Sunday, June 12, 2011

Education Ain't What It Should Be (Part 2)


The Education Bubble
Like the rest of the government, the education bubble is too big to fail, which means that by the time it fails, so will the whole country.
Daniel Greenfield
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Flip through enough of the 99 percent signs and you realize that the majority of that demographic aren’t complaining about the lack of financial regulation or income inequalities, so much as they’re upset that they took on loans to pay for college degrees to get jobs that don’t actually exist.
The fault here isn’t Wall Street’s, it’s a policymaking apparatus that decided the way to deal with the loss of manufacturing jobs was to get as many college graduates out there as possible to create the industries of tomorrow.
This was Clinton’s platform and it’s Obama’s “Winning the Future” platform, pump enough money into education and the jobs will create themselves. The Dot Com boom in the nineties seemed to back up that policy with entirely new companies springing to life with valuations in the hundreds of millions and twenty somethings at the helm. But a good deal of those companies were nothing more than the foam on another bubble—and more problematically the cream of the tech companies were created by college dropouts. Even more problematically, the tech companies liked to save money by importing Chinese and Pakistani employees on H1-B visas as cheap labor, while their lobbies insisted that this would protect “American” innovation.
But the real problem was that swapping manufacturing for college degree jobs solved nothing. American companies that manufacture anything become the tip of an outsourced iceberg. All the companies with the shiny logos depend on Chinese manufacturing and raw materials. They can’t create anything that the People’s Republic of China can’t take away from them when the time is right.
American companies aren’t outsourcing labor to China, China is outsourcing design and marketing to them and allowing them to serve as middlemen between Chinese manufacturers and American consumers, until a Chinese company decides to buy their product unit or its reverse engineered copies of their products are good enough that they invest the money in a marketing campaign to establish their own trusted brand.
And yet the tech industry is the closest to a college degree success story that we have. The failures are legion.
The problem with the “college degrees for everyone” approach is that creating more college graduates does not proportionally create more jobs, it creates more unemployed college graduates and devalues the worth of a college diploma. Too many college graduates mean that employers will look for higher degree levels. High school diplomas used to be a certificate of competence, then that was devalued through promotion in a system where teachers were expected to move students up to the next class no matter what. When college became the new high school, it was devalued in the same way. There are city and state colleges with students who are barely literate, not in the “kids these days use too many abbreviations” way, but in the “functionally illiterate” way.
If the goal is to move everyone to the highest level of education possible, the result will not be a more educated population, but an educational system with lower standards and a population that is less educated than ever because actual education becomes more inaccessible as the standards are lowered.
Make sure that everyone can “afford” to take out college loans and the marketplace will compete for students with traditional universities offering a large buffet of “educational choices”, most of which are not educational or represent any kind of career path outside academia, and private colleges offering useful sounding degrees that no employer will look twice at.
For the liberal politicians it’s a triple score. Money pours into academia which they can use as their own think tanks. The educational system gets four years or more to process students through more sophisticated indoctrination mechanisms. And then the students who can’t find jobs join the ranks of the usefully disaffected because somebody must be to blame… and it can’t possibly be the people pulling the strings of the people shouting at them through megaphones.
Clinton told working class voters that the manufacturing jobs were gone, but their kids would all have college degrees. Obama went one better by telling working class voters that they would be retrained to hold down “Green Jobs”, even as they’re falling faster than the Green companies and their sweetheart government pork. Those lies are what make the class warfare rhetoric out of DC so doubly despicable.
Politicians have never honestly talked to voters about what happened to the American economy, instead they fell back on the same mantra of opening up new markets through globalization and creating new jobs through education.
None of this is new. The country with the highest degree rate in the world is Russia. The USSR ran its citizens through its educational system at a rate that Elizabeth Warren could only gasp in awe at. But what was its education actually worth? About as much as American degrees are becoming worth. If you throw enough money and manpower at the educational system, you will have a really big educational system. What you will not have is anything of worth to go with it.
Only one country that has a higher degree rate than the United States has a higher per capita income and that country has its own oil industry. The usual handwringing that liberal pundits and politicians engage in over how the American educational system is failing compared to countries with higher degree ratios is wasted noise. These same statistics are trotted out to justify dumping more money into the black hole of an educational system under the pretext of job creation. But do the statistics even matter?
