Archive for the ‘Agenda 21’ Category

Compulsory Education’s Unforeseen Consequences: Nebraska Case Studies   5 comments

Lately, there’s been quite a buzz about ending compulsory education. Utah Senator Aaron Osmond propelled the idea when he wrote a piece on this subject at the Utah Senate blog. Osmond pointed out that it is a “parental right to decide if and when a child will go to public school,” adding that “in a country founded on the principles of personal freedom and unalienable rights, no parent should be forced by the government to send their child to school under threat of fines and jail time.”

Public education started out as an opportunity, but over the years, turned into a governmentally enforced mandate. The mandate flies in the face of other laws, such at Utah’s FERPA, which asserts that it is the parent, and not the government, who is the primary authority over a child.

That’s just common sense to most of us; in fact, most parents are utterly unaware that there is a battle going on between government “collectivists” and parents. The idea that parents hold authority over a child is not acceptable to an alarmingly pushy segment of society, who say government should take ownership of children.

This is, of course, communism.

But it’s becoming acceptable to many. Watch the video put out by MSNBC’s Melissa Harris-Perry, of the Lean Forward campaign. She asserts that “we have to break out of the notion that children belong to parents.”

It is time to wake up and protect parental authority. With that introduction, I’m presenting this guest post by Autumn Cook. Thank you, Autumn.

———————————————————————————————————————————-

COMPULSORY EDUCATION: THE GREAT CONTROL GRAB

Guest Post by Autumn Cook

12-year-old Lucas Maynard and his parents found themselves in truancy court last week. Lucas’ offense? He got sick too much this year. The punishment? They’re still waiting to find out, but the judge has informed him that removal from his parents’ custody is a possibility.

All around the country, there is a quiet assault on families taking place. In the name of “helping children,” state laws and school district attendance policies are being altered to draw thousands of innocent children into the juvenile justice system and wave the heavy threat of state force and social services intervention over the heads of ordinary good parents.

Innocent children whose crimes amount to being frequently ill, or struggling with mental health issues such as autism, or being the victim of bullying, are being hauled into court, coerced into lengthy “diversion programs,” threatened with removal from the custody of their parents, actually removed from the custody of their parents, and in other ways terrified and treated like criminals. Their families are being put through the wringer with unpaid time from work for court dates, costs for attorney fees, and fear of state intervention in their families.

Untold numbers of other families are being frightened into doing everything possible to avoid entanglement in this system, including sending their kids to school sick and cancelling family travel. It is happening in states all over the country – I personally know of cases in Indiana, Texas, and Wyoming, with particular knowledge of what is happening in Nebraska because of personal involvement.

Here’s how it’s been playing out in Nebraska. In 2010, motivated by an attempt to get points on its Race to the Top application, the Nebraska legislature passed a law at the request of the Governor which effectively took away the right of a parent to excuse her child from school. The new law required schools to report kids to law enforcement if they had more than 20 days of absence – for any reason at all. Nebraska could get more points on its application by having a plan in place to increase attendance. All states were able to earn more points for implementing more oppressive attendance laws.

At the same time, school districts started tightening up their attendance policies, disallowing excuses for family travel or time home with seriously ill family or military parents on leave from deployment. Before the change, Nebraska applied the reasonable and widely-used standard of reporting kids with unexcused absences – those whose parents hadn’t accounted for their whereabouts.

Where once state law, school district policies, and public officials worked to reduce truancy – kids missing school without their parents’ permission (a.k.a. “skipping”) – the focus is shifting to reducing absences of any kind. The shift is leaving untold collateral damage in its wake, including the relationships between school administrators and the parents they serve. And it’s shifting our culture to embrace the “state knows best” mindset, minimizing the authority of parents and giving far too much power to state officials to decide what’s “best” for individual children. It’s also generating a lot of business for the social service industry.

Last week, the story of the Maynards – referred to above – became the latest in a long list of such abuses out of Nebraska. Their story highlights much of what’s wrong with the “brave new approach” to school attendance that’s sweeping the nation. Lucas experienced a lot of illness – plus two days of impassable winter roads in rural Nebraska – during the past school year. This innocent offense landed him in court, forced to sit away from his parents between the prosecutor and the guardian ad litem assigned to him, listening in terror as the judge informed him that one of the consequences of his absences from school could be removal from his parents’ custody. (Children are assigned a guardian ad litem in cases of alleged abuse or neglect. So the state of Nebraska has implied that the Maynards committed abuse or neglect by keeping their son home when he was ill and when the roads were too dangerous to travel!)

The Maynards’ entire story can be read at the Nebraska Family Forum blog. Unfortunately, it’s only one of hundreds if not thousands of such cases, and that’s just in Nebraska. The toll around the country is much higher, with many cases even more egregious, such as this one involving a 9-year-old in Wyoming.
If you see attendance policies and laws like this, don’t wait a day to contact your local school boards and state legislators. They need to hear the message that laws and policies must protect the fundamental right that parents have to make decisions for their children. For those who are lucky enough to live in states and districts where this approach hasn’t been implemented yet, watch your legislature and local board meetings like a hawk! Proponents of this approach to school attendance are pushing the “state knows what’s best for each child” approach all over the country, including here in Utah this last session.

It’s another piece – an especially frightening piece – of the education reform puzzle that is shaping up all over the country.

More stories from Nebraska

The Chambers Family
A quiet middle-schooler with severe allergies is sent to the county attorney, forced to submit to a drug test without her parents’ knowledge, made to feel like a criminal, and ends up attending school when sick, staying in a quiet room where she naps and eats lunch – just so they can count her present.

The Herrera Family
A mother decides to homeschool her 3rd-grade daughter for the last few weeks of the school year after school officials fail to deal with her bullies and she gets beaten with a stick on the way home from school. Because she doesn’t waited to receive official notice of approval from the state – her daughter was in imminent physical danger – when she comes back the next year she is reported to law enforcement, made a ward of the state, and her mother is placed on the child abuse and neglect list.

The Garrity Family
The story of a 15-year-old boy with autism shows how families who already struggle with unique challenges are abused and put through further suffering by the state of Nebraska and its school districts.

The Hall Family
A well-liked honor roll student with seasonal asthma is forced into a “diversion program.” Diversion from what? Asthma? The solution the following year is that when she is too sick to go to school, her parents must bring her to school so the school nurse can verify the parents’ judgment.

A Global Monitoring Report From the International Bureau of Education   8 comments

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/efareport/post-2015/

With all your free time this summer, here’s something fun.  Study the reports of the global monitoring group at the U.N.’s International Bureau of Education, and see how much of what they say aligns with, or has inspired, Common Core.

No?  Okay, fine.  I’ll do it.

Here’s just a peek into the International Bureau of Education and the Global Monitoring Report.  These sound like something from a horror movie or a chapter in Orwell’s 1984, I know.  But they are actually real.

“Education for All” is a United Nations project that uses the same catch phrases used by Common Core proponents in the United States.  For instance, the stated goals of the Global Monitoring Report (GMR) –which of course, sound good on the surface– mirror recent U.S. education reforms:  Emphasizing equity.  Emphasizing measurability. Emphasizing finance.

Click here:  GMR Proposed post-2015 education goals: emphasizing equity, measurability and finance.

But what do those three concepts mean for U.S. citizens?

EquityEducation For All promotes the redistribution of world wealth so that ultimately, no locality or individual has ownership over his/her own earnings, and global government owns all, so that global government can ensure fair distribution to all.  This is not voluntary sharing; this is punishable, forced redistribution– it is legalized stealing of local taxes, by governments abroad.

Measurability – this means increased surveillance and testing of all teachers and students so that all can be compared and controlled by the global governance.

Finance – In the powerpoint presentation that was given at  a Brussels, Belgium meeting last month, ‘Education post-2015: Equity, measurability and finance’, you can see that it is the United States that is being told to “donate” to make this global educational governance possible.  Annually, the U.S. should “donate” 53 billion, the powerpoint presentation states.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6O8_EjUkaU (GMR “Education for All” video link)

So when you watch this Global Monitoring Report video, you’ll hear the presenter describing the sad facts of poverty in foreign countries as if she were leading a fundraising effort for a charity.

But that’s not what it is.  It is a justification for global communism, which religious leaders have been warning us about for many, many years; communism is, frankly, a  captivating tool of evil.  And many are falling for its lure because it beckons to the envious as well as the charitable.  It asks both to give away self reliance, self respect and freedom– in favor of forced redistribution.

My point today is that a Common Core of cookie-cutter education is not just an American phenomenon.  Globalists want it, too.  And they don’t care if some people lose academically or financially, so long as everyone ends up the same.  The very same.

One particular character who reveals the Common Core / Global Core same-same connection is British globalist Sir Michael Barber, CEA of the world’s largest educational sales company, Pearson.

Barber praises and promotes nationalized educational systems in many countries, lumping Common Core in with the rest.  Watch and listen to his Council on Foreign Relations video and audio interviews. Watch his speeches on YouTube.  He specifically mentions irreversible global reforms, global data collection, and the American Common Core. He says education should be borderless. He defines all education as needing to be “ethically underpinned” by the environmental movement.  He says that all children in all places should be learning the exact same things.  He promotes global databases to compare all people in global educational.  He has written a book (“Deliverology”) dedicated to American education reformers, telling them how to force “irreversible reform”.

He also likes the terms “sustainable reform” and “revolution” and uses these in his Twitter-tweets, (along with  rantings about the need for gun control in the U.S.)  Oh, and his company, Pearson, has aligned all its textbooks, teacher trainings, early childhood education products and other merchandising, to Common Core. Of course.

Sir Michael Barber is highly praised and quoted by our U.S. Secretary Arne Duncan– openly,  lavishly, in public speeches.

Sir Michael Barber.  The man who bridges Common Core to Global Core.

Don’t let him out of your sight.

Fighting the Adoption of Common Core-aligned Science Standards and Textbooks   1 comment

None of us have enough time to process, comprehend and then fight against all of the intrusions on our time and our God-given rights and liberty.

But some things are more important than others.  And fighting the adoption of Common Core-aligned science standards and textbooks must be high on the To-Do list.

Heartland Institute’s Joy Pullman explains it in a great article found here.  http://heartland.org/policy-documents/research-commentary-common-core-science-standards

She writes: “Individual liberty advocates counter that centralization in education is as foolish and damaging as centralizing the economy. They note the ideological tendencies of science education toward politics as a substitute for actual science, particularly in the area of highly debatable global warming alarmism, which is falsely assumed as reality in these standards. The standards also promote a simplified understanding of science and are still incoherent despite revisions…. They ignore central scientific concepts and push a progressive teaching style that has been proven to erode student learning…”

Yet textbook companies are rewriting science to align to the false assumptions of common core, so even those states who wisely rejected the common core or who aim to do so, will likely end up with common core textbooks anyway.

Here’s a letter I wrote to my local and state school boards and superintendents today.

Dear Superintendent and School Boards,
Our homeschooling group attended the Leonardo Museum in Salt Lake City yesterday. What a wonderful museum.  The Mummy exhibit was fascinating, the hands-on digital learning activities were great, the craft workshop and prosthetics exhibits and art were absolutely engaging for visitors of all ages.
But in the multi-room exhibit entitled “Human Rights Exhibit,” visitors were shown not only ecology art, but vocabulary words in the context of the claim that human behavior is killing plant and animal life –and will likely kill off the human race.  There were paintings of futuristic apartment projects teetering dangerously close to the ocean, on islands and cliffs.  The captions stated that because of the FACT of global warming and oceanic flooding, people will be living like this.
I use this as an example of the unscientific assumptions and lies being taught all around us, which are also loading the common core-aligned science standards and science textbooks coming our way.
Let’s not turn a blind eye to the ongoing politically-based rewrite of actual science.  Let’s stand independent of this.  Let’s actually teach the kids hard science based on settled facts as we did in all the wise years up till now.
For a detailed list of news articles and science reviews of Common Core science standards and textbooks, please read this.
http://heartland.org/policy-documents/research-commentary-common-core-science-standards
We have Martell Menlove’s word that Utah will never adopt Common Core science and social studies standards.  But with the majority of textbook companies belonging to the monopoly of the insanely unrepresentative system of Common Core, we as a state have to go out of our way to find true science for our kids.  Let’s do it.
Thanks for listening.
Christel Swasey
Utah Teacher
Heber City
——————————————————-
Green Insanity in the Schools Update:
Update from Illinois:  http://www.christianconservativeresistance.blogspot.com/2013/04/how-i-was-banned-from-my-childrens.html
You have to read this woman’s blog.  First, she and her husband protested the Disney-like green propaganda film that was shown to the elementary school children to “teach” them that humans are destroying the earth. Then she was banned from volunteering in the school.  Then she was reinstated.  Sigh.
——

Top Ten Scariest People in Education Reform: # 5 – Bill Gates   46 comments

Top Ten Scariest People in Education Reform

Bill Gates: Scary Philanthropy

Countdown # 5

 This is the fifth in a countdown series of introductions, a list of the top ten scariest people leading education in America.  For numbers 67, 8 9 and 10,  click here.

