Urgent! Comments Against Global Pre-K SEL Data Mining Needed!

Photo credit: Woodley Wonder Works (CC-By-2.0)

Please submit comments before MIDNIGHT, MONDAY 2/13 opposing this latest global taxpayer funded psychological data mining scheme of our youngest children for invasive, ineffective, and harmful government pre-K programs at the federal register. It can be as short as:

I oppose this latest study because there are already dozens of studies showing that preschool is minimally effective, that beneficial effects fade with time or is academically and emotionally harmful. Social emotional assessment, especially for young children, is extraordinarily subjective and unreliable, violates parental autonomy, and the private right of conscience of free American citizens. This is especially true when data security within the U.S. Department of Education is so poor.

You can also do something more in depth. Here are details:

The federal government is joining with the globalists at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in a new study that seeks to expand social emotional data gathering (psychological profiling) on our very youngest children, collect sensitive family information and try yet again to show that preschool is effective when there are so many studies to the contrary. Here is the pertinent language from the federal register notice:

FR Doc No: 2016-29749
Abstract: The International Early Learning Study (IELS), scheduled to be conducted in 2018, is a new study sponsored by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), an intergovernmental organization of industrialized countries. In the United States, the IELS is conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The IELS focuses on young children and their cognitive and non-cognitive skills and competencies as they transition to primary school. The IELS is designed to examine: children’s early learning and development in a broad range of domains, including social emotional skills as well as cognitive skills; the relationship between children’s early learning and children’s participation in early childhood education and care (ECEC); the role of contextual factors, including children’s individual characteristics and their home backgrounds and experiences, in promoting young children’s growth and development; and how early learning varies across and within countries prior to beginning primary school. In 2018, in the participating countries, including the United States, the IELS will assess nationally-representative samples of children ages 5.0-5.5 years (in kindergarten in the United States) through direct and indirect measures, and will collect contextual data about their home learning environments, ECEC histories, and demographic characteristics.

We have warned for years of the dangers and ineffectiveness of both government preschool programs and the indoctrination and profiling inherent in social emotional learning. This study combines the worst of both. Here is our bullet list of why this study should be opposed:

1) According to this compilation of over two dozen studies, there is already plenty of evidence that, at best, preschool is only minimally effective and there is significant evidence that these programs cause academic and emotional harm.

2) With so much evidence of ineffectiveness and harm, there is no reason to embark on yet another study at taxpayer expense.

3) This data gathering is unconstitutional – There is no constitutional, statutory or moral authority for the federal government to create standards and norms for the attitudes, values and beliefs, for innocent American citizens, conduct psychological research on them and to keep this data in perpetuity in federally mandated state longitudinal databases that according to this proposal are going to be shared with a large international agency with unknown data privacy protection standards.

4) It goes against several Supreme Court precedents affirming parent’s inherent rights to direct the education and upbringing of their children.

5) These types of standards and questions are highly subjective, especially when used for young children, as admitted by leading experts and organizations in the fields of education and mental health.

6) Overworked, untrained teachers essentially become psychotherapists to their classrooms of patients.

7) There is a clear link to Common Core and potential for both indoctrination and danger to student and family freedom of conscience covering such controversial topics as climate change, Buddhist mindfulness techniques, social justice, transgenderism and the LGBT agenda.

8) Because of the weak and gutted federal privacy law, the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), this very sensitive data can be shared with various agencies of the federal government and third parties and re-disclosed and used for “predictive tests,” which are notoriously subjective and inaccurate. Data may then well be used to make life altering decisions for children affecting college entrance, employment, etc.

9) According to information uncovered by the US House Oversight and Government Reform Committee hearings, the state of data security at the US Department of Education is appallingly bad, so this sensitive data, that the government should not have in the first place, is not safe from hackers. We have no idea what the data protection situation is at OECD.

7 thoughts on “Urgent! Comments Against Global Pre-K SEL Data Mining Needed!

  1. I have read all of this information and I do oppose any more studies & efforts to intrude on parents rights concerning their own children.

  2. Only 5 people commented so far.

    This is important because if they get they field test done the main study will be slip through without a hitch done. in 2018, they will claim lack of opposing comments means the public is all for the main study in 2018.
    In their support document for this study “the goal of the study is that the “results from the IELS will allow national policymakers to compare the skills and competencies of children from different nations as they are readying to enter primary school and to evaluate whether changes might be needed in the U.S.’s ECEC (Early Learning Early Care) system”
    Notice they say not parents, not teachers, not principles, not school boards, not States but NATIONAL POLICY MAKERS. Theses policymakers will use this study no matter what it proves or disproves to push government controlled “schooling” onto younger and younger children.

  3. The proposed study will add another intrusive and ineffective (or worse) study to the many already done. I strongly request that this NOT BE DONE. Terrible harm to children can issue.
    Nancy Brooks

  4. If it is unconstitutional, why is it being done? We have a right to privacy and to raise our children the way we want. Is this headed toward a police state?

  5. This is another example of overreach and Nanny state tactics and has the potential to serve as another means of invasion of privacy into the public’s parental rights. The more information a government (policy maker) has and the more they become involved in our children’s daily life, the more vulnerable our children are to indoctrination and their families’ to profiling for political intent.

  6. I oppose this latest study because there are already dozens of studies showing that preschool is minimally effective, that beneficial effects fade with time or is academically and emotionally harmful. Social emotional assessment, especially for young children, is extraordinarily subjective and unreliable, violates parental autonomy, and the private right of conscience of free American citizens. This is especially true when data security within the U.S. Department of Education is so poor.

  7. This data gathering is unconstitutional – It goes against parental rights that were affirmed by the US Supreme Court. There is no constitutional, statutory or moral authority for the federal government to create standards and norms for the beliefs that are set by parents. This is a waste of taxpayer money. The study’s have already been done and all point to no lasting effects. Spend this on actual things that help like books and classroom supplies.

Comments are closed.