According to the OECD (another useless globalization organization wrapped around a WW2 fossil) the Israeli educational system is a hopeless failure. In its 2009 evaluation claimed that Israeli students were behind Turkey, Dubai and Russia in math and science. Yet peculiarly enough Israel keeps collecting Nobel prizes and turning out minor things like instant messaging, drones and Kinect. When reality contradicts statistics, it’s wise to go with reality. That’s a skill most politicians haven’t learned, but it’s a rather valuable one.
The universalization of education is not about remaining competitive in a global marketplace or any of that other nonsense piously repeated by politicians with their hands in more pockets than a thieving octopus—it’s about promoting the homogeneity of ideas across a population. Which is why the importance placed on universal education increases as a country becomes more culturally diverse or internally divided.
The original Department of Education was created two years after the Civil War. The Kalamazoo School Case, which set the precedent for forcing taxpayers to fund public education and created the entire system of property tax school robbery we live under today, took place during the same period. As was the National Education Association whose Committee of Ten played a key role in the standardization of the national curriculum.
A better name for universal education is federalized education, and there is very little difference between the two in the United States. The growing federal control of education is a mechanism for maintaining control of increasingly divided populations. It may be a failed mechanism, but like the rest of the government’s boondoggles, it long ago created a class of people who depend on the system and have a vested interest in its expansion.
When this is understood, the failure of innovation in the system is also obvious. The educational system is not a means of empowering thinkers, but of standardizing a static consensus of ideas. It’s a great way to learn liberal dogma, but an inefficient way of learning anything else. The expansion of the system is not about remaining competitive with China, just as funding more “Green Jobs” is not about “Winning the Future”, it’s about shaping the voters of tomorrow.
We’re not falling behind due to a lack of college graduates, but because we’re smothered by a system of stifling bureaucratic conformity that is far more concerned with its grip on power than with jobs or income. The resemblance to the USSR is not at all accidental.
The system would rather have 10,000 subsidized jobs that it creates than 10,000,000 jobs in the free market. It would rather have a middle class of 5 million college graduates, (40 percent of them government employees), than have a free market middle class of a 100 million, (only 30 percent of them college graduates and less than 0.5 percent of them government employees.) And it would rather have an angry mob camped out near Wall Street, than have a viable economy.
The educational bubble isn’t creating a new Middle Class that will keep social security viable, it is creating dissatisfied people who feel that they are entitled to better and don’t know who to blame. Like the rest of the government, the education bubble is too big to fail, which means that by the time it fails, so will the whole country.
Education system failing boys
By Jim Caruth, Vancouver Sun
October 1, 2011
Our education system is failing half of the population.
When I graduated from high school in Ontario in 1979 the students who achieved more than an 80-per-cent average in the final year received an award.
On stage to accept the award I realized that four out of five of the people on stage with me were female. I learned that about 80 per cent of the high achievers in that school had for many years been female.
Over the last few years I have again noticed that the vast majority of the high academic achievers in my kid's high school are female.
Based on these results one can conclude only one of three things.
Either A) the above observations are anomalies and usually the number of high achievers is typically evenly split between boys and girls, B) girls are generally more intelligent than boys and thus it is natural that they would do better at school or C) the education system is not properly structured to educate males.
The facts point to the obvious conclusion that the education system is failing to educate our boys to the same levels as our girls and has been for decades.
Why has this situation been allowed to exist for as long as it has when it is apparent that the education system is aware of it?
Why is no one talking about this obvious inequity within our society?
Even with the now published inequity in the genders in university entrance, there is still no recognition or discussion of this awful situation.
Why is it that no one cares about the boys?
Failing in science
I would propose an approach like that of the Nuffield Project, involving motivated classroom teachers and productive scientists
Dr. Chris McGowan
Friday, September 30, 2011
I’ve been a scientist most of my life, having enjoyed the best job in the world: Senior dinosaur curator at the Royal Ontario Museum, and professor of zoology at the University of Toronto. During my 33-year tenure I published 46 scientific papers, twelve books, and received continuous federal grant support (NSERC) for my research. The reason for belabouring my credentials is that my views on the serious state of science education in our schools will be viewed as heresy by departments of education across the country.
