Recent Blog Posts

Listen Live Streaming (click maybe twice) M-F 1:30PM Central Time

 ITunes Link To Our Podcast Archive


Join Us Monday-Friday Live Stream and Podcast.

Click on picture above of our heroes--


Link to--Churches Can Make A Huge Difference In An Election



Click here for link to our podcasts



 We need your help in shining the light so please partner with us...Thank you in advance!

Please note we are a 501C4.  Donation is not tax-deductible.  Chosen so we can share truths unhindered.






Click here for link to our podcasts


Listen to internet radio with City On A Hill Radio on BlogTalkRadio

Why is America At War

Cross in the ashes of the WTC

Click on pic to 9/11


The Powerful Story on the Twins
Lifting Each Other in Prayer with Ms. Margaret
Remembering 9/11 in'09
Fresh Hope, the ministry of Susan Sieweke, D.Min.

For in him we live (zao {dzah'-o}, and move, and have our being; Acts 17:28

Fields White To Harvest



Lord, I thought I knew you,

   but know the winds have changed.

Tossed away, will you find me?

   Can still , my heart be sustained?

Just me and you when things were new,

then the season's storms blew by.

   Did I forget to worship you?


Will you come, Lord Jesus to gather us- your sheep.

   For the days grow long and still,

If we watch and wait, will you hear us yet-

   Can we stand strong to do you will?


 The wheat has been blowing in that field,

   While the laborers are so few.

What then, now are we waiting for?

   Can hardened hearts become like new?


 Safely can we stay behind you,

   as we march with your trumpet sound?

Or- have we stayed and hid so long now,

   That our roots dry underground?


 I pray Lord that you will find me.

   I pray not to be ashamed.

I seek you when it's early Lord.

   I pray not to fall away.


So come Lord Jesus come quickly-

   The terrible day is at hand.

I pray we'll all be steadfast.

   So you may strengthen our spirits ,

as we stand.


Loree Brownfield

What If A Nation Prayed

See Prayer List



Let us do our part to keep this the Land of the Free and Honor the Brave


Get to speed--basic info you must know as there is not enough news still for K-12th hidden agenda and about the ROE--so please share!

Homosexual Indoctrination for K-12th hidden in Anti-Bullying Law: The Bill   The Agenda  Federalizing

Revised Rules of Engagement--Empowering The Enemy:  Joshua's Death  The Father's Letter & Interviews

Czars and Their Unconstitutional Powers

Health Care Bill Or The Derailing Of America

Cap and Trade--Skyrocketing Utilities For Almost Bankrupt America/ For Whose Benefit? EPA Report

Know How They Voted

Truths To Share As Freedom Isn't Free

Click on pic to see samples of what's on site

Join with us in prayer (National Prayer List)


Weather By The Hour

Don't forget as you check on the weather to check in with the One who calms the storms!







3.8.14 -

How States and School Districts Can Opt Out of Common Core

Mar 8, 2014 by <> Staff

by Dr. Sandra Stotsky -

States that want to opt out of the Common Core Learning Standards (CCLS) and/or the tests aligned to or based on its standards are being threatened by a toothless tiger that doesn't want the states to know the tiger has no claws.

States are hearing, "It's too late to back out"; "You'll waste all the money you've spent on implementing the [low-level Common Core] standards your state board of education adopted three years ago"; "You'll waste all the money you've spent on [self-described] Common Core consultants who have given [very costly] professional development to your teachers and told them what to change in their classroom curriculum to address Common Core"; "You will have to pay back all the money you got under Race to the Top (RttT)"; or, "You will lose your waiver and not get your Title I money."

Can the U.S. Department of Education (USED) demand repayment from states that got RttT funds? Can it withhold Title I money from a state that loses its waiver? It is important to recall that Congress didn't pass legislation requiring Common Core's standards or tests. All it authorized in 2001 was a re-authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) called No Child Left Behind (NCLB). ESEA hasn't been re-authorized since then, so there are no new or different education policies passed by Congress. A variety of conditions have been attached to the recent waivers issued by USED, but they may have no constitutional legitimacy since Congress didn't approve them. States can certainly raise that objection.

At the national level:

If a state received RttT money and spent it, it most likely doesn't have to pay it back if it now seeks to opt out of using Common Core's standards (by any name) and any tests aligned to or based on these standards. Neither the RttT application nor the grant award from USED contained a repayment penalty for withdrawing from a commitment. Moreover, the Grant Award Notification from USED implied withholding of future RttT funds, not repayment of RttT funds already expended.

In other words, there seem to be no likely penalties if a state accepted a USED award of RttT funds and now chooses to withdraw from the agreement. States can justify their withdrawal on the grounds that the Common Core standards do not meet the original requirements of "common standards" outlined in the RttT application. These standards were supposed to be "supported by evidence that they are internationally benchmarked." But they are not. The Common Core Validation Committee never received any evidence.