The biggest philanthropist on earth comes across as the epitome of sincere, nerdy nice-guy.  And he probably is very nice and very sincere.  But does sincerity trump truth?

The truth is, Bill Gates’ herculean attempt to fund and market Common Core to Americans, and to circumvent the voting public on educational issues, is dangerously, dangerously misguided.

Thus,  not everybody is happy in philanthropy land.  The biggest philanthropist in the world got behind the unproven experiment  of Common Core and  –using money rather than the voice of the American voter– he pushed it into schools, circumventing any vetting  by legislative, educator or parent groups.

Gates’ astronomical wealth  has persuaded millions that Common Core is the solution to education problems,  the argument from everywhere,  approved (by him) and beyond debate.  But let me repeat the fact:  regardless of whether the standards are horrible or glorious, the truth remains that whenever unelected philanthropists are permitted to direct public policy, the voting public  gets cut out of the process.   It’s happening all over the U.S., but not just in the U.S.  The Gates-directing-world-education effect is happening everywhere.

Since Gates has no constituency he can’t be un-elected; so it’s not the the wisdom of experienced educators, but simply one man’s money that is directing implementation of  the controversial Common Core.  His  money has bought, besides technology, work groups, and a seat at the policy making table, extreme marketing success.

He’s got control of the education opinion factory.  When Common Core was debated at the Indiana State Capitol, who showed up to advocate for Common Core?  Stand for Children, which Bill Gates funds.  He also funds the League of Education Voters, the Center for Reinventing Public Education and the Partnership for Learning, all Common Core advocates;  Gates owns Editorial Projects in Education, parent of Education Week magazine.

No wonder, then, even educators don’t seem to know the full truth about Common Core.  They’re reading Education Week and  the Harvard Education Letter.  Translation: they are reading Gates’ dollar bills. (By the way: want to make some money selling out your fellow teachers?  Gates is searching for a grant recipient who will receive $250,000 to accelerate networking of teachers toward acceptance of Common Core. )

Wherever you see advocates for Common Core, you see Gates’ influence.  He gave a million dollars to the national PTA  to advocate to parents about Common Core.  He gave  Common Core developer NGA/CCSSO roughly $25 million to promote it.  (CCSSO: 2009–$9,961,842, 2009– $3,185,750, 2010–$743,331, 2011–$9,388,911 ; NGA Center: 2008–$2,259,780.)  He gave $15 million to Harvard for “education policy” research.  He gave $9 million to universities promoting “breakthrough learning models” and global educationGates paid inBloom 100 million dollars to collect and analyze schools’ data as part of a public-private collaborative that is building  “shared technology services.”  InBloom, formerly known as the Shared Learning Collaborative, includes districts, states, and the unelected Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).  The list goes on and on and on.

It’s hard to know exactly how much money Gates has put toward the promotion of Common Core because of the chameleon-like wording of  educational granting areas.  For example, he gave $3 million  Stanford University and $3 million to Brown University   for “college and career readiness.” (The average person wouldn’t know that college and career readiness is a code phrase defined as  common core by the Department of Education.)  Sometimes he’s promoting “support activities around educational issues related to school reform” for the CCSSO (common core developer) and other times he’s “helping states build data interoperability” –which not everyone would recognize as Common assessments’  bed-making.

According to Gates himself, he’s spent five billion dollars to promote his vision of education since 2000.

He really,  reealllly believes in Common Core.  So it doesn’t matter that Common Core is an experiment on our children  that’s never been tested and has been rejected by countless  top education analysts.  It doesn’t matter that Common Core is an un-American, top-down, nonrepresentative system  that state legislatures didn’t even get to vet.  Bill Gates wants it.

And not just in America– he wants global education standards.

Gates’ company, Microsoft, signed a cooperative agreement with the United Nations’ education branch, UNESCO.  In it, Gates said, “Microsoft supports the objectives of UNESCO as stipulated in UNESCO’s constitution and intends to contribute to UNESCO’s programme priorities.” UNESCO’s  “Education For All” key document is called “The Dakar Framework for Action: Education For All: Meeting Our Collective Commitments.”  Read the full text here:  http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001211/121147e.pdf

So Gates partners with the U.N.’s educational and other goals via UNESCO’s  “Education for All”  which seeks to teach the same standards to all children (and adults) on a global scale.  Why is this a problem?  It supercedes local control over what is taught to students, and dismisses the validity of the U.S. Constitution, all in the name of inclusivity and education and tolerance for all nations.

At this link, you can learn about how Education For All works: “Prior to the reform of the global EFA coordination architecture in 2011-2012, the Education for All High-Level Group brought together high-level representatives from national governments, development agencies, UN agencies, civil society and the private sector. Its role was to generate political momentum and mobilize financial, technical and political support towards the achievement of the EFA goals and the education-related Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). From 2001-2011 the High-Level Group met annually.”

The six goals of “Education For All” are claimed to be internationally agreed-upon. On the linked Education and Awareness page of the U.N. website, we learn:

Education, Public  Awareness and Training is the focus of Chapter 36 of Agenda 21. This is a cross-sectoral theme both relevant to the implementation of the whole of Agenda 21 and indispensable”   http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/susdevtopics/sdt_educawar.shtml

Did you get that?  Education is indispensable for the U.N. to get its agenda pushed onto every citizen worldwide.  They just admitted it out loud.  They want a strong hand in determining what is taught worldwide.

So then we click on Chapter 36.  In 36.2 it says we should “reorient” worldwide education toward sustainable development.  (No discussion, no vote, no input needed on this reorientation plan, apparently.)  36.3 says:  “Both formal and non-formal education are indispensable to changing people’s attitudes…. It is also critical for achieving environmental and ethical awareness, values and attitudes, skills and behaviour consistent with sustainable development…  To be effective, environment and development education should deal with the dynamics of both the physical/biological and socio-economic environment and human (which may include spiritual) development, should be integrated in all disciplines, and should employ formal and non-formal methods”

The take-away?  What does Bill Gates agree to in his Microsoft – UNESCO partnership?

  • Environmental education will be incorporated in formal education.
  • Any value or attitude held by anyone globally that stands independent to that of the United Nations’ definition of “sustainable education” must change.  Current attitudes are unacceptable.
  • Education will be belief-and-spirituality based as defined by the global collective.
  • Environmental education will be integrated into every subject, not just science.

The stated objectives (36.4) include endorsing “Education for All,” and “giving special emphasis to the further training of decision makers at all levels.”

Hence the need for people like Gates to influence the training of decision makers.  When asked what matters most to him, Gates said: education.  His version of education. The Huffington Post reported:

“I’d pick education, if I was thinking broadly about America,” Gates responded. “It’s our tool of equality.”  Is it coincidence that equality and redistribution are also concepts that Linda Darling-Hammond, Chaka Fattah and Arne Duncan are promoting in the federal Equity and Excellence Commission?

How committed is Bill Gates to the United Nations having a say in American education?

In his annual letter, Gates emphasized the importance of  following the United Nations’ Millennial Goals and measuring teachers more closely.  One of those UN Millennial goals is to achieve universal education.  Also, Gates helped create Strong American Schools (a successor to the STAND UP campaign launched in 2006, which was an outgrowth of UNESCO’s Millennium Campaign Goals for Universal Education). It called for U.S. national education standards. (link 1) (link 2)

Also,  Gates’ Foundation funded the International Benchmarking Advisory Group report for Common Core Standards on behalf of the National Governors Association, Council of Chief State School Officers, and ACHIEVE, Inc. titled, “Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education.” This report showed the United Nations is a member of the International Benchmarking Advisory Group for Common Core Standards. (link)

It appears that Bill Gates is more than a common core philanthopist; he is a promoter of global sameness of education as defined by UNESCO and the U.N.

That’s scary.

Public-Private-Partnerships: What Osmond’s Preschool Bill and Herbert’s Prosperity 2020 have in common   3 comments

My brother called the other day to ask me what I thought of the radio ads for “Prosperity 2020.” In my gut I knew there was something bad about it, but I couldn’t put my finger on what.  But thanks to Professor Steven Yates’ white paper on the subject of public-private partnerships, now I get it.

It wasn’t just “Prosperity 2020″ that made me do this research.  I’d also been working out why UT Sen. Osmond’s early childhood education bill, SB17, was so wrong.  It was more than SB17′s way of tempting low income parents to drop their kids in the free government daycare to go to work that made me so uncomfortable.  It was also, I now clearly see, the fact that Osmond’s bill uses private money to create a public service.

The Governor’s project is Prosperity 2020; Osmond’s is  SB17.

So why are both Governor Herbert and Senator Osmond –two Utah Republicans who call themselves conservatives– pushing for public-private partnerships (PPPs)  in Utah?

I still believe that these are decent men who honestly believe their respective projects will benefit Utah.

But sincerity does not trump truth.

Herbert’s Prosperity 2020 and Osmond’s SB17  create public-private partnerships that compromise vital American principles of free enterprise and limit the self-control of citizens’ lives by allowing unelected businesspeople, with government, to view individuals as collectively owned  “human capital.”

There’s nothing wrong with businesses and government working in harmony; of course, that is what a good society does.  Problems come when business leaders (unelected) begin to shape binding government policies.  An elected politician is accountable to his consituency of voters who can unelect him. But who, for example, is Microsoft’s or Pearson company’s constituency?  When Pearson or Gates help set binding education / business policies for Utah, how can voters alter that?

(It must be especially difficult for Senator Osmond to recognize the trouble with blending business and government, since he sits on the Senate Education Committee while being employed by Pearson, the company Utah has partnered with to provide educational technology and educational products.  –But that’s a topic for another day. )

It’s not that these men are calculating socialists.  Not at all; they’re just short on research.  They don’t recognize what their new alignments of public-private partnerships (PPPs) end up creating.

Many have explained the trouble with blending business and government in partnership. They call it soft fascism:  I think of it as fascism by consensus.  In the case of Prosperity 2020, it’s soft, consensual fascism via good marketing.  (Have you heard the many recent radio ads for Prosperity 2020?)

I’ve never seen PPPs (Public Private Partnerships) better explained than by Professor Steven Yates, whose white paper on the subject was presented at a conference at the Ludwig von Mises Institute in 2006.  I’m going to quote him extensively here.

His paper, “Sustainable Development: Public-Private Partnerships, the undermining of free enterprise, and the emergence of soft facism Sustainable Development: the Hidden Threat to Liberty,  was published a few years ago: http://files.meetup.com/1387375/LIBERTYGARDEN-PPP.pdf   (www.freedom21santacruz.net)

Professor Yates’ paper is long but great.  See it here. 

I’ve taken the time to scoop up his main points.

 

  • Public-private partnerships really amount to economic control—they are just one of the key components of the collectivist edifice
  • The individual person does not own himself; he exists to serve the state or the collective
  • Public-private partnerships bring about a form of “governance” alien to the founding principles of Constitutionally limited government, government by consent of the governed
  • The PPP system is fascist since it involves corporations and governments working together to make policy; it is soft fascist because it is not overtly totalitarian.
  • Vocationalism in education makes sense if one’s goals are social engineering, since it turns out worker bees who lack the  tools to think about the policies shaping their lives

Yates also writes:

“What is a public-private partnership? What purposes were they supposedly created to serve? What, on the other hand, is free enterprise? Are the two compatible? In answering these questions we shall see that although advocates of public-private partnerships frequently speak of economic development, public-private partnerships really amount to economic control—they are just one of the key components of the collectivist edifice being built…

…How did the enthusiasm for public-private partnerships begin, and what do they have to do with sustainable development? We can the idea of the comprehensively planned society at least to Plato, who envisioned such a society in his Republic. In the Republic, there is a place for everyone and everyone knows his place. Properly educated philosopher-kings rule—because by virtue of their educations they are most suited to rule.

…In modern times we must cite the collectivism of Jean-Jacques Rousseau…  And we could cite G.W.F. Hegel (author of The Philosophy of Right and other works), inventor of the idea of the state as the historical manifestation of the Absolute. In the Hegelian vision, the individual belongs to the state.

…Characteristic of all these visions is that once implemented, the individual person does not own himself; he exists to serve the state or the collective. He is not to be allowed to direct his own paths, but is compelled down paths laid by those in power…

…The long-term goal here is what can be increasingly envisioned as an emerging world state with many facets (the three E’s of sustainable development being equity, economy, environment—with a prospective ‘fourth E’ being education).

This world state will gradually subsume and eradicate nation-states until the phrase United States of America names not a sovereign country but a large tract of micromanaged real estate—at least half of which will be off-limits to human beings.

By the start of the 2000 decade, one city or town after another all across the country was bringing in “consultants” and having “visioning” sessions.

… Communities began to be transformed from within, typically with the full cooperation of mayors and other elected officials, other local government officials, business groups such as the local Chamber of Commerce, presidents of local colleges, and neighborhood-association groups. Plans with names such as Vision 2025… would result from these sessions.

The idea was to build up a form of capitalism that would transform itself into socialism via the collectivization of its participants through, e.g., self-directed work teams...Education had become entirely group-focused through group projects and group grades. Thus the business personnel turned out would have no moral center other than the collectivist one. It also became increasingly vocation-focused….