Prior to my early retirement in 2003, I had noticed a decline among university students in their understanding of basic scientific concepts, and in their inability to undertake experimental investigations. This was especially evident during field courses, when they were required to conduct independent research projects. So many of them lacked hands-on experience, making me suspect that the emphasis in classrooms was on memorizing and recalling facts, rather than on understanding principles. To test this, I recently made some observations at a local high school. Much impressed by the teachers’ dedication, I was heartened to find that hands-on-science did exist, at least at this school. However, as I chatted with the students and saw how they conducted their experiments, I had the impression they were following a ‘recipe’ to satisfy a course requirement, rather than building upon a solid foundation in science.
Science is primarily a practical subject and forty years of teaching have convinced me that the best way for students to learn is through their own experiences. Schools have limited budgets for purchasing equipment and supplies, which might restrict the amount of experimentation in the classroom. To illustrate what can be done with limited resources, I staged a hands-on science week at the ROM during last year’s school break. Using everyday items, I explored various topics—from demonstrating air density by using atmospheric pressure to collapse milk cartons, to ‘rubberizing’ leftover chicken bones to show the composite nature of bone. Interacting with enthusiastic youngsters and their parents after each presentation revealed how few of them conducted experiments at school.
One outcome of my presentations was an invitation from the Science Teachers Association of Ontario to be a featured speaker at their annual meeting. In preparing for my talk, I searched the curriculum for a segment of science where I could assemble a string of interrelated experiments. Remarkably, there wasn’t one. Indeed, little in the curriculum resembled science as I know it. Instead, I discovered a smorgasbord of sociology and misunderstood science, with meaningless flow charts linking Fundamental Concepts, Big Ideas and the three Goals of the science curriculum. Significantly, the first goal is “to relate science…to society.” This has as much relevance to the teaching of science as the chemical properties of gold have to the teaching of economics.
In assembling a segment on flight, I found that one of the Big Ideas here was that, “Air has many properties
that can be used for flight and for other purposes.” To me, big ideas are things like atomic theory and natural selection, not this meaningless drivel. As I admitted to the audience, if I were teaching flight in the classroom my students would fail because I left out the entire Goal 1 category including “crop dusting,” “transportation of organs for…transplants” and “trips for business and pleasure”. Nor did I mention flying “kites…a safe distance from overhead hydro wires” (in Goal 2). I also left out “home insulation, tires, sleeping bags, [and] layered clothing” (in Goal 3). However, my students would have a solid grasp of the science of flight through conducting their own experiments—from building and test-flying a simple airfoil made from a toilet-roll tube, to comparing the drag forces on streamlined Plasticine models, using a hairdryer.
Seeing so many young teachers in the audience, I was convinced they would think I was from another planet when I began my rant on the curriculum. But they were completely onside, expressing the view that the curriculum was senseless. I suspect that most of them teach science the way it should be taught anyway. However, they still have the problem of setting tests for their students, with the mandatory non-science nonsense required by the Ontario Ministry of Education. And the problem is not confined to the province of Ontario, as a comparison of curricula for other ministries confirmed.
When I taught school science in the UK during the 1960s, students spent most of their time conducting experiments themselves. Imagine today’s 12-year-olds inoculating Petri dishes with bacteria and assessing the effects of Penicillin. They became critical thinkers—understanding through experience.
This was the result of the Nuffield Science Teaching Project. Essentially, a group of science teachers got together to devise imaginative ways of teaching their subject, using real scientists as resource people.
Bob McDonald
Sceptical at first, I soon realized this was the only way to teach science. I learned never to underestimate what youngsters can achieve, if motivated and properly directed. It is disturbing to think that those students in the sixties were better educated in science than our students are today.
Those responsible for the curriculum clearly have no understanding of science. The document they produced bears the hallmark of decision-making through consensus, with input from committees, focus groups, educational consultants and sundry other “experts.” The illogical end result does a grave disservice to students and teachers alike, eroding science education throughout Canada.
Bob McDonald of CBC’s Quirks & Quarks, with whom I have discussed this problem, has witnessed a decline in science education over the years. When judging science fairs across the country, he meets students with sophisticated experiments that look impressive to the uninformed. However, when probed, they reveal little grasp of the underlying concepts.
Given the catastrophic problems facing planet Earth, scientific literacy has never been more critical. Science education is too important to be left in such abysmally incompetent hands. I would propose an approach like that of the Nuffield Project, involving motivated classroom teachers and productive scientists.