Nor has evidence been provided by two post hoc attempts to provide such evidence: the 2011 < df> report by David Conley at the University of Oregonand the 2012 <> report by William Schmidt and a colleague at Michigan State University, Richard Houang. Conley's report, funded by the Gates Foundation, contradicted the findings in his 2003 pre-Common Core <> report on college-readiness standards, while Schmidt and Houang's < re-up-by-guest-blogger-zeev-wurman/> report has been severely criticized on methodological grounds. It is unclear who funded it.

Moreover, RttT was a three-year program extended to last four years. It expires in the fall of 2014. Whatever changes states make after 2014 cannot affect the grant. In addition, no state committed itself explicitly to maintain forever the new policies required by RttT. Once RttT grants expire, it is unclear how the USED could demand repayment for an expired program.

If a state obtained a waiver from some aspects of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and now seeks to opt out of using Common Core's standards and tests aligned to or based on them, it is highly unlikely to lose Title I money. Title I is implicated in the Common Core issue only because the state committed to the CCLS to obtain the waiver.

If the state applies for an extension of the waiver through the 2015-2016 school year, it would need to replace its commitment to implement the Common Core with a commitment to implement alternative standards approved by its institutions of higher education (IHEs). IHE approval of more demanding "college- and career-ready" standards would allow the state to retain the waiver, without penalty. Legislators need to ask their public IHEs to approve standards that enable mathematically and scientifically ambitious high school students to take STEM-preparatory coursework while in high school, not in transition courses elsewhere after high school graduation or after passing a GED test.

If the US Department of Education (USED) decided to be punitive, it could withhold at most only 5%-10% of the 1% of Title I funds set aside for state administrative functions. For example, if a state received $200 million under Title I, the administrative set-aside is $2 million. The most severe federal punishment would be 5-10% of that, or a maximum of $200K.

If the state chose to give up its waiver, the state would be under the NCLB mandate again to get all students to proficiency by 2014. NCLB has a range of sanctions for persistently failing schools and districts, ranging from conversion to charter schools, closing the school down altogether, replacing a large percentage of the school's staff, to carrying out turnaround plans. If states give up their USED waivers from NCLB requirements, they would still have to assess their state's standards annually with tests that, by law, must be based on these standards, and NCLB's sanctions would again apply for failing schools and districts. It is not clear what the sanction would be for failing to get all students to proficiency by 2014, that is, if most schools failed to achieve Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) for all subgroups.

The primary financial consequence of relinquishing the waiver would involve flexibility, not amount, of funding. Under NCLB, failing schools must allocate 20% of their Title I funding to Supplemental Education Services, typically outside tutoring. The waiver doesn't change the amount of funding those schools receive but allows them to redirect 20% of it to other Title I uses. These districts would lose flexibility, not money.

USED would find it politically difficult to impose financial penalties on waiver cancellation when Common Core is not, in theory, a federal program. Or so we are regularly told.

At the state level:

Districts can select their own curricula and, in some states, their own standards. What they cannot do easily is avoid state testing. State tests operate under state laws which force all districts to participate, although sanctions vary by state. Typically, the results of these tests are used to rank or grade schools publicly, and they serve to label the schools as meeting or not meeting NCLB's requirement of proficiency.

A district with a stronger curriculum than one addressing Common Core's standards is betting implicitly that its results will be better on the state test. If schools choosing to address more demanding standards than Common Core's are ranked low on a Common Core-aligned test for several years, they may face state department of education sanctions, which can range from the state managing the district to reshuffling school administrators. Legislators can address this power play by withholding funding of the state's department of education if it seeks to prevent schools with low scores on a Common Core-aligned test from addressing more demanding standards than Common Core's. All the district should be required to do is produce evidence of evaluations showing that its standards are more demanding than Common Core's.

A future post will further address districts that want better standards and tests than their state board and department of education are imposing on them.

Sandra Stotsky, Ed.D. is Professor Emerita, University of Arkansas.



3.17.14 - Truth in American Education n-common-core-assessments/

< on-common-core-assessments/> Sandra Stotsky on Common Core Assessments

Filed in <> Common Core Assessments by <> Shane Vander Hart on March 17, 2014 . < on-common-core-assessments/#comments> 0 Comments

Massachusetts is telling their parents that they can not opt their students out from the PARCC assessments that are being field tested this year. They are treating them the same as MCAS which are considered mandatory under state law.

Dr. Sandra Stotsky, who served as a Senior Associate Commissioner in the Massachusetts Department of Education and was later on the Massachusetts State Board of Education, addresses Common Core aligned testing and parents who wish to opt their students out:

The general situation across states is this: a state's tests must be based on a state's official standards. If the official standards are aligned to Common Core (no matter what they are called), then the test items must address CC's standards. That's why it is imperative that local school boards vote to reject CC's standards and any curriculum addressing them. It doesn't matter what set of standards they say they are replacing CC with. The legal point is that the state tests will not be in sync with the local curriculum and standards (which by state law, local districts have a right to have), so the local school districts can legally refuse to give state tests because they don't address the legally adopted standards and curriculum at the local level.

