Oklahoma will test some incoming teachers with ‘America-first' exam
'We're not bringing in woke indoctrinators into the classroom,' Walters told The Washington Post on Monday, adding, 'It's a very America-first approach.'
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
Walters has courted controversy for previous efforts to shape Oklahoma's schools, including distributing Bibles in classrooms and backing a proposal to teach high-schoolers that there were 'discrepancies' in the 2020 election. He supported the unsuccessful effort to create the nation's first public religious charter school in Oklahoma that culminated in a deadlocked Supreme Court ruling in May.
Walters told the education board that its members will not have a chance to review the test for teacher candidates before it is implemented. Chris Van Denhende, a board member, asked Walters in July to ensure the policy 'passes legal muster.'
Advertisement
'It sounds like we're on the edge,' Van Denhende said.
The requirement went into effect over the summer, Walters said, but the test is being finalized. Applicants from New York and California receive a notice that they will not be accepted until they complete the exam, once it is ready. Walters said he hoped the exam would be released 'soon.'
The Oklahoma State Department of Education shared five sample questions from the multiple-choice test Monday, covering topics such as the Constitution and the makeup of Congress. Oklahoma already requires new teachers to take a US citizenship test, which covers civics topics, to complete their certification.
Walters said the test for California and New York teachers
would also focus on 'the biological differences between the two genders.'
Some sample questions from the exam:
1. What are the first three words of the Constitution?
A. In God We Trust
B. Life, Liberty, Happiness
C. The United States
D. We the People
2. Why is freedom of religion important to America's identity?
A. It makes Christianity the national religion
B. It bans all forms of public worship
C. It limits religious teaching in public life
D. It protects religious choice from government control
3. What are the two parts of the U.S. Congress?
A. House of Lords and Commons
B. Courts and Senate
C. Executive and Legislative
D. Senate and House of Representatives
4. How many U.S. Senators are there?
A. 435
B. 110
C. 50
D. 100
5. Why do some states have more Representatives than others?
A. They cover a larger geographic area
B. They have held statehood for a longer period
C. The number is determined by military presence
Advertisement
D. Representation is determined by population size
-
Oklahoma State Department of Education
Applicants will have to answer all 50 questions correctly to qualify. Walters said the test is 'common sense' and 'straightforward.' While the requirement is aimed at teaching applicants from California and New York, Walters said he would consider expanding the test to applicants from other blue states.
Cari Elledge, president of the Oklahoma Education Association, which represents the state's school employees, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. She told USA Today that the move is a 'political stunt to grab attention,' adding that inserting politics into the state's teacher screenings could harm morale and turn away good educators.
The union told its members in a July letter that Walters 'has no legal authority to vet certified teachers based on political ideology' because state law requires Oklahoma to recognize out-of-state teaching credentials, USA Today reported.
Walters said he is prepared for the teacher test to face legal challenges.
The move deepens PragerU's influence in state education. The nonprofit, which produces videos promoting conservative views of history, race, sex, and gender, has secured partnerships with at least five states to allow their content to be optional teaching material in public schools.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
5 minutes ago
- Fox News
Republicans investigate whether President Biden abused the presidential autopen
Fox News senior national correspondent Rich Edson has the latest on the response to the Hur Report's claims the former president had a 'poor memory' on 'Special Report.'