Progressivism Masquerading as Education
Battle for the nation's soul being fought in the public schools, Bankrupt ideology of progressivism masquerading itself as education
Arnold Ahlert
Thursday, June 30, 2011
A couple of weeks ago the results of a nationwide history test given at various grade levels were released by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). To virtually no one’s surprise, only 20 percent of fourth graders, 17 percent of eighth graders and 12 percent of high school seniors demonstrated “proficiency” on the exam. Most Americans, if we’re being honest, are equally incompetent, if not more so, regarding basic economics. Throw in a lack of proficiency regarding the Constitution, and you get a trifecta of ignorance that ought to embarrass any First World nation. Yet if the Maryland public school system is any indication, we’re beyond embarrassment: “environmental literacy” will now be required in order to graduate high school.
Understand, no reasonable person has a problem with teaching children to be responsible stewards of the planet. But anyone who has watched the steady evolution of public schools from places of education into
propaganda centers for the progressive worldview knows exactly what is going on here. The State Board of Education hides the truth by saying there are no specifics regarding what is to be taught, but Maryland Governor, Democrat Martin O’Malley, lets the cat out of the progressive bag when he notes the law with serve as “a foundation for green jobs.”
You know which country had a romance with green jobs? Spain. Know what they discovered? For every green job created, 2.1 non-green jobs were lost. Spain’s unemployment rate is currently 22 percent. And then there’s Great Britain. Three weeks ago, one of their largest utility companies, Scottish Electric, announced that the gas and electricity bills of five million customers would go up by a whopping 19 and 10 percent respectively, beginning August first. Six other major power providers expected to follow suit.
Why is it happening? Part of the reason is higher wholesale costs for power, but the other reason is depressingly familiar. Raymond Jack, Scottish Power’s chief executive: “The rising burden of non-energy costs faced by Britain’s energy suppliers — including the cost of meeting government environmental and social programs and the cost of distributing electricity on the national grid — has also placed further upward pressure on energy bills.” The result? In Britain, the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) points out that many of the country’s poor will be faced with a choice between “heating and eating” next winter.
Does anyone remember how many public schools made blowhard Al Gore’s movie, “An Inconvenient Truth” required watching? That would be the same movie in which a British court found eleven inaccuracies, even as it called the film “political propaganda.” Did that stop the schools from pushing this crap of a movie on impressionable kids? Of course not. Now America is chock full of young kids who are completely convinced the “planet has a fever,” even as they fail to notice the head fever-monger has a “carbon footprint” that would make Godzilla’s imprint look ballerina-like by comparison.
Battle for the nation’s soul being fought in the public schools, Bankrupt ideology of progressivism masquerading itself as education
Once again I will say what I have said countless times before, and I will keep saying it, until enough
Americans understand it. The battle for the nation’s soul is not going in in state houses across the country, nor is it occurring in Washington, D.C. or Hollywood. It is occurring in the thousands of public schools around the nation, where the bankrupt ideology of progressivism is being foisting on impressionable children, masquerading itself as education.
It is not education. It is indoctrination. It is an indoctrination so thorough that the same high school students who can already quote chapter and verse on environmentalism, don’t know the century in which the Civil War was fought, and can’t add or subtract without a calculator. It is an indoctrination so thorough that the concept of failure has been replaced by social promotion, grade inflation and self-esteem massage. It is an indoctrination so thorough that kids can get free condoms and directions to the nearest abortion clinic from the same school nurse who isn’t allowed to offer moral guidance about either choice. It is one so thorough that 31 percent of Americans polled by the Gallup Organization think there are “too many rich people” in America.
Too many rich people? The social mobility that forms the essence and beauty of America, the idea that anyone, regardless of background or circumstance, can elevate himself to wealth — is a problem? Make no mistake: when people are educated, the most critical aspect of which is the ability to think for oneself, Nanny State, wealth-redistributing progressivism is in serious trouble. Making environmental literacy a requirement for receiving a diploma is all about expanding the progressive agenda by stealth. The dead giveaway here is that what constitutes environmental literacy remains wholly undefined, even as it becomes an requirement. That is exactly backwards. An honest State Board of Education would define the parameters of such a program before making it part of the state’s core curriculum. The parameters would then be subject to scrutiny and debate.
