Reasons parents are refusing the SBAC assessment:
- The Cooperative Agreement between SBAC and the Federal Department of Education, demands that SBAC share student level data with the federal government. (Link 1)
- The federal DOE changed FERPA to allow sharing of student level data with “stakeholders” without parental consent. (Link 2)
- A Missouri court has found the Cooperative Agreement between SBAC and the Federal Department of Education to be unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment to the US Constitution. (Link 3)
- According to SBAC’s own documents, the SBAC assessment has no outside validity studies, and no reliability. (Link 4) This is educational malpractice.
- American Institutes of Research is a partner with SBAC. (Link 5) South Dakota has also chosen AIR to deliver the assessments to students. (Link 6) “At AIR, diversity and inclusion are mission critical. Without the proper attention to the diversity of our workforce and those we serve, we cannot achieve our goal: to conduct and apply the best behavioral and social science research and evaluation towards improving peoples’ lives.” Their mission has nothing to do with academic knowledge. (Link 7)
- The SBAC is Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT). CAT means that test questions are based on the answers to previous questions. You can learn more about the dangers of CAT here.
- South Dakota law requires schools to administer the tests. The law does not require students to take the test. (Link 8)
- The SBAC assessment does not have any bearing on students’ academic success. In other words, it is not used on a report card or to promote to the next grade. It is used for school accountability. (Link 9)
- The test is designed for students to fail. According the South Dakota Department of Education, 63% of students will fail these tests. If the average proficient rate drops by 39%, what does that do to the Native American Student? If only 44% of native students are currently testing proficient on the DSTEP test, and there is a drop of 39%, only 5% of Native students will test proficient! (Link 10)
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that parents possess the “fundamental right” to “direct the upbringing and education of their children” and the Court declared that “the child is not the mere creature of the State: those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right coupled with the high duty to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.” (Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 534-35)
The Supreme Court criticized a state legislature for trying to interfere “with the power of parents to control the education of their own.” (Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 402.) In Meyer, the Supreme Court held that the right of parents to raise their children free from unreasonable state interferences is one of the unwritten “liberties” protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. (262 U.S. 399).
It is cardinal with us that the custody, care and nurture of the child reside first in the parents, whose primary function and freedom include preparation for obligations the state can neither supply nor hinder. . . . It is in recognition of this that these decisions have respected the private realm of family life which the state cannot enter.
– Prince v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944)
This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
– Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632 (1974)
In a long line of cases, we have held that, in addition to the specific freedoms protected by the Bill of Rights, the “liberty” specially protected by the Due Process Clause includes the rights . . . to direct the education and upbringing of one’s children. The Fourteenth Amendment “forbids the government to infringe … ‘fundamental’ liberty interests of all, no matter what process is provided, unless the infringement is narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest.”
– Washington v. Glucksburg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997)
The liberty interest at issue in this case-the interest of parents in the care, custody, and control of their children-is perhaps the oldest of the fundamental liberty interests recognized by this Court. In light of this extensive precedent, it cannot now be doubted that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children.The problem here is not that the Washington Superior Court intervened, but that when it did so, it gave no special weight at all to Granville’s determination of her daughters’ best interests. More importantly, it appears that the Superior Court applied exactly the opposite presumption.
The Due Process Clause does not permit a State to infringe on the fundamental right of parents to make childrearing decisions simply because a state judge believes a ‘better’ decision could be made.
– Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000)
You can print to share with others here.