…In some cases, the use of public-private partnerships to facilitate the construction of more government schools has been promoted. On other occasions, public-private partnerships actually get involved in instruction and curriculum development themselves, sometimes beginning with very small children, e.g., the Child  Care Partnership Project. This entity serves as a kind of incubator for public-private partnerships between state-level child care administrators and businesses, nonprofits, foundations, and other groups.

Education, unsurprisingly, is a preoccupation of elite groups such as the World Economic Forum, which sponsored the Global Education Initiative… The vision for the Global Education Initiative (GEI) was conceived during the World Economic Forum’s Annual Meeting 2003. Together, business leaders of the Information Technology and Telecommunications Community of the Forum launched an initiate to create new sustainable models for education reform in the developing world through public-private partnership.

 

School-To-Work education, of course, emphasizes vocation at the expense of academics, i.e., traditional subject areas

Vocationalism in education makes sense, if one’s goals are social engineering. It will turn out human worker bees who lack the mental tools to think about the policies shaping their lives.

… [The US] first integrated education and government via the Goals 2000 Educate America Act, then education and business via the School-to-Work Opportunities Act and finally business and government with the others via the Workforce Investment Act.

…Among the casualties of this system are traditional academic subjects, which are relegated to the status of decorations as job training is ratcheted up.

Students are compelled to select a “career cluster” as early as the eighth grade. As they near graduation they find themselves sent to work sites for labor training instead of in classrooms learning reading, mathematics, history, government, and so on.

Public-private partnerships are fundamentally different from previous organizations and collaborations that have involved businesstheir widespread adoption is bringing about a form of “governance” that is alien to the founding principles of the United States (Constitutionally limited government, government by consent of the governed) and inimical to individual liberty.

We have begun to see government not by consent of the governed, but “governance” (i.e., control) by committee, and by bureaucracy.

This brand of “governance” employs an arsenal of tricks imported from behavioral psychology, such as the use of Delphi technique to coerce a “consensus” by intimidating and marginalizing critics.

Government  “partnerships” … do not stem from its mandate to protect life, liberty, and private property...

Public-private partnerships do not fit into the conceptual model of free enterprise. 

… We should be vigilant to the possibility—probability—that something has gone badly wrong even if the language of free enterprise is still used…  A public-private partnership will always have as its goal a business-making venture that requires some form of “governance.”  The question is, since the players will vary in experience and wealth, who has the most power? We know from life itself that whoever has the most money has the power… Representative government loses… free enterprise is compromised. The economic system begins its move from a one based on liberty and productivity to one based on control

If corporations have the most money—as is often the case—they will obtain levels of power that make them as dangerous as any government not on a constitutional leash.

[Soft fascism] can be understood only in the context of the “fourth E” of sustainable development: education.

American history discloses two broad philosophies of education, what I will call the classical model and the vocational model.

The classical model incorporates the full scope of liberal arts, including history and civics, logic and philosophy, theology, mathematics as reasoning, economics including personal finance and money management. Its goal is an informed citizen who understands something of his or her heritage and of the principles of sound government and sound economics generally.

The vocational model considers education sufficient if it enables to graduate to be a tradesman or obedient worker.

History, logic, etc., have little to contribute to this, and so are ratcheted down, as in the School-To-Work model.

Mathematical education, for example, will be sufficient if it enables students to use calculators instead of their brains…

He will go along… according to the Hegelian model of education that subordinated the individual to the “needs” of the state or of society.… vocational programs “school” students to fit the needs of the “global economy” seen as an autonomous, collective endeavor, instead of educating individuals to find their own ways in the world, shaping the economy to meet their needs.

This system is fascist since it involves corporations and governments working together to make policy; it is soft fascist because (due to the lack of genuine education) it is not overtly totalitarian.

… This is not a “conspiracy theory,” even though you will not hear it reported on the 6 o’clock news. It is as much a fact as gravity. It is not even hidden from us; the documents supporting such claims, penned by their own advocates, are readily available to anyone willing to do some elementary research…”

—– —— —–

It is worth your time to read all of Yates’ white paper.

   Herbert’s Prosperity 2020 and Osmond’s SB17  create public-private partnerships that compromise vital American principles of free enterprise and limit the self-control of citizens’ own lives by allowing unelected businesspeople, with government, to view individuals as collectively owned  “human capital.”

Utah Bill SB100   7 comments

If you live in Utah, and if you are concerned about the “global governance” (U.N. over U.S.) agenda in books and many schools, please contact your senator and tell them we want to AMEND OUT the part of the bill that gives advantages to students who enroll in the IB (a global governance indoctrination program) International Baccalaureate (IB).

We will want to defeat the bill if it stays in its present form, but we are asking for AN AMENDMENT to take the expensive and not-America-centered “IB” portion out.  Why? Because IB teaches our kids that no country is blessed with a superior system; all governments are equally acceptable.  (That includes communist, socialist, dictatorship-based and all other systems.)

Children should hold our U.S. Constitution and our nation’s great, God-fearing founders in a place of honor.  IB does not teach this.

PLEASE CONTACT UTAH SENATORS – START WITH YOUR OWN SENATOR — be sure to let them know you are a constituent.   (See contact info below)

SB-100 HIGHER EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIP AMENDMENTS (Sponsor: Jerry Stevenson)

See bill text here: http://le.utah.gov/~2013/bills/sbillint/sb0100.pdf

This bill passed committee and will be debated and voted on in the Senate.  It “allows the Board of Regents to assign additional weights to grades earned in International Baccalaureate program courses in determining scholarship eligibility in the Regents’ Scholarship Program.”  We must educate our Senators about the downsides of the International Baccalaureate program.

Facts About International Baccalaureate (IB)

(International Baccalaureate Organization — IB Diploma Programme)  http://www.ibo.org/become/guidance/

http://youtu.be/n_6u9a6xiKo?t=45s  -news broadcast on I.B. in Idaho

IB Magazine: http://www.ibo.org/ibworld/jan2010/index.cfm

Fiscal-Accountability-Research Considerations

•The IB is neither transparent nor accountable to the Utah State Office of Education or the Utah State Legislature.
•The IB is expensive and lacks fiscal restraint when Utah shows nearly $20 billion in debt.
•The IB requires an international contract with arbitration under Swiss law.
•The IB is over-rated and lacks substantive research and shows no significant difference against competitive programs such as the Advanced Placement Program to justify its costly materials and professional development.

Political-Philosophical-Religious Considerations

•In 1924 at Oxford University the finest progressive political/philosophical minds founded the IB with the intent to educate children of League of Nations, and later U.N., employees and ambassadors from many nations.
•In 1984 President Ronald Reagan withdrew US membership from UNESCO, calling it “un-American.”
•UNESCO was a founding sponsor and continues to be its close ally and collaborator.
•Until it became unpopular, the IB publicly endorsed the UN’s radical Earth Charter as its foundational philosophy, crafted by Mikhail Gorbachev and Maurice Strong, chairman of the 1992 Rio Earth Summit whose declaration document was entitled Agenda 21.
•Both The Earth Charter and Agenda 21 share the same tenets: ◦Global unilateral disarmament (a violation of the Second Amendment);
◦Population control (including abortion on demand);
◦Extremist environmental policies that infringe on private property rights and that do not need scientific research to prove they are valid;
◦Redistribution of wealth through a global environmental tax, already in force federally and through foreign aid to eradicate poverty, undercutting domestic prosperity and free enterprise.

Because of all of the links to UN organizations and the global agenda indoctrination that is part of the IB curriculum, many parents will opt to keep their children out of IB programs. It is NOT fair that their students will then be at a disadvantage when applying for scholarships!

(go here to find your Senator: http://le.utah.gov/GIS/findDistrict.jsp)

Express  concerns over giving weighted consideration to IB, and ask them to VOTE “YES” on Amendments to take IB out of the bill!

Sen. Luz Robles 801-550-6434 cell
Sen. Jim Dabakis 801-815-3533 cell
Sen. Gene Davis 801-647-8924 cell
Sen. Pat Jones 801-278-7667 hm
Sen. Karen Mayne 801-968-7756 hm
Sen. Wayne Harper 801-566-5466 hm
Sen. Deidre Henderson 801-787-6197 cell
Sen. Brian Shiozawa 801-230-3406 hm
Sen. Wayne Niederhauser 801-942-3398 hm
Sen. Aaron Osmond 801-888-8742 cell
Sen. Howard Stephenson 801-572-1038 hm
Sen. Daniel Thatcher 801-759-4746 cell
Sen. Mark Madsen 801-361-4787 wk
Sen. John Valentine 801-224-1693 hm
Sen. Margaret Dayton 801-221-0623 hm * NO NEED TO CALL HER – SHE GETS IT!
Sen. Curt Bramble 801-361-5802 cell
Sen. Peter Knudson 435-730-4569 cell
Sen. Stuart Reid 801-337-4182 cell
Sen. Allen Christensen 801-782-5600 hm
Sen. Scott Jenkins 801-731-5120 hm
Sen. Stuart Adams 801-593-1776 hm
Sen. Todd Weiler 801-599-9823 cell
Sen. Ralph Okerlund 435-979-7077 cell
Sen. Lyle Hillyard 435-753-0043 hm
Sen. Kevin VanTassell 435-790-0675 cell
Sen. David Hinkins 435-384-5550 hm
Sen. Evan Vickers 435-817-5565 cell
Sen. Steven Urquhart 435-668-7759 wk

The Bill Sponsor is Sen. Jerry Stevenson 801-678-3147 cell
Make sure he understands IB and is willing to amend it out of the bill!

HERE ARE E-MAIL ADDRESSES

dhinkins@le.utah.gov
kvantassell@le.utah.gov
lhillyard@le.utah.gov
rokerlund@le.utah.gov
tweiler@le.utah.gov
jsadams@le.utah.gov
jwstevenson@le.utah.gov
sjenkins@le.utah.gov
achristensen@le.utah.gov
screid@le.utah.gov
pknudson@le.utah.gov
curt@cbramble.com
mdayton@le.utah.gov
jvalentine@le.utah.gov
mmadsen@le.utah.gov
dthatcher@le.utah.gov
hstephenson@le.utah.gov
aosmond@le.utah.gov
wniederhauser@le.utah.gov
standoc10@comcast.net
dhenderson@le.utah.gov
wharper@le.utah.gov
kmayne@le.utah.gov
pjones@le.utah.gov
gdavis@le.utah.gov
jdabakis@le.utah.gov
lrobles@le.utah.gov
surquhart@le.utah.gov
evickers@le.utah.gov

Video from Nevada Principal – How I.B. compares to A.P.

This video assesses the qualities of I.B. and A.P., tells which program most universities prefer, which program offers more choices to students, what similarities exist between A.P. and I.B. programs; the principal prefers A.P.

Declaration of Independence from Common Core   2 comments

Declaration of Independence from Common Core

–inspired by the 1776 Declaration of Independence

February 5, 2013.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary…[for parents and teachers] to dissolve the [educational policy] bands which have connected them with [Common Core Governance] and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, [Educational] Liberty and the pursuit of [Educational] Happiness [while free from surveillance tracking by government longitudinal databases and P-20 Councils].

–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government [such as the Common Core Initiative] becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it [Common Core Initiative], and to institute new [education policy], laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that [High standards, such as those held previously by Massachusetts, California and other states] long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations [such as those brought by Common Core and its testing and data collection] pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government [False Educational Standards], and to provide new Guards for their future security.[State-vetted standards]

–Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies [States] ; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government [Education policy]. The history of the present  [Governance of Common Core] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

[Common Core Governance refuses to allow those governed by it, to vote or consent to its standards, tests, data collection and rules] which is wholesome and necessary for the public good.
[Common Core Governance has made promises of academic grandeur without showing empirical evidence or references for these claims; when pressed, Common Core governance has] utterly neglected to attend to them.

[Common Core Governance has, by sliding under the public radar, essentially forbidden state legislators] to [have time to see rules] of immediate and pressing importance, [dealing with Common Core's cost and academic veracity.

[Common Core Governance] has refused to [allow Constitutional education and has asked]  large districts of people [to]   relinquish the right of Representation in the [Common Core Governance], a right inestimable to them…

[Common Core Governance] has called together [teacher professional development conference] bodies at places… for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
[Common Core Governance has bribed and/or deceived state leaders and thus] has dissolved [the rights of sovereignty of states and school districts] repeatedly, [and has dismissed with mislabling, as extremists, any who stand] opposing with manly firmness [these] invasions on the rights of the people.

[Common Core Governance has refused to provide a method of amendment for the Common Core] and has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States [from having a fair voice in their creation]; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for [writing and amendment of standards]; refusing to [ask Congress] before altering family privacy regulations; and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of [Private Student Data], the States remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of [privacy] invasion from without, and convulsions within.
[Common Core Governance] has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by [breaking Constitutional law and the General Educational Provisions Act] by [entering into micromanaging Cooperative Agreements with test-writing consortia].

[Common Core testing Governance] has made [all schools and teachers] dependent on [its] Will  for the tenure of their offices, and the [continued] payment of their salaries.

[Common Core Governance] has made [school districts and teachers] dependent on [its] Will [even in states that rejected Common Core, such as Texas, by bribing districts with money under Race To The Top], a gross misuse of taxpayer dollars.