Instead, the state is leaving it up to local school boards to “implement the requirement as they see fit,” according to a state official. That’s progressive code-speak for “we’re going to get away with whatever we can get away with, wherever we can get away with it.” Thus, if 40 school districts teach global warming is “settled science” and parents in one school district rebel, 39 others are still pushing the agenda.
This country is in serious trouble. We are producing legions of semi-educated kids with marginal abilities in math, reading, history and Constitutionalism. We’re being forced to import engineers and scientists because we don’t graduate enough people with those abilities domestically. American students are getting clobbered on international tests, scoring below some students from Third World countries. Three-out-of-four high schools graduates from some states require remedial courses in reading and math before they can do college level work.
Environmental literacy? How about literacy, period?
D.C. teachers help their students cheat on standardized exams
Sunday, June 05, 2011 by: J. D. Heyes
(NaturalNews) If you thought you'd heard it all regarding the sad state of public education in the U.S. today, think again. In the nation's capital, the teachers there help their students cheat on standardized exams.
A report last month said the D.C. Public Schools district is under investigation after officials discovered 14 security breaches by both students and teachers during standardized testing in April. The Office of State Superintendent ordered the investigation after throwing out test scores from three classrooms with "evidence or strong suspicion of test security violation."
"Two classrooms had possible testing irregularities and one classroom had a confirmed case of testing impropriety," Safiya Simmons, a spokeswoman for acting schools Chancellor Kaya Henderson, told the Washington Examiner.
In all, the superintendent's office is investigating 18 classrooms after evidence was found that incorrect test answers were erased and then corrected during 2010 testing. Eight of the institutions were charter schools, but 10 belonged to the chronically troubled D.C. public school system. All three of the classrooms where the tests were tossed out belonged to the D.C. district.
Naturally, the report said, D.C. public school officials had no comment about what went on in the suspect classrooms, but really - what can they say? After all, actions speak louder than words: Two teachers were forbidden from taking part in the 2011 testing and a third teacher left the school district before the investigation was finished. Moreover at the Noyes school, one teacher admitted to a violation, USA Today reported.
School spokesman Fred Lewis said none of that was related to the suspected cheating. That denial might carry some weight if this wasn't the first time the D.C. school system has been flagged for suspicious test scores.
According to USA Today, 103 D.C. schools were flagged between 2008-2010 "for having at least one class of students with statistically high rates of wrong answers" that were erased and corrected. That's more than half the schools in the district.
Coincidence? You be the judge. At Noyes, students' passing math on the standardized tests went from 10 percent to 58 percent in a single year, earning it a National Blue Ribbon award from the U.S. Department of Education. But in 2010, during standardized testing, 80 percent of the school's classrooms were flagged for having an inordinate, suspicious amount of erasures that were replaced with correct answers.
In a separate school, seventh grade students averaged 12.7 wrong-to-right erasures, a phenom with better odds than winning the Powerball lottery, USA Today said.
And all along, the nation's large teachers unions continue to resist any real attempts at reforming public education - such as genuine school choice - and holding teachers responsible for their actions (and for actually educating our kids).
Is it any wonder the nation's kids rank near the bottom in comparison to students in developed nations, a development that is certainly not new.
Big Government and Big Union education clearly isn't working, and worse, many of the so-called professionals - the teachers themselves - can't be trusted.
The only real choice, if we're serious about improving our education system, is offering parents a choice in where to send their kids to school. Private schools offer better educational results and it's not just an option for rich kids only.
Every year we wait is another generation of kids we lose.
World education rankings: which country does best at reading, maths and science?
The OECD's comprehensive world education ranking report, PISA, is out. Find out how each country compares
Jessica Shepherd,,
Tuesday 7 December 2010
The world education rankings from the OECD are out. The UK is slipping down in maths, reading and science, and has been overtaken by Poland and Norway, this major study of 65 countries reveals today.
Around 470,000 15-year-olds across the world sat a numeracy, literacy and science test last year, the results of which inform the latest Pisa study by the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
PISA rankings within OECD. Illustration: Paul Scruton for the Guardian
The Programme for International Student Assessment (Pisa) is highly respected across the globe, and enables politicians and policy-makers to assess how different country's education systems compare.
It shows the UK's reputation as one of the world's best for education is at risk, and has tumbled several places since 2006.