New York Post
6 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump caught Democrats in a trap — torn by their Medicaid lies
This week, President Donald Trump officially launched his push to remove illegal aliens from state Medicaid rolls by cross-checking them against federal databases, a move that's sure to send Democrats running to the courts yet again. But when it comes to illegal immigrants and welfare, Democrats have a serious problem — and it's not just their continuing slide in favorability. It's that they just can't make up their minds about whether or not those here illegally are receiving federal Medicaid dollars at all. Advertisement When Congress was debating Trump's One Big, Beautiful Bill Act, one of the left's oft-repeated refrains was that there was no need to ban illegal aliens from Medicaid's rolls — because giving them its benefits was already against the law. They conveniently forgot to mention the 12 states that explicitly expanded non-emergency Medicaid coverage to illegal immigrants, and the other gaping loopholes being exploited nationwide. But in June, Trump made a move that forced Democrats drop the act and show their hand: His Health and Human Services Department began sharing Medicaid data from four states and Washington, DC, with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Advertisement Cue the outrage. Within days California Attorney General Rob Bonta, New York AG Letitia James and 19 other blue states filed suit in federal court to block the data-sharing — and gave up the game in the process. Democrats love to lie in the court of public opinion — but in a courtroom, you've got to tell the truth. And by suing to stop Team Trump, they practically confessed: Illegal aliens are on Medicaid, and blue states are desperate to keep it that way. Advertisement Since then HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (or CMS) Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz have doubled down, expanding their partnership with ICE to include nationwide Medicaid data. To help their effort, Rep. Wesley Hunt (R-Tex.) demanded that Gov. Kathy Hochul cough up the data on Medicaid-receiving illegal immigrants in the Empire State, citing her legal obligations to regularly report enrollment and eligibility data to the federal government. The Democrats' lawsuits continue their track record of fighting beyond the limits of their power to protect illegal aliens — in this case by keeping their Medicaid data 'safe' — while endangering law-abiding Americans. Their claims that no illegal aliens take advantage of Medicaid benefits also fly in the face of Medicaid's own records. Advertisement Between 2021 and 2023, taxpayers spent at least $16 billion on emergency services for illegal immigrants, CMS has reported, with federal taxpayers covering more than 70% of those costs. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters When you add in the billions likely spent on non-emergency services in direct circumvention of federal law, the total figure of Medicaid resources going to illegal aliens is incalculable — an enormous transfer of wealth from Americans to non-citizens who shouldn't be here at all. Welfare benefits like Medicaid have been some of the strongest magnets spurring mass migration into this country and encouraging people to illegally stay. Halting those perks, as Trump and Republicans in Congress are rightly doing, will do much to turn the magnet off. Stealing from Medicaid is especially grievous because the program is intended to help America's most vulnerable, including low-income children and people with disabilities. When illegal aliens or other ineligible people take Medicaid, they not only suck up taxpayer resources, they reroute precious resources from legitimate Medicaid recipients who already have to compete for a limited pool of providers. It's downright despicable — yet Democrats in Congress and in at least 20 blue states seem more than happy to run interference to ensure that it continues. Advertisement Some Democrats are begging for their party to moderate after November's resounding defeat. Some — like New York City primary voters — are sprinting further to the left. If they want to appeal to the majority of voters in the coming midterms, though, they need to get their Medicaid stories straight. Advertisement More important, they need to get their priorities straight. Instead of robbing from taxpayers to give to law-breakers, Democrats should protect Medicaid for the Americans who truly need it. They could do that by following the lead of Republicans like Gov. Jeff Landry of Louisiana, who just signed a law referring illegal aliens fraudulently receiving welfare to ICE so they can be deported. If Democrats can't make up their minds about illegal aliens and welfare, the American people will make up their minds about the Democrats — and keep rejecting them at the ballot box. Hayden Dublois is the Data and Analytics Director for the Foundation for Government Accountability.
New York Post
6 minutes ago
- New York Post
California Gov. Gavin Newsom signs redistricting measure in response to new Texas House map
California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed off Thursday evening on a redistricting plan aimed at countering Texas Republicans' planned implementation of new congressional maps for the Lone Star State. Newsom enacted the so-called 'Election Rigging Response Act,' setting a Nov. 4 special election asking whether Golden State voters approve of new House districts designed by legislators. The Democrat-controlled state Senate passed the special election measure in a 30-8 vote, shortly after the Dem-held state Assembly approved it in a 57-20 vote. Advertisement If the new map is approved by voters — and if it survives near-certain legal challenges — Democrats could win up to five additional House seats in next year's midterm elections, canceling out the five seats Republicans in Texas are expected to gain as a result of their redistricting push. Newsom announced that California would forge ahead with redistricting at a rally-like press conference in Los Angeles last week. AFP via Getty Images 'The president and the Texas Republicans are rigging the election … it is our duty to fight fire with fire,' state Sen. Jerry McNerney (D-East Bay) said during debate on the measure. Advertisement McNerney argued that 'California voters should have the right to decide if the state should respond to the president's effort to rig the election.' Since the measure seeks to override the Golden State's voter-approved, nonpartisan redistricting commission, a special election is necessary to redraw the existing congressional map. State Democrats maintain that the mid-decade redistricting measure is a one-off, needed to directly respond to Texas Republicans, but some in the legislature expressed fear that California would never return to its original system. President Trump strongly backed Texas' effort to redraw congressional maps in the Lone Star State. REUTERS Advertisement 'With the reported involvement of the [Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee] in this action – that has been developed behind the scenes – one has to be awfully suspicious of significant changes to this process,' argued Republican state Sen. Roger Niello (R-Sacramento County). 'Indeed, the intent or the power to continue on our previous track after 2030 is of great concern to me and I think should be of great concern to everybody who votes in favor of this,' he added. Former President Barack Obama weighed in on California's redistricting earlier this week at a DCCC fundraiser, arguing that Newsom's plan 'was a smart, measured approach' to counter Texas' move.
