105 Peavey Rd, Ste 116
Chaska, MN 55318

Personal U.S. Student Data Given to International Agencies

March 18, 2002

The "National Education Sciences Reform Act" - HR 3801 - allows individually identifiable data to be collected by independent international agencies, including comprehensive demographic data and the attitudes, values and belief systems of American students.

HR 3801 is now being considered in the U.S. House Education Committee.

The bill now goes onto the full Education and Workforce Committee for action next week. The House Education committee will vote it out sometime next week. The House plans to vote on HR 3801 after the Easter break.

Happenings to Date:

As stated earlier, we are addressing three particularly egregious sections of HR3801. We have already discussed the extensive personal data collected by the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) students from before birth to adulthood, including prenatal and psychiatric information.

In subcommittee last week, current federal privacy legislation (PPRA and FERPA, for those of you who are familiar with it} was amended into the bill. That is a great improvement.

Current serious penalties for violating those laws, however, would be eliminated in HR3801! The penalties that are being removed are felony convictions with serious fines and up to 5 years in prison if federal employees use "individually identifiable data for anything other than a statistical purpose."

International Surveys:

HR3801 prohibits the development of a nationwide database of individually identifiable information on individuals with two exceptions:

1. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (the NAEP) which for the first time must be administered in each state; and

2. "International assessments" developed under the National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES).

Individually identifiable personal demographic and attitude data on American children may be exchanged with international organizations under HR3801. The international organizations involved are not subject to U.S. laws.

Here is an example. The NCES "sponsored" the American portion of a survey on civic education by the International Association for the Evaluation of Academic Achievement (IEA).

Just as in the NAEP, this international survey collects lots of demographic data. You will notice how probing these questions are beyond the standard demographic questions about sex, ethnicity, and country of birth. Here are some examples:

- Number of books in the home

- Receives a daily newspaper

- Parents' highest level of education

- Frequency of changing schools in the past two years as a result of moving

- Expected years of further education

- Number of days absent from school last month

- Number of parents in the home

- Total number of people in the home

- Frequency of English spoken in the home

- Amount and type of extracurricular activities

- Time spent with friends after school

- Time spent with friends in the evening

- Time spent watching television or videos on school days

- Frequency of computer use at home

- Time spent on homework each day

- Frequency of discussing things studied at school with someone at home

The introduction says:

"The assessment phase of the study, conducted in 1999 and analyzed in this report, was designed to assess the civic knowledge of 14 year old students across 28 countries. The assessment items in CivEd were not designed to measure knowledge of a particular country's government, but were developed instead to measure knowledge and understanding of key principles that are universal across democracies." [Emphasis added.]

Note that they emphasized democracies, not constitutional representative republics as we have here in the U.S.

The introduction also states:

"Another key component of the Phase 2 study focused on measuring the attitudes of students toward civic issues." [Emphasis added.]

What attitudes are measured?

Percentage of ninth grade U.S. students reporting that various economy-related actions probably or definitely should be the governments responsibility. (Figure 5-9, 1999, pg 84)

-- Keeping prices under control 84.2%

-- Providing industries with the support they need to grow 66.2%

-- Guaranteeing a job for everyone who wants one 65.4%

-- Reducing differences in income and wealth between people 63.5%

-- Providing an adequate standard of living for the unemployed 58.6%

The IEA is monitoring progress of American students on the new "international" educational curriculum, which is the same as the new "federal" curriculum, in this case, how well students are accepting expansive central government planning, government redistribution of wealth, and undermining individual responsibility (and thus individual liberty).

The majority of ninth grade students in the U.S have not been schooled in our free market system, the value and necessity of competition or the protection of the inalienable right of private property. The IEA undoubtedly gives the U.S. education "reform" movement high marks for its progress toward imposing the new federal curriculum upon American children.

As a parent, you can opt your child out of state assessments, the NAEP, and every survey that involves education on every level, no matter from where it comes. See the Parental Consent Notice developed by Beverly Eakman

If enough people refuse to participate in sampling surveys, they lose tier scientific validity. Saying No undermines the very viability of the surveys, rendering them useless.


3. A third major concern: Regional Government Boards

HR3801 sets up regional government boards to create a plan for their region to put the new system of education fully in place. They are to "survey" every entity at every level of education to assess progress toward their plan. The boards provide an abundance of "technical assistance" on educational issues "of regional and national interest."

The Governing Boards are appointed to "represent" citizens according to various groups, such as teachers, business, etc, thus undermining a fundamental principle of self-government -- elected representation. People who are appointed represent the interests of those who appoint them.

Regional governance is brazenly unconstitutional. Regional governance by appointed boards has no U.S. or state constitutional authority to make plans for the education of our children. They are unaccountable to the taxpayers, because they cannot be voted out of office.

This is a subversion of our free system of representative democracy, The public, in reality, is opposed to the Goals 2000, School-to-Work minimum competency, career centered training of our children that is being systematically mandated from the federal government.

Serving the "national interest" in education is a violation of the 10th amendment to the constitution. It also serves to further implement the National Curriculum. The Regional Boards will use results from the NAEP to assess progress toward the federal goals.


EdWatch is entirely user-supported. The continuation of our research and distribution work is entirely dependent on individual contributors. If you want to assure that our work continues, Link to -- www.edwatch.org

Please e-mail us to subscribe to this EdWatch e-mail service.

(c) EdWatch - All rights reserved.