The UK is ranked 25th for reading, 28th for maths and 16th for science. In 2006, when 57 countries were included in the study, it was placed 17th, 24th and 14th respectively. Poland has stretched ahead of the UK in maths, while Norway is now ranked higher in reading and maths.
Andreas Shleicher, head of the Pisa programme, said the picture for the UK was "stagnant at best". "Many other countries have seen quite significant improvement," he added.
The National Education Association
By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
January 14, 2008
The National Education Association (NEA) is perhaps the most powerful labor union in the nation, but it is rarely investigated by the major news media. Both Bill and Hillary Clinton have attended the NEA's annual convention and expressed their appreciation for the union's political support.
At the NEA's July 1993 convention, President Clinton stated: "I believe that the president of this organization (NEA) would say we have had the partnership I promised in the campaign of 1992, and we will continue to have it.... You and I are joined in a common cause, and I believe we will succeed." A few months later, on December 15, 1993, EDUCATION WEEK reported that "Debra DeLee, the former director of governmental relations for the NEA, has joined the Democratic National Committee as its executive director."
A clear majority of the public school teachers in the nation belong to the NEA. Yet probably very few have known what their own union has stood for throughout the years of the 20th century. The following is a chronology of just a few of the revealing activities and published statements of the NEA during that time:
October 19, 1929---The NEA presents John Dewey ("Father of Progressive Education") with a "Life Membership." This is the same year Dewey published INDIVIDUALISM, OLD AND NEW, in which he proclaimed "We are in for some kind of socialism." And it is the year after Dewey in the December 5, 1928 NEW REPUBLIC praised the Soviet Bolsheviks' "marvelous development of progressive educational ideas and practices" and their counteracting "the influence of home and Church."
1932---The NEA makes Dewey honorary president of its organization, and its Department of Superintendence division publishes its tenth yearbook subtitled CHARACTER EDUCATION. In this yearbook, it criticizes the church for employing "outworn dogmas of the past" and states that "relativity must replace absolutism in the realm of morals" and that "the citizen of the future must be a citizen of the world."
July 1934---At the 72nd annual meeting of the NEA, Willard Givens (who will be executive secretary of the NEA from 1935 to 1952) says: "A dying laissez-faire must be completely destroyed and all of us, including the 'owners,' must be subjected to a large degree of social control.... An equitable distribution of income will be sought."
January 1946---NEA JOURNAL publishes "The Teacher and World Government" by Joy Elmer Morgan (editor of NEA JOURNAL from 1921 to 1955), in which he proclaims: "In the struggle to establish an adequate world government, the teacher...can do much to prepare the hearts and minds of children for global understanding and cooperation.... At the very top of the agencies which will assure the coming of world government must stand the school, the teacher, and the organized profession."
October 1947---NEA JOURNAL publishes "On the Waging of Peace" by NEA official William Carr, who advocates that teachers "teach those attitudes that will result ultimately in the creation of a world citizenship and world government."
November 23, 1956---former teacher, communist, and organizer of the New York Teachers' Union, Dr. Bella Dodd, states in an interview in the Los Angeles TIDINGS: "I learned that the function of the Communist Party was to be the lead donkey pulling the drift of American life to the left. Most of the programs we advocated, the National Education Association followed the next year or so."
1962---ISSUES IN (HUMAN RELATIONS) TRAINING is published by the National Training Laboratories of the NEA, and in this book the editors write that human relations or sensitivity training "fits into a context of institutional influence procedures which includes coercive persuasion in the form of thought reform or brainwashing...."
September 23, 1968---NEA president Elizabeth Koontz addresses the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education and states: "The NEA has a multi-faceted program already directed toward the urban school problem, embracing every phase, from the Headstart Program to sensitivity training for adults--both teachers and parents." Remember the reference immediately above concerning "sensitivity training" and "brainwashing."
1971---SCHOOLS FOR THE '70s AND BEYOND: A CALL TO ACTION is published by the NEA, and declares that "...teachers who conform to the traditional institutional mode are out of place. They might find fulfillment as tap-dance instructors, or guards in maximum security prisons, or proprietors of reducing salons, or agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation--but they damage teaching children, and themselves by staying in the classroom."