[Common Core Governance] has erected a multitude of New Offices, [and technologies] and sent hither swarms of Officers [propaganda-wielding spokespeople] to harrass our people, and eat out their [hearts and minds] substance.
[Common Core Governance]  has kept among us… standing [educational standards and citizen surveillance tools, including P-20 Councils and federally funded State Longitudinal Database Systems] without the Consent of our legislatures.
[Common Core Governance]  has affected to render the [unelected boards such as Council of Chief State School Officers and National Governors' Association] independent of and superior to the Civil power.
[Common Core Governance]  has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; [this includes quoting from, accepting money from, and/or aligning with the goals of, anti-constitutional activists such as Bill Gates, Bill Ayers, and Sir Michael Barber and UNESCO,] giving  Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of [unwanted educational rules such as the rule that eliminates cursive writing for all children, the deletion of the majority of classic literature for all students, and the diminishment of traditional math teaching] among us:
For protecting them, [the unwanted rules] by a mock Trial [Common Core Validation Commttee], from punishment for any [damages] which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our [ability to innovate via the 15% limit on improvements to Common Core]:

For imposing [Common Core education, data collection, and tests] on us without our Consent [nor a vote]:

For depriving us … of the benefits of [a standards] Trial [the standards having not been tried anywhere before their imposition on the States]:

For [figuratively] transporting us beyond Seas to be [indoctrinated into 'global citizenship' above U.S. citizenship]
For abolishing the free System of [state sovereignty over education], establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies [States]:

For taking away our [local control], abolishing [or severely altering] our most valuable Laws [such as the Family Educational Rights Provisions Act], and altering fundamentally the Forms of our [local educational] Governments:

For suspending our own [local decisionmakers], and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all [educational testing, datat collection and standards] cases whatsoever.
[Common Core Governance] has abdicated [Constitutional] Government… by declaring [Common Core to be state-led],  thus waging educational War against us [using lies].

[Common Core Governance] has plundered our [literature], ravaged our [math], [ended our cursive writing lessons], and destroyed [freedom from student surveillance and longitudinal tracking] of our people.

[Common Core Governance] is at this time transporting large Armies of [social studies and science standards] to compleat the works of [educational damage]….

[Common Core Governance] has constrained our fellow [teachers] taken Captive on the high [propaganda] to bear [false witness in support of Common Core] against their [consciences], to become the [executers of Common Core and its tests] upon [students] friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by [losing their jobs].
[Common Core Governance] has excited domestic [corporations] amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless [Common Core Implementation Opportunist] Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of [formerly cherished traditional education] for all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. An [Educational Governance system] whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the [educational sovereign] of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our [state school boards]. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by the [Common Core Governance] to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our [high quality and control of education]. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the [teachers and parents] in the  united States of America… appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these [local school districts], solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be [Educationally] Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the [Common Core Governance]  and that all political connection between them and the [Common Core Governance] is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as [Educationally] Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy [Educational standards], conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish [non-CC-aligned educational] Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which [Educationally] Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our [Educational] Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

——————————————————————————–

Californians Against Common Core   10 comments

http://cuacc.org/

California Republicans and Democrats are coming together to fight a common problem: the Common Core takeover of education.

At the Californians United Against Common Core website (CUACC) you can purchase Orlean Koehle’s book, “Common Core: A Trojan Horse for Education Reform” and see the growing list of Californian individuals and organizations opposing the Obama-backed initiative:

Eagle Forum of California – Orlean Koehle, President
Eagle Forum of Long Beach – Jeanne Goodin, President
Eagle Forum of Sonoma County – Carol Pascoe, Vice President
Pacific Justice Institute – Brad Dacus, President
Pacific Research Institute – Lance T. Izumi
David Geer – City Council Member Modesto
Redding Tea Party – Erin Ryan
Angela Weinzinger – President of Travis Unified School Board
Rosa Koire – Director of postsustainabilityinstitute.org – democratsagainstUNAgenda21.com
Nina Pellegrini – Californians For Property Rights
Heather Gass – President CitizensTownHall.org and East Bay Tea Party

Documentary Movie on Anti-American Education   6 comments

I just finished watching a documentary called “Agenda: Grinding America Down,” which you can access here: https://vimeo.com/52009124

I learned a lot.

At 52 minutes, it discusses why the hard left has tried so hard to take over education, turning children into willing tools and dependents upon the socialist state rather than individuals with self-reliance, intellect and moral character. The left pushes “social justice” in schools (meaning, we must steal from the rich, to redistribute to the poor) and teaches “relative truth” rather than truth. At 58:15 the film discusses the education unions and cites the National Education Association platform as being openly anti-parent. At 1:00 it discusses an NEA resolution to take children from parents as close to birth as possible. It discusses the new “pledge to the world” that is replacing the “pledge to the US flag” that is being chanted in an increasing number of schools.

Without using schools as a vehicle of socialist propaganda, these socialist/communist revolutionaries would never have been able to change the thinking of the majority of Americans from traditional, Constitutional Americanism to socialism (which they have successfully done, as evidenced by the latest Obama election.)

    If there is any doubt where Arne Duncan, Sec. of the Dept. of Education, is pushing our American education system (using Common Core as a vehicle) please compare his speeches– here–

http://find.ed.gov/search?client=default_frontend&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&q=arne+duncan+speech&sa.x=0&sa.y=0

–to the constitution of Communist Party USA.

Here’s the link: http://www.cpusa.org/cpusa-constitution/

Unbelievable, yes.

Yet there it is, in writing.

Just Say No to Arne Duncan’s “Green” Curriculum   3 comments

                                  My fourth grader saw this poster.  He asked me what a carbon footprint was.

I told him that some scientists think carbon hurts our earth, while other scientists say that is not actually true.  Some people think that the government wants to tax people so much that they use, as an excuse, the idea of carbon footprints.  They will tax people more if they do an activity that increases carbon on earth.

I told him that I have not studied it enough yet to have an opinion of my own.  I do not know which scientists are closer to the truth, but because it’s not settled, schools should not be teaching it as if it were a fact.

And people should not be hanging posters like this where children will see and assume one side of the argument is the only true side.

This anecdote is just a forward to the reason I’m writing today.  The original reason is this link:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:leMYpC7VZ40J:www.chesapeakebay.net/channel_files/18256/affiliate_update_-_epa_region_3_sub-award.ppt+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShjVUlWcJ_QXczKpqycvtgsx_sH58TXfd0eCMafK1wcpvSaEm7OTOcXyrpPqStPJYlzNnDHe6H1Kf4XX6KAb4T_K00Fr_QiX922VCkZtSlVJT28EroJEG3Vg3M10doX6XVAI-XF&sig=AHIEtbSOtdWRC-f4oItTEg-l-pnCSdDCTQ

Thanks to the Missouri Education Watchdogs publicizing it, here:  http://www.missourieducationwatchdog.com/2012/12/wading-into-standards-weeds.html

If you click on that top link, you’ll find a powerpoint presentation entitled: “EPA Region 3 Sub-Award Update.”

So what?

EPA means Environmental Protection Agency.  And Region 3 refers to a region –not a state– that the US Dept. of Education is now recognizing (moving away from the concept of states which can be such a pesky reminder of Constitutional rights).  “Sub-Award update” means that money is being accounted for, having been awarded by the federal government to “region 3″ to alter local education to align with EPA goals –rather than previously held academic priorities for schools, which were previously determined by local entities like school boards and principals.

Yes, it’s creepy. It is propaganda, pure and simple.  And the head of all public schools in our country, Arne Duncan, has promised us he’s going to push for more and more of it.

US Sec. of Education Arne Duncan announced,  “Education plays a vital role in the sustainability movement… education must be part of the solution… This week’s sustainability summit represents the first time that the Department is… educating the next generation of green citizens and preparing them to contribute to the workforce through green jobs… Educators have a central role in this…  teach students about how the climate is changing… explain the science behind climate change and how we can change our daily practices…. prepar[e] students for jobs in the green economy… the Department of Education hasn’t been doing enough in the sustainability movement. Today, I promise you that we will be a committed partner…”

You’re kidding, right, Arne?  You are saying that you will use schools to promote green propaganda despite the fact that millions of scientists, teachers, students and parents don’t believe a word of the “global warming” and “climate change” science?

http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/greening-department-education-secretary-duncans-remarks-sustainability-summit

Not only is he not kidding, he’s now paying the EPA to “align” with Common Core.

Link: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:leMYpC7VZ40J:www.chesapeakebay.net/channel_files/18256/affiliate_update_-_epa_region_3_sub-award.ppt+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShjVUlWcJ_QXczKpqycvtgsx_sH58TXfd0eCMafK1wcpvSaEm7OTOcXyrpPqStPJYlzNnDHe6H1Kf4XX6KAb4T_K00Fr_QiX922VCkZtSlVJT28EroJEG3Vg3M10doX6XVAI-XF&sig=AHIEtbSOtdWRC-f4oItTEg-l-pnCSdDCTQ

It’s interesting that “Green Schools” are being promoted by the U.S. Department of Education.  On the surface,  greening schools sounds a little bit boring but not bad.  Students learn wonders like “turn off the lights when you leave the room” and “eat healthy food”.

But along with that, they also learn things that are not science, not high-quality, uncontroversial, settled science.  Teachers are being told to teach sustainable propaganda and call it science. Controversial points will be taught as if they were absolutes.  It goes against the whole spirit of what education is about:  students are not told to weigh information, study empirical evidence from many sources, and judge truth from fiction, fact from opinion.

They are just told that the sustainablility movement is true.

Schools will get grants if they push the green curriculum.

And teachers better teach it.

Read the Full Text of Agenda 21 (Educational Systems to be Supplanted by Environmental Agenda)   21 comments

Here’s a link to the full text of the United Nations’ Agenda 21 global transformation plan:  http://habitat.igc.org/agenda21/index.html

I take particular interest in these three chapters: 25, 24, and 36, as a teacher and as a mother.

Chapter 25 – the one about children: http://habitat.igc.org/agenda21/a21-25.htm

Chapter 24- the one about girls:  http://habitat.igc.org/agenda21/a21-24.htm

Chapter 36- the one about education:  http://habitat.igc.org/agenda21/a21-36.htm

If you are new to governmentspeak, you won’t see many red flags.  It’s not until you slow down and really think about what they are writing (and not writing) that you begin to see how twisted this Agenda 21 really is.

Two examples:

From Chapter 25: “Ensure access for all youth to all types of education…  ensure that education… incorporates the concepts of environmental awareness and sustainable development throughout the curricula…”

Did you catch that?  Throughout curricula,  that means in every single class– spelling, grammar, science, English, math, history, technology, art, languages, sports, student government, debate, home economics, and the rest– students must be learning environmental awareness and sustainable development?  Does that not strike you as dogmatic- almost crazy?

Also from Chapter 25:  ” Consider…recommendations of… youth conferences and other forums that offer youth perspectives.” 

–On first reading, that sounds fine, right?  Listening to young people. What could possibly be wrong with it?

Well, look up “Delphi Technique” when you have some time on your hands.

There are sustainability youth “conferences” happening right now that are clearly little more than the globalists’ politically motivated indoctrination camps.

After youth spend time “dialoging” about environmental issues –where the dialogue is being controlled by Agenda 21 activist facilitators– those facilitators will take the youth recommendations back to headquarters. Nice.  Here’a a link to such a youth conference.  All 14-year-olds and up are cordially invited to be totally immersed in the green, anti-sovereignty, anti-constitution, pro-collectivism, pro-communist, environmental agenda: http://www.agenda21now.org/index.php?section=home

It should not be creeping into our schools.  But it is.

Teachers are being taught to teach sustainable development across the curricula.

The U.S. Department of Education is pushing it.  http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/greening-department-education-secretary-duncans-remarks-sustainability-summit

Secretary Duncan says in the above linked speech, “Educators have a central role in this… They teach students about how the climate is changing. They explain the science behind climate change and how we can change our daily practices to help save the planet. They have a role in preparing students for jobs in the green economy. Historically, the Department of Education hasn’t been doing enough in the sustainability movement. Today, I promise you that we will be a committed partner.”

And here: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001433/143370e.pdf  Unesco promotes “Guidelines and Recommendations for Reorienting Teacher Education to Address Sustainability”

It’s obvious that teachers are being pushed in the direction of Agenda 21 without knowing it’s a political agenda.  The Agenda 21 tenets, such as the supposed importance of limiting human reproduction, of limiting building, sports or recreational activities that touch grass, oceans or trees; of limiting airplane and car use, or of believing that there is human made global warming, are not settled facts among scientific communities (or in religious ones, for that matter.)  Yet teachers are supposed to teach them as settled facts, as doctrine.

Please have the courage to say no if you are a teacher, a school board member, a principal, or a parent.

Even if you happen to believe in the tenets of Agenda 21, such as global warming, population control, or putting plants above or equal with humans’ needs, do you believe that all children should be subject to these teachings, regardless of what their parents or teachers or churches believe?

Shouldn’t a child be taught to weigh competing theories and judge empirical evidence for his/herself, rather than accepting a dogma blindly?  Isn’t that what education is supposed to mean?