There's more than one way to skin the cat. That's why there's a move to get rid of local school boards and put all power of curriculum, instruction, and standards under regional or state ed board.

More specifically, unless state law explicitly forbids parents from opting their kids out of SBAC or PARCC field tests, then parents can do so, and should. They can petition their school boards to pass a policy allowing all parents to opt their kids out of all field tests for any Common Core-aligned test. And they can add that there are to be NO penalties for parents exercising that right. State DoEs cannot make policy, by law. They are threatening local districts and parents illegally.



From: Donna Garner [] Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 3:21 PM To: Donna Garner Subject: MILLIONS OF KIDS TO TEST COMMON CORE-BASED EXAMS - EDVIEWS.ORG - 3.23.14

3.23.14 -

Millions of kids to test Common Core-based exams

Mar 23, 2014 by <> Staff

What's on the new Common Core-based exams? More than 4 million kids in U.S. schools soon will have a clue.

Field testing begins this coming week in 36 states and the District of Columbia on assessments developed by two different groups of states. Participating students will be asked to sit for hours in front of a computer or use a No. 2 pencil to answer questions.

But there's no need for kids to worry. The scores won't count, this time. The actual exam-testing won't be used for another year.

The Common Core standards spell out what math and English skills students should have at each grade, and are designed to develop more critical thinking skills than traditional schoolwork. They were first pushed by governors concerned about the large number of high school graduates needing remedial college help.

The field tests, to be conducted until June, are a big step forward in the push to more fully integrate the new academic standards into the school environment. They will give education officials a chance to judge things such as the quality of each test question and the technical capabilities of schools to administer the tests, which are computer-based but also will be available on paper.

But they also come as the standards face political push-back in many states.

Indiana lawmakers, for example, last year paused implementation of the standards and a measure ending the state's participation is at the governor's desk. House lawmakers in Tennessee passed legislation that would delay implementation under Common Core for two years, but that proposal hasn't been taken up in the Senate.

Common Core supporters hope the field tests highlight the best of Common Core.

"There's been a lot of talk and a lot of planning and it's actually happening, which I think generates some excitement and some reality. for the fact that this is moving ahead," said Jeffrey Nellhaus, director of research, policy and design with the consortium Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, or PARCC.

Joe Willhoft, the executive director of the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, told reporters there will be snags, and that's in part due to the nature of what a field test is - an -opportunity to see what works and doesn't.



From: Janet Wilson [] Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 9:47 AM To: Texans Against CSCOPE Subject: [Texans Against CSCOPE] ~ NATIONAL OPT OUT & REFUSE THE TEST CAMPAIGN ~

Janet Wilson posted in Texans Against CSCOPE

Image removed by sender. Janet Wilson

Janet Wilson

9:46am Mar 24


The goal of the “National Opt Out & Refuse the Test Campaign” is to provide the awareness, resources, and support needed in order to have every single child in the United States of America opted out of the federally mandated high stakes testing and assessments that go along with the Common Core State Standards and the Race to the Top assessment program. When individual states signed up for the Race to the Top assessment program to receive funding from our federal government, they agreed to align their curricula with the Common Core State Standards, before the standards were even written. The federal government has unconstitutionally violated our 10th Amendment by exercising power over education.

Education should be controlled locally and within the States. Until we are able to get rid of Common Core through legislation at the state level, we need to make sure that no more children will be abused by the high stakes testing and assessments that go along with Common Core. The sooner we have all children opted out of these high stakes tests and assessments, the sooner teachers will no longer have to “teach to the test.”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *


1. Join our community on Facebook ( <> and find support before, during, and after the process of Opting Out/ Refusing the Tests.

2. Please go to the website ( <> to find the “Common Core State Standards Parent Opt Out form” from Truth in American Education. Please fill out this form, keep the original for your own personal records, and make enough copies of your completed form for all of the following recipients:

a. The superintendent of your child’s school district

b. The principal of your child’s school

c. Each of your child’s teachers

3. On top of completing the form above, please also click on your State’s Opt Out Guide that is located to the left of the website's campaign blog post.

In your State’s Opt Out Guide, you will find further instructions that are necessary and specific to your own state. Please refer to these instructions, as well as the instructions stated on the “Common Core State Standards Parent Opt Out form” from Truth in American Education. Please make sure that you opt your child out of all the high stakes testing and assessments that go along with Common Core as soon as possible so we can begin allowing teachers to get back to teaching the traditional way instead of having to “teach to the test.”

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Website - <>

Facebook Groups - &

Twitter -

#SayNoToCommonCore, #StopCommonCore

Image removed by sender.

Image removed by sender.

View Post on Facebook · Edit Email Settings · Reply to this email to add a comment.