February 10, 1973---In the SATURDAY REVIEW OF EDUCATION, NEA president Catherine Barrett pronounces: "Dramatic changes in the way we will raise our children in the year 2000 are indicated, particularly in terms of schooling.... We will need to recognize that the so-called 'basic skills,' which currently represent yearly the total effort in elementary schools, will be taught in one-quarter of the present school day.... When this happens--and it's near--the teacher can rise to his true calling. More than a dispenser of information, the teacher will be a conveyor of values, a philosopher.... We will be agents of change."
February 1979---The NEA holds its 17th annual Conference on Human and Civil Rights in Washington, DC, and the keynote speaker is New Ager Jean Houston. She states that many teachers have opened "the minds of children from darkness to illuminist humanity.... The moral mandates,...the standard brand governments, religions...are breaking down.... The New Age is seeded and created.... And who is it done by? I suggest largely by educators...."
February 1980 - June 1984 ---John Lloyd is executive director of the Kansas National Education Association (an NEA affiliate). He says that Saul Alinsky's RULES FOR RADICALS is the NEA's "bible." In the book, Alinsky has an "acknowledgment" to Lucifer, and further states that the radical organizer "dedicated to changing the life of a particular community must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many to the point of overt expression. He must search out controversy and issues.... An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent.... He knows that all values are relative.... Truth to him is relative and changing."
April 5, 1983---THE WASHINGTON POST editorial, "Political Teaching," accuses the NEA of preparing curriculum materials on nuclear weapons, atomic war, and the American arms build-up, which are "political indoctrination." The NEA curriculum is called "Choices: A Unit on Conflict and Nuclear War."
March 1991---NEA TODAY publishes an interview conducted by NEA staffer Stephanie Weiss with Planned Parenthood president Faye Wattleton, in which the latter expresses her support for school-based distribution of contraceptives and "comprehensive sexuality education" which would begin "well before... kindergarten age."
1994---DICTATORSHIP OF VIRTUE: MULTICULTURALISM AND THE BATTLE FOR AMERICA'S FUTURE by NEW YORK TIMES reporter Richard Bernstein is published. In this book he writes that as long ago as 1973 the NEA proclaimed that "all whites are racists," and in 1991 NEA TODAY declared that "never again will Christopher Columbus sit on a pedestal in United States history. Christopher Columbus brought slavery to the hemisphere."
July 1997---Kansas Education Watch Networks "Update" states that the following are actual excerpts from a transcript of an audio cassette tape used to train NEA labor negotiators in the Midwest: "In order to apply pressure tactics properly, your negotiating team needs to know and understand your board and its negotiating team thoroughly. Uncovering information about the board, the superintendent and the board negotiating team, are critical to your success in negotiations.... The suggested data to be gathered on board members is the following: ...religious affiliation. His estimated income....and don't forget to check into his politics....wear down the board physically and psychologically...."
January 5, 1999---INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY publishes "The NEA's Political Lesson Plan" by staff writer Michael Chapman, in which he explains: "The nation's largest teachers union wants the U.S. to nationalize health care, start a nuclear freeze, adopt national energy policies and pass more gun-control laws. Yet it doesn't want teachers tested or schools privatized.... The NEA has long backed a left-wing political agenda."
Many more revealing facts about and quotes by the NEA can be found in my NEA: GRAB FOR POWER. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the NEA has continued its radical leftist agenda, as the following are excerpts from the NEA's July 2007 ADVANCING NEA's LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM: "NEA supports: (1) repeal of the so-called right-to-work provision of federal labor law (2) a tax-supported, single-payer health care plan for all residents of the United States (3) the addition of the Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution (4) reproductive freedom without governmental intervention (5) comprehensive immigration reform that rejects the criminalization of undocumented immigrants and includes a path to permanent residency, citizenship, or asylum NEA opposes: (1) the use of vouchers or certificates in education (2) federally mandated parental option or 'choice' programs (3) the testing of teachers as a criterion for job retention, promotion, tenure, or salary increments (4) any constitutional amendment imposing limitations on taxes or the federal budget."
Also See:
Don't Blame the Teachers! Blame the Parents!
18 March 2011
Agenda 21! The Death Knell of Liberty!
02 March 2011
Parents! What do You Know about Whole Child Education?
13 August 2010
Sex Education in Ontario Elementary Schools is Going Too Far!!
24 June 2010
Teaching Propaganda or American History?
25 April 2010
What Happened to Education?
30 August 2009
Homeschooling - What About It?
18 June 2009
Education Ain't What It Should Be (Part 1)
21 April 2008