Yukon College Professor Bob Jickling’s article on this subject is worth reading:  “Why I Don’t Want my Children to be Educated for Sustainable Development”

Link here:

http://whatiscommoncore.wordpress.com/2012/08/03/green-propaganda-does-not-belong-in-schools-yukon-college-professor-explains/

Schools to Teach That “Unsustainable” includes Airplanes, Private Homes, Traditional Religion, Modern Agriculture, Ice in Your Drink.   3 comments

What is sustainable development? What is “unsustainable”?

At first glance, “sustainable development” –and the idea of teaching it in schools, museums, zoos, movies, media and planning commissions– might sound so reasonable as to make anyone opposing the sustainable obsession appear quite stupid.

“Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/pages/what-is-sustainable-development.html

But when you do a little digging, you see that it’s insane to follow “sustainability” as defined by the United Nations’ –and increasingly, the U.S. Dept. of Education’s, programs.

The U.N. wants to influence all students –and all humans– to focus on forced “sustainability” to the exclusion of all other things.  All Other Things.

It’s sickening.

This stack-n-pack high rise is supposedly the ideal for a globally sustainable future.  It makes the humans take up less space so the plants can grow.  This is your sustainable future if the U.N. gets its way.

No private homes.  No private property. No golf courses, no grazing flocks, no intrusions on the earth with scuba diving or snowskiing.  Rip up pavement so that as few paved roads as possible remain.  And allow few human births.

It’s not a horror movie.  It’s the actual plan of UNESCO and many, many other “globally minded” politicians and individuals.

Read, read.  It’s all referenced.  Everything I am writing here is linked to documents you can verify, all written by the United Nations, not by any critic of the U.N.

 

 So, “UNSUSTAINABLE” choices now include:

and, according to the UNEP Global Biodiversity Assessment Report, it’s also unsustanable to have:

  •  Ski Runs
  • Grazing of Livestock: cows, sheep, goats, horses  
  • Scuba Diving
  • Disturbance of the Soil Surface
  • Large hoofed animals
  • Fencing of Pastures or Paddocks
  • Agriculture
  • Modern Farm Production Systems
  • Building Materials
  • Industrial Activities
  • Human-Made “caves” of brick and mortar, concrete and steel
  • Paved and Tarred roads, highways, rails  
  • Railroads
  • Floor and Wall Tiles
  • Aquaculture
  • Technology Improvements
  • Farmlands, Rangelands
  • Pastures, Rangelands
  • Fish Ponds
  • Modern Hunting
  • Harvesting of Timber
  • Logging Activities
  • Fossil Fuels – Used for driving various kinds of machines
  • Dams, Reservoirs, Straightening Rivers
  • Power Line Construction
  •  Economic systems that fail to set a proper value on the environment
  •  Inappropriate Social Structures
  •  Weaknesses in Legal and Institutional Systems
  •  Modern Attitudes toward nature – Judaeo-Christian-Islamic religions
  •  Private Property   
  •  Population Growth – Human Population Density

  •  Consumerism and population figures
  •  Fragmentation of Habitat – cemeteries, derelict lands, rubbish tips, etc.
  •  Sewers, Drain Systems, Pipelines
  •  Land use that serves human needs
  •  Fisheries
  •  Golf Courses
  •  Synthetic drugs
  •  Fragmentation – Agricultural development, etc. 

For links to the above list, see page numbers here: UNEP Global Biodiversity Assessment Report. Here are scanned copies of this list and if you continue to scroll down the pdf, you will see the actual  referenced pages from the Global Biodiversity Assessment.  Thanks go to the Freedom Advocates, who compiled most of the above on their website.

PAGE REFERENCES from “The Global Biodiversity Assessment” <scanned article and relevant pages

http://www.freedomadvocates.org/articles/sustainable_development/what_is_%22unsustainable%22%3F_2003022414/

It seems that the “sustainablists” are driven by the desire to control humanity without fully considering the wider impacts of what happens when you take away protective Constitutions, personal property and local sovereignty, for the reason that “sustainability” demands it.

The UK sustainablists write:  “the focus of sustainable development is far broader than just the environment. It’s also about ensuring a strong, healthy and just society. This means meeting the diverse needs of all people in existing and future communities, promoting personal wellbeing, social cohesion and inclusion, and creating equal opportunity.”

The ultimate way to enforce equality is to redistribute everything and enforce that redistribution with government/military force.

UNESCO: The Brainwashing Site For Teachers– Reorienting Academics to “Sustainability” Indoctrination and the End of Liberty   2 comments

Here’s the UNESCO’s brainwashing site for teachers. It’s aim is to “reorient” academics to focus on “sustainability” and to slowly eradicate personal liberty in favor of collectivism.

http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_a/mod04.html

The goal:  UNESCO (United Nations) wants to “teach” (indoctrinate) everyone to become obsessed with “sustainability” to the point that they are willing to give up everything for sustainability– traditional academics; traditional authority of parents over their own children; parents, especially women, raising their own children; personal property, Constitutions, religions; traditional museums and media.  Nothing will be allowed to be more important than “sustainability” in anyone’s mind.

UNESCO wants to transform the thinking of every human on earth.  This is easier to do if they first indoctrinate teachers, since they can more easily “teach” their new religion of sustainability if teachers are converted first.

This link will bring you to UNESCO’s teacher training page:  Teaching and Learning for a Sustainable Future: a multimedia teacher education programme. 

Another interesting and scary page on the same site is : http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/   This is where they show which political programs teachers are to focus on.  One that is particularly disturbing to me is the emphasis on girls and women.

They want to make sure every mother is in the workforce rather than being home with her child.  And they want to limit the amount of babies being born in the first place; thus, they redefine as “rights” things like reproductive norms.

Those who think the “sustainability” obsession of the United Nations (and increasingly, of the U.S. Department of Education) is just about recycling are very naiive.  Sustainability is an ultimately anti-human, cruel political agenda that aims to governmentally control every person on earth –under the deceptive banner of earth care.

 “Sustainability” has no business in legitimate academic life.

Thank You, Senator Lee   Leave a comment

Utah Senator Mike Lee is a rare patriot.

He actually did what all the senators are supposed to be doing:  he defended the U.S. Constitution from the tentacles of the United Nations– again!

He defended our freedoms:  national sovereignty and parental rights, when others lightly dismissed the seriousness of the threat to these sacred things.

The article below is reposted from Lee’s op-ed in USA Today:http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2012/12/06/treaty-disabled-mike-lee/1752473/

 

Treaty backers can’t have it both ways

If the U.N. convention won’t affect U.S. laws, how can it change other nations?

by Senator Lee

December  6. 2012 – Supporters of the U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities are attempting to have it both ways. They dismiss as a myth any concerns about protecting sovereignty or parental rights because the treaty lacks a formal enforcement mechanism. They suggest that Congress can simply ignore any United Nations demand that isn’t in our national interest.

USA Today’s view:  Disabled Senate rejects U.N. rights treaty

Yet they simultaneously argue that U.S. ratification is necessary in order to force other countries to institute reforms. This inconsistent logic begs the question: If the treaty cannot be used to force changes in American law, how can it then be used to change the laws of other countries?

Ironically, no one highlighted this inconsistency more eloquently during Tuesday’s floor debate than one of the treaty’s most ardent supporters, Sen. John Kerry: “When  have words or suggestions that have no power, that cannot be implemented, that have no access to the courts, that have no effect on the law of the United States, and cannot change the law of the United States, when has that ever threatened anybody in our country?”

Or any other country, for that matter.

Supporters argue the treaty  gives us a seat at the international table. But America already sits at the head of that table. Our laws are the gold standard for protecting the rights of disabled persons. Nothing about Tuesday’s vote changes that. We continue to be influential throughout the world in promoting the Americans with Disabilities Act as the model for other countries. Ratifying the treaty would not strengthen our hand, nor would it provide further rights or benefits for Americans at home.

At best, the treaty is ineffective. At worst, it could have grave consequences for U.S. domestic law. By their very nature, treaties diminish our sovereign authority to govern ourselves. Parties to this particular convention must answer to an unaccountable U.N. committee and are subject to its directions. If you believe Sen. Kerry, then the U.S. has nothing to worry about, but also no reason to support the treaty. If he is wrong, we have many reasons to oppose it.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, is a member of the Foreign Relations Committee.

—————————–

Amen.

What Does Teacher Improvement Really Mean?   Leave a comment

Remember Inigo Montoya’s quote in The Princess Bride?  “You keep using that word; I do not think it means what you think it means.”

The way that U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, and the writers of the education chapters of the United Nations’ Agenda 21, use words, remind me of that quote –continually.

They keep using these words.  I do not think they mean what we think they mean.

Examples of words that mean the exact opposite of how they sound:

  • “social justice” – it really means stealing, the “redistribution of weath”
  • “college and career readiness” – it really means Common Core, having the exact same standards as virtually everyone else on earth (See Ed.gov definitions: http://www.ed.gov/race-top/district-competition/definitions
  • “accountability” – it really means top-down control, not mutual accountability
  • “world class education” – it really means having the same –which is mediocre at best– the same education as every other country in the world
  • “globally competent” – it really means acting out the “sustainable development” agenda which seeks to erase individual sovereignty.
  • “teacher improvement” – it really means getting rid of the teachers –and teachings– that do not agree with the fanatical “sustainable development” agenda, as agreed upon by the United Nations and the U.S. Department of Education.

Alisa Ellis made this last point, about “teacher improvement” in her talk.  –Among many, many other important things.

Alisa Ellis: On the Global Education Agenda   Leave a comment

At a recent conference of “Agency Based Education,” Alisa Ellis spoke about the goals of the U.S. Department of Education as they align with the United Nations’ “Universal Education” goals.  This informative video explains how the nice-sounding plans of the United Nations actually harm us.  They take away parental rights over children and take away teachers’ and school boards’ rights about what will be taught in local schools.

 

Agenda 21 Reduces All Education to “Underpinning” Environmental and Collectivist Curriculums   Leave a comment

The following (shortened) statements from Chapter 36 of the U.N.’s Agenda 21 shows the openness with which the globalists intend to indoctrinate all of us.  They’ll use schools, museums, theatres, media, anything.

Basic education is redefined by the Agenda 21, reduced to only an “underpinning” to their obsession with promoting all things “sustainable”.

In the words of the United Nations itself–  “Basic education is the underpinning for environment and development education…”  That’s the motive for all this global education pushed by UNESCO, Bill Gates, Sir Michael Barber of Pearson, and the U.S. Dept. of Education.  The goal has never been to endow the illiterate with literacy and numeracy because they need it; the goal is using basic education as a necessary steppingstone to promoting the sustainable development agenda –which includes taking away nations’ rights and individuals’ rights over their own property, their own children, and their own bodies.

It’s really, really bad.

Agenda 21 For Change (shortened here)

Complete text of Agenda 21: Chapter 36 here

From: http://www.iisd.org/rio+5/agenda/chp36.htm

Chapter 36: Education, Training and Public Awareness

“… Education can give people the environmental and ethical awareness, values and attitudes, skills and behaviour needed for sustainable development.”

“Basic education is the underpinning for environment and development education…”

“To improve sustainable development education, nations should seek to:

  • Make environment and development education available to people of all ages.
  • Work environment and development concepts, including those of population, into all educational programmes… There should be a special emphasis on training decision makers.
  • Involve schoolchildren in local and regional studies on environmental health…”

“The world needs a flexible and adaptable work force… Countries should:

  • Set up training programmes for school and university graduates to help them achieve sustainable livelihoods.
  • Encourage all sectors of society, including industry, universities, governments, non-governmental organizations and community organizations, to train people in environmental management.
  • Provide locally trained and recruited environmental technicians..
  • Work with the media, theatre groups, entertainment and advertising industries, to promote a more active public debate on the environment.”

Next Chapter [ Next Chapter ]

Anyone who still believes that U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is on the same team as students, parents, teachers, and the American way, please do your homework.  Read his speeches. 

He is all for “global citizenship,” international “sustainability” and top-down control of what’s taught and who teaches it.  He is obviously an Agenda 21 follower.  He even overuses the exact same phrases that the United Nations overuses in reference to education.  Consistently.

When State Boards of Education wake up to what is going on in U.S. education today, they will run as fast as they can in the opposite direction from anything Arne Duncan is praising and promoting:

–These include:

  • Common Core (most often called “college and career readiness,”)
  • The P-20 citizen tracking system  (often called “accountability”)
  • Educational Equity and/or Social Justice  (those are their words; it’s plainer to call them communism)
  • The States’ Longitudinal Database Systems (SLDS)  –spying-on-citizens network
  • The term “World Class Education”

UN INTERNET BLACKOUT OF AGENDA 21: COVERUP OF SITES ACCESSING UN AGENDA 21   1 comment

This is creepy.

For months and/or years, many of us have been studying the United Nations’ Agenda 21, especially the education chapters.  It’s the U.N.’s plan to change everything in the 21st century.

But just now, just today, we noticed that if you try to find it on the United Nations website, it is GONE.

