Im a dude!

I did point out the fact to the state department of education that this person did defend the Applied Scholastics and Lron way too much.

Here's a good critical resource:
http://www.studytech.org

Direct link to the "Applied Scholastics & Scientology" page
http://www.studytech.org/asi.php

Video:
5/23/07 - Professor David Touretzky (CMU) appears on the Glenn Beck show to discuss Scientology's increased encroachment into public classrooms.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aYfpH6PXlM0

More Arizona residents need to write the department of education. REally any tax payers as they are surely accepting federal funding as well.

Performance labels for AZ

http://www.azcentral.com/news/education/school-scores.php

Why dont they have a 100% pass rate?

Taking case to the media is a very good idea, I hope it will work.
I think it would be helpful to determine, in percentage terms, how much of the curriculum is based on Hubbard's works.

Scientology and scientologists claim that the study tech they export and teach in these schools is not religious in nature.

Yet, when a scientologist pays a church of scientology to learn LRon's same exact study tech, via courses (such as Basic Study Manual, Student Hat, Key to Life), or to have scientology study tech applied to them via word clearing (Method One, Primary Rundown, Qual Review) scientologists deduct these expenses as religious donations made towards religious services on their tax returns.

So which is it? It sounds as though its non-religious only when it needs to be in order to scam someone. The above study tech religious services that scientologists pay for and deduct from tax returns can run into thousands of dollars-worth of deductions.

So, if LRon's study tech really is non-religious as the scientology officials and celebrities claim, then STOP ALLOWING SCIENTOLOGISTS TO DEDUCT THEM ON THEIR TAX RETURNS.

Amen dorothy

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2012/01/10/20120110arizona-charter-schools-put-to-test.html

I hope they take a serious look at Midtown Primary

I hope that ugly smell in Pinellas county hits this school too.

This would be a good experiment to try:

They say that they are not connected in any way to the CofS?

Well, lets have someone who would be otherwise qualified to teach there except for the fact that they are not in good standing with the CofS, a known independent with a teaching credential, maybe?

Of course several of them would need to apply and see if any of them even come close to landing a job!

Jeff

I don't know about all this. The school has been open that it uses studytech. If parents are happy with the results of the school, who are we to complain on their behalf?

I do understand the argument against government funding going to religiously motivated schools, I just haven't seen any evidence that would lead me to suggest this is happening. The use of Studytech in and of itself is not a religious matter if it is used to learn maths or history or whatever. Only if the school is actively promoting the religious writings of Hubbard is there an issue in my opinion.

This is not to say that I accept studytech as an effective tool for learning - quite the opposite - but I think that if Arizona wants to set up a system of charter schools, and parents make informed decisions about those schools, it isn't really any of our business. I would hope that few parents would be happy with such an obviously counter-productive learning system, but that is their decision.

After reading this article on Study tech by Dave Touretzky, I am not sure if the points I made above are entirely sound. Maybe, maybe not. I'll have to take a closer look at the secular v religious side of things.

http://studytech.org/study-tech-essay

Thanks, damo, for researching and finding Dr. Touretsky's essay. Critics here have repeatedly linked to it as the best explanation of Study Tech's insidious nature.

Damo, do you mean that the phoenix school has been open about its use of the tech or the one in pinellas county? I was told on the phone and in email by the director that they are in no way affiliated with COS.

If the school uses Applied Scholastics, it is linked to CoS. The CoS Organization Charts show that the chain of command is
Church of Scientology International,
Executive Strata International,
International Management Executive Committee,
Flag Command Bureaux,
A.B.L.E.
Applied Scholastics International

Also, Applied Scholastics is a kind of sister organization to Church of Scientology International in that (1) both pay royalties for trademarks and copyrights to Religious Tech. Corp and Church of Spiritual Tech, and (2) both are in 1993 IRS Closing Agreement .** The groups are non-legally linked because Sea Org runs the Continential Liaison Office which controls both the local Churches and ABLE, the corporation that controls Applied Scholastics. Since Sea Org is a vaporous brotherhood instead of a legal entity, CoS lawyers imagine this creates an illusion of separateness, but they are wrong. The two are deeply intertwined. When a school says they have no relation to Church of Scientology, the question should be, "Are you paying any CoS Corporation for Applied Scholastics or any other materials, and are you donating to any CoS Corporation?

*See Applied Scholastics International within the Org Chart and its Footnote F5, on the first two posts at CoS Organization Charts at viewtopic.php?f=9&t=31561

** http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Cowen/essays/irs.html