirectly attacking the Department of Education, I think I'm not entirely convinced that that's either the main goal or even one of the main goals here. That might just be, you know, great, right, that's just
a fringe benefit. I think what's really happening here, and again this is my opinion, but what I think is happening is that Oklahoma lawmakers they just want to operate in this fictional world, and and they want to they want to dictate how things operate, and they want to enforce that perception of that fictional world onto others as well. Gaslighting. That's I mean, this is really just high stakes gaslighting. And so the problem is the drawback to that is effectiveness.
Educational effectiveness be damned, right, I mean it's like, that's not it's hard to imagine that that would be a consideration at all. It's all about how do we look and what can we do with it? And you know that is just misguided leadership right there. You know, it's it would be hard to make up something worse than that. I mean, it's just sacrificing the kid's futures in order to enforce this story that you know, they they can't back it up themselves, you know, their their religious stories.
They can't justify that kind of belief and so but what they can do is they can kind of morph the rest of the world back into their viewpoint. And you know, like I said, education be damned, and it's it's really infuriating and asinine.
Well, I'm going to give the semi last word to Sindy. Cindy, say what say you?
I remember in twenty sixteen, after Trump was elected, I read this fascinating article explaining how and why Trump won back then in red states and mostly rural areas. It's because but by destroying the education system in these places, the only source of information the public has is the church and so if you don't have enough information about why you are in a city cuation, then the only source of information again comes becomes the church. And and
that's the point of christoph fascism. It's to give back UH center place to to to the church, not in terms of not only in terms of you know, society and and and UH and and community and everything else, but also information because when you countrol information, of course you control uh the entire population. And I think it's uh it's basically what's what's happening here again, it's just more and more of the same stuff, just cultural information from uh, from the people you want to uh to to,
not to lead, but to control. And so that's that's the only way to do it. To destroy education.
Yeah, I definitely adhere exactly what you guys are saying, especially when it comes to if you want to control the mind of the people who happen to be under you destroy the institutions that educate them. And when test scores suddenly improve, but it's due to altered benchmarks rather than real student gains, it's a red flag.
Even covering up actual student losses. It's not just false gains, it's covering up losses, and so it's even worse.
Yeah, exactly, it's it's covering up the losses that happen to, you know, come to those who are not getting the proper education that there's that they're supposed to get, oftentimes because the curricula and also the benchmarks for them for their achievements are being altered. But schools, parents and lawmakers deserve clear and upfront information because when it comes to education, the only thing worse than Perer performance is a lack
of honesty about what the numbers really mean. So let's remember, if something sounds too good to be true, it might just be a change in the rules. Always ask what's the real score?