The U.N. has deleted all public access to even reading it on the internet.  I am shocked.  If you didn’t know what it was, it’s an agenda the United Nations is trying to push on every global locality that puts green-mindedness and “sustainable development” above any other educational, political, or economic goal. It marginalizes the importance of academics, to push “sustainable education” on kids. It uses collectivity as a philosphy to get people to forget about individuality or things like property and property rights. It’s totally anti-nationalism, anti-liberty, anti-Constitution.  Organizations like I.C.L.E.I. and SmartGrowth and Prosperity 2020 are a part of it. But now you can’t even study it. They zapped it off the internet.

Maybe they deleted access because of Glenn Beck’s new book (fiction) that was also titled “Agenda 21″? I don’t know.

This is just unbelievable.

If you weren’t worried about Agenda 21 before, maybe this will persuade you to study it now.

 

The George Soros – American Institutes for Research Connection   1 comment

The Open Society Institute is a main client for the American Institutes for Research (AIR).

See it on the AIR Clients page.  http://www.air.org/about/?fa=viewContent&content_id=351

Socialist George Soros is the Open Society Institute’s  financier.
http://cnsnews.com/blog/dan-gainor/soros-spends-400-million-open-society-education-social-action-colleges-and
The Utah State School Board just spent $39 million to buy the AIR’s version of Common Core tests.
Are the Utah State School Board and Superintendent blind to these political relationships?   Or do they simply agree with them?
I suppose they agree with these philosophies.
The socialists in Utah’s educational leadership do not realize that their actions define them as socialists.

No Real and Certain Rights for Parents in U.N. Treaty Text   Leave a comment

 Compiled by LeNell Heywood

“Children are treated much, much better in the special needs setting whenever their parents have real and certain rights. Those rights are gone if this Senate ratifies this treaty.”

– Michael Farris

 

From Concerned Women for America

http://www.cwalac.org/printer_1189.shtml

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is a treaty that undermines U.S. sovereignty. Despite its name, it does little to advance the needs of people with disabilities. This treaty is unnecessary and will surrender American power into the hands of a foreign entity.


Overview:

  • Americans with disabilities are already protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act and other federal laws.
  • America is already the leading example for the world, providing freedom and justice for persons with disabilities.
  • Advocates of the Treaty argue that if the U.S. signs on it will send a strong message to other countries to do the same.
  • Those opposed to the Treaty understand the error of signing onto a Treaty where U.S. power is emasculated.

 

Excerpts from Michael Farris’ address to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee

http://www.foreign.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/REVISED_Michael_Farris_Testimony.pdf

The way for the United States to continue to lead the world in this area is to ensure that American law and practice live up to the promises of the Declaration of Independence rather than the amorphous standards of a committee of 18 experts in Geneva.

 

The UNCRPD follows the trend of the second generation of human rights treaties which promote the idea that government, not parents, have the ultimate voice in decisions concerning their children.

 

Early human rights instruments were very supportive of the rights of parents to direct the education and upbringing of their children.

 

All of the rights that parents have under both traditional American law and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act will be undermined by this treaty.

 

Children are treated much, much better in the special needs setting whenever their parents have real and certain rights.

 

Those rights are gone if this Senate ratifies this treaty.

 

Americans should make the law for America—we do not need a committee of experts in Geneva to look over our shoulders to help us determine what kind of policy we need to best protect Americans with special needs and disabilities.

 

It was American self-government and not international law that led to the significant advancements that this nation has seen in the appropriate law and policies concerning persons with disabilities.

 

International law has no track record of success that could lead any reasonable person to believe that international law would have any claim of superiority over American self-government.

 

We should pass whatever laws we need to ensure proper policies and practices for Americans with disabilities. But we should not give away our policy prerogatives to the superintendence of a committee of UN experts sitting in Geneva.

 

Treaty Text:

http://www.un.org/disabilities/convention/conventionfull.shtml

Be aware that the UN has its own language. Reading these documents having never read them before might not raise any red flags. We know from experience how the mere mention of treating people equally, especially in “developing nations” can mean a mandate to the wealthy nations to redistribute their funds to those nations, either through more foreign aid (hidden international tax) or through a direct international tax, which has been on the table for some time.

 

UT Senator Mike Lee is trying to stop this! Please thank him! UT Senator Hatch voted yes on the Motion to Proceed after committing to Senator Lee that he would vote no. Senator Hatch needs to hear from you. 

The vote for ratification is tomorrow.

 

Please read this information and contact your U.S. Senators today (number and locator link below) and pass it on. The vote will take place tomorrow at noon.

 

Ask them to oppose UNCRPD (U.N. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

 

Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121

 

Find your senators here:

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

—————————————————————————-

The author of this blog thanks LeNell Heywood for compiling this information.

Education Leaders v. Religious Leaders   5 comments

Education Leaders v. Religious Leaders

By Susie Schnell and Oak Norton

http://www.saveasd.com/prominent-educators-vs-religious-leaders/

“And also trust no one to be your teacher nor your minister, except he be a man of God, walking in his ways and keeping his commandments.” -Mosiah 23:14

Dewey, Goodlad, McKay, Benson

Education Leaders: Goodlad, Dewey, Bloom, etc.                 v.        Religious Leaders:  Benson, Packer, McKay, Lewis, etc.

Public   education has served as a check on the power of parents, and this is   another powerful reason for maintaining it.” – John Goodlad, Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pg. 165“[schools] should liberate   students from the ways of thinking imposed by religions and other traditions   of thought.”    -John Goodlad, “Education and Community,” in Democracy, Education, and the Schools, Roger   Stone, pg. 92. “There   is a spirit working among the Saints to educate their own offspring. If our   children will be all we will have for a foundation of glory in eternity, how   needful that they be properly trained… There   are wolves among us in sheep’s clothing ready to lead astray our little ones…   Wolves do not devour old sheep when there are any young ones. I have herded   sheep long enough to know that. Look after your children.” – Elder John W. Taylor, (Collected Discourses 2:138.)“There   are three dangers that threaten the   church from within, and the authorities need to awaken to the fact   that the people should be warned unceasingly against them. As I see   them, they are flattery of prominent   men in the world, false   educational ideas, and sexual impurity.”-President Joseph F. Smith (Gospel Doctrine p. 312-313.)
“Most youth   still hold the same values of their parents… if we do not alter this pattern,   if we don’t resocialize, our system will decay.” – John Goodlad, Schooling for the Future, Issue #9, 1971 “Many activities link the values of one generation to   the next, but perhaps the most central of these activities is parents teaching children in the home.   This is especially true when we consider the teaching of values, moral and ethical standards, and faith.” -Elder L. Tom Perry, April 2010 LDS General Conference
Parents do not   own their children. They have no ‘natural right’ to control their education   fully.” – John Goodlad   / Developing Democratic Character in the Young, pg. 164 “[We should] reassert the primary right and   responsibility of parents for the total education of their children, including social values, religious   convictions, and political concepts. Schools should be reminded that their   primary field of competence is academic, not social adjustment, or world   citizenship, or sex education. Parents should stand firm on this and not be   intimidated by ‘professional educators.’ After all, it’s their children and   their money.” -Ezra Taft Benson (An Enemy Hath Done This, p. 231)
Education is a   task for both parents and state. The state, parents, and children all have interests that must be protected.” – John Goodlad, Developing Democratic Character in the Young, 2001, pg. 164 “While   other institutions, such as church and school, can assist parents to ‘train   up a child in the way he [or she] should go’ (Proverbs 22:6), ultimately this   responsibility rests with parents. According to the great plan of happiness, it is parents who are entrusted with the   care and development of our Heavenly Father’s children. ” -Elder L. Tom Perry, April 2010 LDS General Conference
“The curriculum of the future will be what one might   call the humanistic curriculum.” – John Goodlad   / Directions of Curriculum Change, The NEA Journal, March 1966“Education is thus a most powerful ally of   Humanism, and every American public school is a school of Humanism. What   can the theistic Sunday-schools, meeting for an hour once a week, and   teaching only a fraction of the children, do to stem the tide of a five-day   program of humanistic teaching?” -Charles   Potter, co-signer with John Dewey of the Humanist Manifesto, “Humanism: a New   Religion”, pg. 128(Humanism   is the denial of God and elevation of man. It is the “Korihor” doctrine if   you are LDS.) “Humanism is a threat to the work of the   Lord. One   of the greatest threats to the work of the Lord today comes from false   educational ideas. There is a growing tendency of teachers within and without   the church to make academic interpretations of gospel teachings – to read, as   a prophet leader has said, ‘by the lamp of their own conceit.’ Unfortunately,   much in the sciences, the arts, politics and the entertainment field, as has   been well said by an eminent scholar, ‘all dominated by this humanistic approach which ignores God and   his word as revealed through the prophets.’ This kind of worldly system   apparently hopes to draw men away from God by making man the ‘measure of all   things’ as some worldly philosophers have said.” -Harold   B. Lee, Conference Report 10/68 p. 59.“There is promise, given under inspiration from the Almighty, set forth in these beautiful words: “God shall give unto you knowledge by his Holy Spirit, yea, by the unspeakable gift of the Holy Ghost.” (D&C 121:26.) The humanists who criticize us, the so-called intellectuals who demean us, speak only from ignorance of this manifestation… They have not heard it because they have not sought after it and prepared themselves to be worthy of it. … Do not be trapped by the sophistry of the world which for the most part is negative and which seldom, if ever, bears good fruit. … Rather, “look to God and live.” (Alma 37:47.)” -Gordon B. Hinckley,  10/83 GC, Be Not Deceived“We   are very particular to forbid anyone from preaching Catholicism, or   Protestantism, or Mormonism, or Judaism, in a public school classroom, but   for some reason we are very patient with those who teach the negative   expression of religion. In the separation of church and state we   ought to demand more protection from the agnostic, from the atheist, from the   communist, from the skeptic, from the humanist and the pragmatist, than we   have yet been given… I   submit that the atheist has no more right to teach the fundamentals of his   sect in the public school than does the theist. Any system in the schools or   in society that protects the destruction of faith and forbids, in turn, the   defense of it must ultimately destroy the moral fiber of the people.” -Elder   Boyd K. Packer, What Every Freshman Should Know, September 1973 Ensign
Enlightened   social engineering is required to face situations that demand global   action now.” – John Goodlad / Schooling for a Global Age, pg. xiii “If they embark on this course the difference   between the old and the new education will be an important one. Where the old initiated, the new merely   ‘conditions’. The old dealt with its pupils as grown birds deal with young   birds when they teach them to fly; the new deals with them more as the   poultry-keeper deals with young birds- making them thus or thus for purposes   of which the birds know nothing. In a word, the old was a kind of   propagation-men transmitting manhood to men; the new is merely propaganda.” -C.S. Lewis, Abolition of Man, Pg. 22
“…educators   must resist the quest for certainty. If there were certainty there would   be no scientific advancement. So it is   with morals and patriotism.” – John Goodlad / Education for Everyone: Agenda for   Education in a Democracy, Woods Learning Center, pg. 6“…a student attains ‘higher order thinking’   when he no longer believes in right or wrong. A large part of what we   call good teaching is a teacher´s ability to obtain affective objectives by   challenging the student’s fixed beliefs. …a large part of what we call teaching is that the teacher should be   able to use education to reorganize a child’s thoughts, attitudes, and   feelings.” -Benjamin   Bloom, psychologist and educational theorist, “Major Categories in the   Taxonomy of Educational Objectives,” pg. 185 Unfortunately, other educators deny   the existence of God or deem God irrelevant to the human condition. Persons who accept this view deny the existence   of moral absolutes. They maintain that right and wrong are relative   concepts, and morality is merely a matter of personal choice or expediency.” -Elder   Dallin H. Oaks, Ensign, October 1992, pg. 60“God uses scripture to unmask erroneous   thinking, false traditions, and sin with its devastating effects. He is a   tender parent who would spare us needless suffering and grief and at the same   time help us realize our divine potential. The scriptures, for example, discredit an ancient philosophy that has   come back into vogue in our day—the philosophy of Korihor that there are no   absolute moral standards, that “every man prosper[s] according to his   genius, and that every man conquer[s] according to his strength; and   whatsoever a man [does is] no crime” and “that when a man [is] dead, that   [is] the end thereof” (Alma 30:17–18)” -Elder   D. Todd Christofferson, April 2010 LDS General Conference
I walked out   of jail and into my first teaching position—and from that day until this   I’ve thought of myself as a teacher, but I’ve also understood teaching as a   project intimately connected with social justice.” -Bill Ayers at the World Education Forum in Caracas,   Venezuela in front of Pres. Hugo Chavez“It is my expectation that Teacher Education for   Democracy and Social Justice will   become a rich resource for continuing this multi-layered conversation-from   democratic belief to democratic action-that is the hallmark of educational   renewal.” -John Goodlad’s forward to “Teacher Education for Democracy and Social   Justice,” Nicholas Michelli and David Lee Keiser “In a   complete reversal from a century ago, many today would dispute with Alma   about the seriousness of immorality. Others would argue that it’s all   relative or that God’s love is permissive. If there is a God, they say, He   excuses all sins and misdeeds because of His love for us—there is no need for   repentance. Or at most, a simple confession will do. They have imagined a Jesus who wants people to work for social   justice but who makes no demands upon their personal life and behavior.” -Elder   D. Todd Christofferson, April 2010 LDS General Conference“I wonder how much we offend Satan if the proclamation   of our faith is limited only to the great humanitarian work this church does   throughout the world, marvelous as these activities are. When we preach the gospel of social justice, no doubt the devil is   not troubled.” -President James E. Faust, Liahona, November 1995, pg.   3
“…the state we   should strive for is better described in Deweyan terms as a social democracy.” – John Goodlad, Developing Democratic Character in the Young, 2001, pg. 153 I feel to warn you that one of the chief   means of misleading our youth and destroying the family unit is our   educational institutions. There is more than one reason why the Church is   advising our youth to attend colleges close to their homes where institutes   of religion are available. It gives the parents the opportunity to stay close   to their children, and if they become alerted and informed, these parents can help expose the   deceptions of men like Sigmund Freud, Charles Darwin, John Dewey, John Keynes and others.   There are much worse things today that can happen to a child than not getting   a full education. In fact, some of the worst things have happened to our   children while attending colleges led by administrators who wink at   subversion and amorality.” -Ezra   Taft Benson (The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p. 307.)
“I do not see how any honest educational reformer   in western countries can deny that the greatest practical obstacle in the way   of introducing into schools that connection with social life which he regards   as desirable is the great part played by personal competition and desire for   private profit in our economic life. This fact almost makes it necessary that   in important respects school activities should be protected from social   contacts and connections, instead of being organized to create them. The Russian educational situation is   enough to convert one to the idea that only in a society based upon the   cooperative principle can the ideals of educational reformers be adequately   carried into operation.” – John Dewey, Impressions of Soviet Russia   and the Revolutionary World, pg. 86“I believe that the school is primarily a social   institution. Education being a social process, the school is simply that form   of community life in which all those agencies are concentrated that will be   most effective in bringing the child to share   in the inherited resources of the race, and to use his own powers for social   ends. I believe that education, therefore, is a process of living and not   a preparation for future living.” -John Dewey, My Pedagogic Creed, January 1897 When you speak of peace, the Communists   mean the cessation of all opposition to Communism, the acceptance of a   Communist world. Then, and only then, can there be peace. This alone is   what peace means in Communist language. Once this is understood the utter   falsity and hypocrisy of Communist references to peace becomes at once   obvious. I have mentioned these things   simply to emphasize one dominant force which has as its ultimate achievement   and victory-the destruction of capitalism, the destruction of the free agency   of man which God has given him, and that destruction may be brought about-as   advocated by Marx himself-in a brutal way. What is the other force? It is   just the opposite. Jesus said to the man who came and asked him which is the   greatest law, ‘Thou shalt love the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou   serve, and the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as   thyself.’ When Marx was asked one time what was his object, he answered, ‘To   dethrone God.’ -David   O. McKay, Two Contending Forces, BYU Speech, May 18, 1960
Every child in America entering school at   the age of five is insane because he comes to school with certain allegiances   to our founding fathers, toward our elected officials, toward his parents,   toward a belief in a supernatural being, and toward the sovereignty of this   nation as a separate entity. It’s up to you as teachers to make all these   sick children well – by creating the international child of the future.” -Dr.   Chester M. Pierce, Harvard Professor of Education and Psychiatry, in an   address to the Childhood International Education Seminar in 1973 “From the   5th grade through the 4th year of college, our young people are being   indoctrinated with a Marxist philosophy and I am fearful of the harvest. The younger generation is further to the   left than most adults realize. The old concepts of our Founding Fathers are   scoffed and jeered at by young moderns whose goals appear to be the   destruction of integrity and virtue, and the glorification of pleasure,   thrills, and self-indulgence.” -Ezra Taft Benson, The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, pg. 321
Education should aim at destroying free   will so that after pupils are thus schooled they will be incapable throughout   the rest of their lives of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school   masters would have wished …” -Bertrand   Russell, quoting Gottlieb Fichte the head of psychology that influenced Hegel   and others. “Wherefore,   because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I, the Lord God, had given him…I caused that he should be cast down;” -Moses 4:3“Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will,   and bring to pass much righteousness;” -Doctrine & Covenants 58:27“We must protect this American base from   the brainwashing, increasingly administered to our youth in many educational   institutions across the land, by some misinformed instructors and some wolves   in sheep’s clothing. Their false indoctrination, often perpetrated behind the   front of so-called academic freedom, is leaving behind many faithless   students, socialist-oriented, who are easy subjects for state tyranny.” -Elder Ezra Taft Benson, Conference Report, April 1962

