Thanks to Charleston Rotary Club Breakfast

Thanks to the Charleston Rotary Breakfast for their gracious hospitality.

I was invited to speak on Friday, May 31, 2013 and to provide a presentation on Common Core. After a short introduction and a few comments to explain where my concerns were rooted, we watched a truncated version of a video produced by the American Principles Project and The Concerned Women of America. The floor was then opened for questions from the membership and visitors.

Question: From the PowerPoint, and mission statement, you (SCPIE and GCPIE ) are referring to conservative education reform. What does that mean? What do you mean by conservative?

Answer: For the means of this presentation, I was using this slide referring to the relationship between the parent, the student, and the teacher; the service is provided by the teacher to the parent to educate the student. Clearly, in the home school environment the parent and teacher are the same. The revolt against Common Core is bipartisan/nonpartisan so I only brush upon politics to show that.We can update this slide to provide clarity for future presentations. Feedback is always appreciated.

Question: Why are you opposed to common core when it is apparent that moving from one state to another, or moving from another country to the United States, that it would be more beneficial to have a common standard.

Answer: (Paraphrased answer at event, expanded here) The Constitution of the United States, and the individual states, places the job of education squarely in the hands of the states, and the people via the ninth and tenth amendments. It is not an enumerated power of the Federal Government, and not surprising that individuals and groups that do not support those limited power principles of the federal government may support a national or federal over-reach into education. Also, to back up this principle, every state has a constitutional education provision. Common Core is simply another attempt to go around these principles by creating imaginary loop-holes. It actually does violate codified statutes. Statistically speaking is also not a prudent choice to alter the entire education framework over every state just to accommodate students that may transfer into, or among the many states. An estimate of just 4% <2% of students transfer, and most within states. International student transfers is even less. It would be more beneficial for states to focus on reading education in K-3 to prepare our youth to properly understand their courses. Allowing students to graduate at a 7th grade level does not prepare them for any advanced study or good paying jobs.

Again, thank you for your valuable time. I hope that we can partner in this endeavor to right our ship of education in South Carolina and in the United States of America.

Gregory Adams

Update: For clarity, the <2% number comes from the 2010 Census data.

Update2: Further clarity, http://rotarycharleston.wordpress.com/