The Battle Over the American Classroom   2 comments

There is a battle going on for control of American classrooms.

It’s a battle about which many students, teachers and State School Board Members are still blissfully unaware.

It’s a battle between the rights of each individual and each locality, versus the collective, as defined by the United Nations and, now, even by the U.S. Dept. of Education.

It’s a battle for what gets planted in the mind of the child.

It’s a battle for constitutional, local control (of students’ standards, tests, and curriculum) versus worldwide control (with education to be determined by federal and global cooperatives without any significant local representation.)

It’s also a battle between teaching the traditional academics: reading, writing, math, science and history, versus teaching the United Nations’ Agenda 21, which envisions a new “education” –that many are calling indoctrination.

The new “education” marginalizes academics.

It calls itself “World Class Education” but it is only a communistic sameness of learning across all countries.  It prioritizes “sustainable development,” “Social Justice” (redistribution of global wealth), the “collective good,” “going green” and “global citizenship” far above teaching academics.

And it presents “climate change” as if it were a real and settled science.

     The Department of Education, sadly, has betrayed us, lining up with the United Nations in this battle.  Link: http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/vision-education-reform-united-states-secretary-arne-duncans-remarks-united-nations-ed

Today,  the battle for the rights over a child’s life and learning has hit the news in a new form, under the title of  a United Nations treaty for the Disabled.   But it’s the same fight.  It’s a fight for our children.  http://news.yahoo.com/republicans-oppose-vote-un-disability-treaty-223300511.html

In the U.N. Disability treaty, the word “disability” is fuzzily defined.  Not really defined.  It uses an “evolving” definition.  Slippery!  Does “disabled’ mean a child with a mental handicap, including dyslexia or another common academic struggle?  Does it mean someone with a missing finger? A missing leg? A missing tooth?  And why should the government be the one to determine what is in such a child’s best interests, over the parents’ feelings?  This is a slippery slope of giving another sacred, hard-won American freedom, of parental rights over the child, utterly away.

This United Nations treaty poses as a helpful move, to ensure rights for the disabled, but what it really does is make the government, and not the parents, decision makers about what is in the best interest of a child, including whether home schooling is legal.

That provision, in the words of Rick Santorum, is “a direct assault on us and our family.”

Some also say that the treaty calls for people with disabilities to have “access to the same sexual and reproductive health programs as others” which means it might be linked to abortion.

So often, what starts off as an apparently  kindly socialistic “access to” a thing, soon becomes compulsory.

Former Utah Supreme Court Justice Dallin H. Oaks ruled that:

“Family autonomy helps to assure the diversity characteristic of a free society.  There is no surer way to preserve pluralism than to allow parents maximum latitude in rearing their own children.  Much of the rich variety in American culture has been transmitted from generation to generation by determined parents who were acting against the best interest of their children, as defined by official dogma.  Conversely, there is no surer way to threaten pluralism than to terminate the rights of parents who contradict officially approved values imposed by reformers empowered to determine what is in the ‘best interest’ of someone else’s child.”

—Dallin Oaks’ point is so vital.  Parents’ idea of what is in the best interest of their children does NOT necessarily match the “official dogma” of governments. 

No education reformers –U.S. Dept. of Education Secretary Arne Duncan, President Obama, Pearson CEA Sir Michael Barber, Bill Ayers, UNESCO– have the right to determine what is in the best interest of someone else’s child.  Period.

Arne Duncan’s 2010 speech exposes the U.S. Dept. of Education’s stance: that education should be the same everywhere, globally, and that competition and innovation is of the past.  Listen to this communist speak.  He is our U.S. Secretary of Education.  He is in charge of American K-12 children.  He even quotes Sir Michael Barber as if that’s a good thing.

“It is an absolute honor to address UNESCO. During the last 65 years, UNESCO has done so much to advance the cause of education and gender equity…   The promise of universal education was then a lonely beacon—a light to guide the way to peace and the rebuilding of nations across the globe. Today, the world… faces a crisis of a different sort, the global economic crisis. And education is still the beacon lighting the path forward—perhaps more so today than ever before.

Education is still the key to eliminating gender inequities, to reducing poverty, to creating a sustainable planet… education is the new currency…

… the Obama administration has an ambitious and unified theory of action that propels our agenda. The challenge of transforming education in America cannot be met by quick-fix solutions or isolated reforms. It can only be accomplished with a clear, coherent, and coordinated vision of reform.

Second, while America must improve its stagnant educational and economic performance, President Obama and I reject the protectionist Cold War-era assumption that improving economic competitiveness is somehow a zero-sum game, with one nation’s gain being another country’s loss.

I want to make the case to you today that enhancing educational attainment and economic viability, both at home and abroad, is really more of a win-win game; it is an opportunity to grow the economic pie, instead of carve it up.

As President Obama said in his speech to the Muslim world in Cairo last year, “Any world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another will inevitably fail.”

There is so much that the United States has to learn from nations with high-performing education systems… I am convinced that the U.S. education system now has an unprecedented opportunity to get dramatically better. Nothing—nothing—is more important in the long-run to American prosperity than boosting the skills and attainment of the nation’s students… Closing the achievement gap and closing the opportunity gap is the civil rights issue of our generation. One quarter of U.S. high school students drop out or fail to graduate on time. Almost one million students leave our schools for the streets each year. That is economically unsustainable and morally unacceptable.

One of the more unusual and sobering press conferences I participated in last year was the release of a report by a group of top retired generals and admirals. Here was the stunning conclusion of their report: 75 percent of young Americans, between the ages of 17 to 24, are unable to enlist in the military today because they have failed to graduate from high school…   education is taking on more and more importance around the globe. In the last decade, international competition in higher education and the job market has grown dramatically…

Yet there is also a paradox at the heart of America’s efforts to bolster international competitiveness.

To succeed in the global economy, the United States, just like other nations, will have to become both more economically competitive and more collaborative.

In the information age, more international competition has spawned more international collaboration. Today, education is a global public good unconstrained by national boundaries.

… economic interdependence brings new global challenges and educational demands…. America alone cannot combat terrorism or curb climate change. To succeed, we must collaborate with other countries.

These new partnerships must also inspire students to take a bigger and deeper view of their civic obligations—not only to their countries of origin but to the betterment of the global community. A just and socially responsible society must also be anchored in civic engagement for the public good.

…Yet even as the United States works to strengthen its educational system, it is important to remember that advancing educational attainment and achievement everywhere brings benefits not just to the U.S. but around the globe. In the knowledge economy, education is the new game-changer driving economic growth.

Education, as Nelson Mandela says, “is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world.”

From Indonesia to Pakistan to Kenya, education has immeasurable power to promote growth and stability. It is absolutely imperative that the United States seize the opportunity to help Haiti build a stronger school system from the ruins of its old, broken one—just as America coalesced to build a fast-improving, vibrant school system in New Orleans after the tragedy of Hurricane Katrina.

…Educating girls and integrating them into the labor force is especially critical to breaking the cycle of poverty. It is hard to imagine a better world without a global commitment to providing better education for women and youth—including the 72 million children who do not attend primary school today.

And don’t forget that a better-educated world would be a safer world, too… My department has been pleased to partner with the U.S. Agency for International Development to help ensure that our best domestic practices are shared world-wide.

The United States provides over a billion dollars annually to partner countries working on educational reform.

Our goal for the coming year will be to work closely with global partners, including UNESCO, to promote qualitative improvements and system-strengthening…

Ultimately, education is the great equalizer. It is the one force that can consistently overcome differences in background, culture, and privilege…

Now, it is true that not all will share equally in the benefits of the knowledge economy. College-educated workers will benefit the most. That makes President Obama’s 2020 goal, the goal of once again having the highest proportion of college graduates, all the more central to building U.S. competitiveness.

… President Obama, a progressive president… wants to improve teacher evaluation…The President and I both recognize that improving educational outcomes for students is hard work with no easy answers. And transformational reform especially takes time in the United States…

The North Star guiding the alignment of our cradle-to-career education agenda is President Obama’s goal that, by the end of the decade, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. That goal can only be achieved by creating a strong cradle-to-career continuum that starts with early childhood learning and extends all the way to college and careers.

In the U.S., early learning has come into its own. It is now recognized as the first and most critical stage in human development. We have a special opportunity today to build a bigger and better coordinated system of early care and education that prepares children for success in school and life—in place of a system with uneven quality and access.

…Tragically, low-income and minority students do not have equitable access to effective teachers in the United States. Too often, the children who need the most help get the least. Too often, we perpetuate poverty and social failure—and that has got to stop.

…The United States cannot substantially boost graduation rates and promise a world-class education to every child without ending the cycle of failure in the lowest-performing five percent of our schools. Year after year, and in some cases for decades, these schools cheated children out of the opportunity for an excellent education. As adults, as educators, as leaders, America passively observed this educational failure with a complacency that is deeply disturbing.

Fewer than 2,000 high schools in the United States—a manageable number—produce half of all its dropouts. These “dropout factories” produce almost 75 percent—three-fourths—of our dropouts from the minority community, our African-American and Latino boys and girls.

…Our vision of reform takes account of the fact that, in several respects, the governance of education in the United States is unusual. Traditionally, the federal government in the U.S. has had a limited role in education policy.

Before the 1960s, almost all policymaking and education funding was a state and local responsibility. In the mid-1960s, the federal role expanded to include enforcing civil rights laws to ensure that poor, minority, and disabled students, as well as English language learners, had access to a high-quality education.

As the federal role in education grew, so did the bureaucracy. All too often, the U.S. Department of Education operated more like a compliance machine, instead of an engine of innovation. The department typically focused on ensuring that formula funds reached their intended recipients in the proper fashion. It focused on inputs—not educational outcomes or equity.

The Obama administration has sought to fundamentally shift the federal role, so that the Department is doing much more to support reform and innovation in states, districts, and local communities. While the vast majority of department funding is still formula funding, the Recovery Act created additional competitive funding like the high-visibility $4.35 billion Race to the Top program and the $650 million Investing in Innovation Fund, which we call i3.

I’ve said that America is now in the midst of a “quiet revolution” in school reform. And this is very much a revolution driven by leaders in statehouses, state school superintendents, local lawmakers, district leaders, union heads, school boards, parents, principals, and teachers.

To cite just one example, the department’s Race to the Top Program challenged states to craft concrete, comprehensive plans for reforming their education systems. The response was nothing less than extraordinary. Forty-six states submitted applications—and the competition drove a national conversation about education reform. Thirty-two states changed specific laws that posed barriers to innovation. And even states that did not win awards now have a state roadmap for reform hammered out. [UTAH]

The i3 program also had a phenomenal response. The $650 million i3 fund offered support to school districts, nonprofit organizations, and institutions of higher education to scale-up promising practices.

…I said earlier that the United States now has a unique opportunity to transform our education system in ways that will resonate for decades to come. Last year and this year, the federal government provided unprecedented funds to support education and reform.

…In March of 2009, President Obama called on the nation’s governors and state school chiefs to “develop standards and assessments that don’t simply measure whether students can fill in a bubble on a test, but whether they possess 21st century skills like problem-solving and critical thinking and entrepreneurship and creativity.” Virtually everyone thought the president was dreaming.

But today, 37 states and the District of Columbia have already chosen to adopt the new state-crafted [state-crafted] Common Core standards in math and English. Not studying it, not thinking about it, not issuing a white paper—they have actually done it. Over three-fourths of all U.S. public school students now reside in states that have voluntarily adopted higher, common… standards… That is an absolute game-changer …

The second game-changer is that states have banded together in large consortia to develop a new generation of assessments aligned with the states’ Common Core standards. In September, I announced the results of the department’s $350 million Race to the Top assessment completion to design this next generation of assessments.

Two state consortiums, which together cover 44 states and the District of Columbia, won awards. These new assessments will have much in common with the first-rate assessments now used in many high-performing countries outside the U.S. When these new assessments are in use in the 2014-15 school year, millions of U.S. schoolchildren, parents, and teachers will know, for the first time, if students truly are on-track for colleges and careers.

For the first time, many teachers will have the assessments they have longed for…

    Sir Michael Barber’s book, Instruction to Deliver, reminds us that the unglamorous work of reform matters enormously…

…we are committed to establishing a different relationship with the 50 states—one more focused on providing tailored support to improve student outcomes.

… America has a great deal to learn from the educational practices of other countries…

…I welcome this international dialogue, which is only beginning. In December, in Washington, I will join the OECD Secretary General for the global announcement of the 2009 PISA results. In March, we will be sponsoring an International Summit on the Teaching Profession

Thinking of the future as a contest among nations vying for larger pieces of a finite economic pie is a recipe for protectionism and global strife. Expanding educational attainment everywhere is the best way to grow the pie for all…”   – U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, 2010 speech

Full text:

http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/vision-education-reform-united-states-secretary-arne-duncans-remarks-united-nations-ed

Colorado Conference Dec. 6 To Expose Common Core Initiative   1 comment

 

Bob Schaffer was the man who blew the whistle on Marc Tucker and Hillary Clinton’s plot to take over American education.  Schaffer got their letter recorded in the official Congressional Record years ago.  http://www.eagleforum.org/educate/marc_tucker/

Robert Scott was the very wise Education Commissionar who, together with Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, rejected Common Core for Texas –and enraged Sec. of Education Arne Duncan.

Bill Evers, who is a Hoover Institute, Stanford University research fellow, also served on Mitt Romney’s Education Committee.  He spoke on the danger of Common Core education this summer, to a standing room only group in Salt Lake City.

Sandra Stotsky served on the official Common Core Validation Committee (and refused to sign off on the standards because, among other things, they cut out classic literature and call it improving education.)

Jim Stergios and Ted Rebarber spoke this summer, here in Salt Lake City, to our senate Education Committee, testifying of the alarming error it was to adopt Common Core on educational and on Constitutional grounds.

This is going to be a great meeting.  If you get to go, please leave a comment here, letting others know what you learned.

Internationally Imposed Education In Schools   Leave a comment

Internationally Imposed Education In Schools
By Susie Schell
Common Core needs to be considered a means to an end, not the end. The end is International Education. We don’t have to speculate any more. We have new information:
The US Dept of Education website speaks of education for the “Global Public Good”. Here are some titles: “Broadening the Spirit of Respect and Cooperation for the Global Public Good” and “Strengthening Education as a Global Public Good”. The emphasis now is on International Education. Common Core is not the ends. It is only the means to get us there.

Another phrase for “International Education” is “World Class  Education”. Traditionalists, like you and me, would define this term as  excellent education, the best in the world, so we don’t see any red  flags when it is used. I believe the new progressive definition of  “World Class Education” is a ‘one-size-fits-all international Agenda 21  equity in education’.
In other words, children in all countries learn  exactly the same thing, mainly, Agenda 21 UN goals of sustainability,  working for the common good, climate change mixed with basic academics  in order to succeed in a global world. We need to start understanding  these new definitions of old terms in order to understand the  international goals coming to schools near you.  Arne Duncan says he no longer wants the U.S. to compete with other countries. He wants us to work with them, using the same curriculum so there will be equity among all nations.  http://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/internationaled/bilateral.html
He thinks the goal for the US Dept of Ed is to create equity across the world and to reach out and teach  other nations as well, using our tax money. We are now partnered with  the UN to bring these goals to pass.
————————————————————————————-
The author of this blog thanks Susie Schell for her research.
————————————————————————————-
If there is any doubt in any reader’s mind whether the agenda of the U.S. Department of Education’s agenda is precisely following and implementing the one-world, one-entity, control goals of the United Nations’ Agenda 21, please read this 2010 statement from Secretary of Education Arne Duncan:  http://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/internationaled/iew2010-duncan.html
Statement on International Education Week 2010
by U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan
November 15-19, 2010

It is my privilege to invite you to participate in the 11th annual International Education Week, November 15-19, 2010.  International Education Week is a joint initiative of the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of State.  It celebrates the importance and benefits of international education in the United States and around the world.  This year’s theme is International Education:  Striving for a Sustainable Future.

…We are reminded that the challenges we face today are increasingly borderless.  Climate change, the environment, and the economy are but some of the issues that affect our daily lives and demand our attention on a global scale.  Finding sustainable solutions is imperative and will require an unprecedented level of international cooperation.  [NOTICE HOW HE USES 'CLIMATE CHANGE' AS A MATTER OF UNCONTESTED, SETTLED SCIENCE;  NOTICE HOW HE NEVER SPEAKS OF LITERACY, MATH, OR LEARNING TRUTH, BUT HE USES THE EXACT TERMINOLOGY OF THE U.N.'S AGENDA 21 WHICH IS TO REORIENT EDUCATION TO BE ABOUT "COLLECTIVITY AND SUSTAINABILITY."]

A complete education in the 21st century must teach our children about their interdependent world, and it must prepare them to be good leaders and good global citizens …as they participate in international education and international exchange, our students can gain the knowledge and experiences to help them contribute to a sustainable future for all.  [IF YOU EMPHASIZE BEING A GLOBAL CITIZEN AND BEING INTERDEPENDENT OVER BEING AN INDEPENDENT U.S. OR OTHER CITIZEN, YOU GIVE UP TEACHING NATIONAL PATRIOTISM, THE SAFETY OF NATIONAL LAW, A SENSE OF VALIANT DEFENSE AGAINST ENEMIES, AND THE PROTECTIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION]

…I strongly urge everyone to join the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of State in celebrating international education…

U.S. Dept of Education Contact: JoAnne Livingston joanne.Livingston@ed.gov

Dear Dr. Menlove, Utah State School Board, USOE and Governor Herbert:   Leave a comment

Dear Dr. Menlove, Board, USOE and Governor Herbert:

 

Please see what the U.S. Department of Education is pushing in this document.http://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/internationaled/international-strategy-2012-16.pdf

Compare it to Agenda 21 of the United Nations, the  “Reorientation of Education”:http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/res_agenda21_36.shtml and

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/res_agenda21_25.shtml

Then tell me there’s not an active attack happening against U.S. freedom, using our public schools and our school children.

 

I want to know what prevents you, our Utah leaders, from fighting for our education freedoms.

 

Please take the time to respond.

 

 

Christel Swasey

Utah teacher

Globalism, the religion of New Ed: US Dept of Ed Doc   Leave a comment

Just take a peek at what the U.S. Department of Education is pushing in this document.  http://www2.ed.gov/about/inits/ed/internationaled/international-strategy-2012-16.pdf

Then compare it to Agenda 21 of the United Nations.  It’s  “Reorienting Education” globally, here:  http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/res_agenda21_36.shtml and

 

http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/res_agenda21_25.shtml

Then tell me there’s not an active attack happening against U.S. freedom, using our schools and our school children.

Eco-Collectivist Values, Not Knowlege, To Be Taught in Schools   Leave a comment

The United Nations branch that oversees education, UNESCO, has issued documents, clearly displaying a plan to transform education worldwide into youth “global citizen” indoctrination.  Under this philosophy, actual learning of reading, writing, and math are old news, 20th century aspirations. But the learning of sustainable development is to the the essential literacy of the 21st century.  Quote:

“IN THE 21ST CENTURY, THE LITERACIES [OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT] WILL BE AS ESSENTIAL TO COMPREHENDING THE WORLD AS WERE THE TRADITIONAL SKILLS OF READING AND WRITING AT THE START OF THE 20TH CENTURY.”

- pg. 3 “New Vision of Education” and http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_a/popups/mod01t05s01.html

A seven-part video series below teaches how and why there really is a deliberate dumbing down of education happening in America today to make room for environmental/collectivist propaganda.

It’s seen as inefficient to teach children what we think of as academic knowledge.  Now, under the Sustainable Development movement, the U.N. and the Department of Education want to teach sustainable development and collective thinkingat the expense of traditional learning. 

This new mission of schools includes cutting out the teaching of individual liberty under the U.S. Constitution, or individual rights, or property rights, to make way for “global citizenship.”

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

So, what can we do?

If you can’t afford private school or home school, then teach your children when you actually do have them close how to identify and see through the indoctrination.

Teach your children that there is such a thing as goodness and truth.  It’s not all relative.

Teach them that there is right and wrong, not just tolerance and intolerance. There is a God in heaven.

Teach them that the family is more important and more lasting than the government.  Individuals matter.  Property rights matter.  The U.S. Constitution protects individual rights like owning property, owning guns, and remaining free from unreasonable search and seizure.

And tell them that while recycling is fine, it’s never going to be more important than reading, writing and math.

U.S. Constitution Marginalized As Regions Replace States – Which Region Are You In?   2 comments

http://www.wnd.com/2012/11/online-learning-experience-replacing-schoolbooks/?cat_orig=education

I was just reading the above-linked article about how CSCOPE is getting rich replacing Texas textbooks with an online system that parents cannot view and the board of education will not need to approve.  Important article.

But my point here is something completely different:

A quote in the article was from Education Service Center Region 9 Executive Director Anne Poplin.

What??  Region 9?

Part of the U.N.’s Agenda 21 goal to overcome American exceptionalism and sovereignty is to have regions replace states.  It’s a subtle and effective way to subvert the Constitution’s careful separation of states’ powers and federal powers.

I had not yet seen it up close until today.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/contacts/gen/regions.html#8

Yes, the Department of Education has divided our country into ten regions.

Utah’s in Region 8.

They are called “Communication Regions” in Fedspeak.

Is anybody out there paying attention?

 

Education reforms that are part of Agenda 21: Rosa Koire on the Glenn Beck show   Leave a comment

Rosa Koire, author of “Behind the Green Mask” and a very smart democrat, a guest on the Glenn Beck show, talks about the education reforms that are part of Agenda 21.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,834 other followers