We're in the grips of teacher strike fear in BC  –  just a few days before school start.  Of 31 union "threats" to withdraw services, the go-ahead has been granted by the Labour Relations Board for all except 1.  Teachers must take attendance and transmit this information to the office.

My biggest complaint has been about the ILLEGAL withholding of preparation and sending of report cards to parents.  This leaves parents bereft of critical information by which they can monitor their child's progress  –  or decide to supplement with tutoring or withdraw the child from that school.  I wrote the following essay to a local newspaper blog with my views.

“THAT'S JUST SOME PARENT ON HOLD  . . . ”

“That's just some parent on hold who called complaining about something. If you let it blink long enough, she'll go away.”  (office assistant to Joel Klein, NYC schools chancellor, about a blinking phone in the office,  from “Class Warfare” by Steven Brill, 2011)

Well, it’s finally happened!  Parents have been rendered redundant to the cause of education of their children.

In the international scheme of things teacher unions generally follow the same agendas, the same demands, the same narratives.  But, it’s only in British Columbia that the powerful BC Teachers’ Federation has gained so much in asserting control.  No doubt the air-waves are congratulating the vanguard BCTF!

I saw the Education Minister’s interview where he was pleased that the Labour Relations Board ruled that attendance must be taken and transmitted by public school teachers during the upcoming “strike”.  That ensures the babysitting function.

I read the VSB chairperson’s opinion column state this “teach only campaign” would not harm children and was in aid of building a “fair society”. 

I read and heard the BCTF president proclaim that teachers will not do administrative or bureaucratic work.

I saw how the LRB was snookered into declaring “OK” an illegal withdrawal of services  –  they are excused from preparing and sending report cards to parents and guardians.

Now we are seeing school boards abolishing recess and cautioning parents that principals and vp’s may not be available for answering questions about their children due to administrative overload.

Do not be quieted, parents.  You have very effectively been squeezed out of the picture. Deliberately and opportunistically.  Pray tell, how can parents be responsible for the education of their children?.  It’s parents who are legally responsible but the state and its employees always diminish the parental role.  In fact, many parents say they actually are disempowered and made to feel inadequate.

For people in the public school system to say that parents can still talk to their teacher, or the teacher will call is not good enough!  Remember, in BC, it is legal for teachers to complain to parents about their grievances such as opposition to FSAs.  Who wants their ears filled with this stuff?

It is patently ILLEGAL to withhold report cards.  See my selection of legalities that says so here: 

http://genuine-education-reform-today.org/2011/08/08/withholding-student-reports-is-illegal/

How come the state socialist agenda to erode and diminish the family is so successful in BC?  It’s Orwell all over  –  War is Peace  –  Families First means Families Last!

I have seen ads for teachers in British newspapers in the 80s which had on their masthead “Socialism At Work”.

And I remember reading the USA Congressional Record of 1963 during their inquiry into communist infiltration with these quotes about communist goals:

- “Discredit the family as an institution”

- “Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents”

- “Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.”

Victory for socialism but not for parents or civil society! I’m sick to my stomach with this takeover and parents usurped!

Is this a true formula  –  socialism equals totalitarianism?

Quebec, is increasingly becoming more totalitarian.  Children are to go to government subsidized day-care to be "socialized", even as research shows poor results from these day-care programs.  Homeschooling parents are discouraged and steered into public schools.  Ethics and Religious Culture courses are mandatory in public and private schools.

Who are the motivators behind Quebec's statist mandates in childhood care and education?  I get little conversation about this in British Columbia, Canada. But, this is what I posted recently — both to clarify things in my own mind and to publish these questions to a broader audience.

Parents Cornered By The State  –  Any Options?

(by Tunya Audain 20110519 comment to blog, The Report Card, by Janet Steffenhagen, Vancouver Sun Education Reporter, on story “Canada's top court considers mandatory religion course in Quebec schools” 20110518)

Increasingly the state imposes what it thinks best in the cause of “The Common Good”. Creeping statism !

(Statism:  the practice of concentrating economic and political power in the state, resulting in a weak position for the individual or community)

How does this happen?  Do politicians meet in secret, and then proceed to legislate, some decree? No, generally such an action is in response to pressure or persuasion from some lobbying group  –  either self-interested or well-meaning.

Thus we see a group, in knee-jerk fashion, approach government for some comprehensive, universal program to correct a problem on behalf of some public good.  Very recently, in the name of reducing obesity and overindulgence in salt and sugar, two groups (Canadian Medical Association Journal and Active Healthy Kids Canada) suggested government remedies.

But the Globe and Mail did a blistering editorial on their starry-eyed suggestions.  Some quotes:

- People in a democracy should be free to make bad choices.

- The attitude seems to be that only the government can rescue children from bad habits.

- How the state is supposed to program the pounds off today’s children is not explained.

- Shaming and blaming, taxing and banning, will not work.

- The heavy hand of the state is not the answer to every ill.

(Globe and Mail, April 27, 2011, Toward a Utopia of Apples and Nuts)

I mention the above as introduction to my fears about the creeping totalitarianism in Quebec. I’m referring to the two related stories  –  a) The Supreme Court of Canada hearings on the legality of Quebec’s imposition of Ethics and Religious Culture (ERC) curriculum on all schools, private and public, and b) a Quebec judge ordering a family to send their 3 and 5 year old children to state-funded daycare for “socialization” and which family had earlier had to send their homeschool children to public schools.

The Supreme Court started its hearings yesterday, with at least 8 interveners including the Canadian Civil Liberties Association.  The testimonies and presentations will be extremely important to follow to determine just far we have come in losing our freedoms in Canada. "Can the state impose, without the possibility of an exemption, a program of study about religion and ethics on parents who view it as infringing on their religious beliefs and their freedom of conscience? Such is the stake in this case."

The case about the homeschooling family and the day care issue is being handled by a group called the Home School Legal Defense Association.  http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/quebec-judge-orders-three-year-old-into-daycare-for-socialization video  “Forced into Daycare” http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/939198910001

In the matter of freedoms being squeezed, is our only recourse the law courts?

One big question for me is who are the lobbies behind these moves in Quebec, making it such a totalitarian province?  Is it just the Liberal government of Quebec or are there other lobbies such as public service unions who stand to gain if all children are made to attend state daycares and schools?  Or are other groups that oppose school choice and parental rights in education involved?

This week I heard yet another presentation of why we “need” universal Early Childhood Education (ECE) programs in BC when I attended the public COPE meeting on Public Education.  However, as persuasive as the speaker, Dr. Paul Kershaw, was, he admitted three times that in Canada there was a growing “nervousness” toward such programs.  Could it be that the heavily subsidized $7.00 a day program in Quebec is not producing the intended results?  See this May 12th report:  “Quebec’s massively-funded daycare program ‘very low’ quality”.  http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/quebecs-massively-funded-daycare-program-very-low-quality-expert

A comment on this story of poor daycare results says:  “This interference is our generation’s residential school system.  Hopefully when these children will grow up they’ll be able to make a class action lawsuit in the same fashion.”

Are we only to wait until these children grow up when they might see that they have been cheated and they go to the courts for reparations?   They, who now are so seductively herded into universal state programs to be “socialized” and alienated from their families. How can the parents be so compliant? But what can resistant and cornered parents do? That’s what those two legal actions are about in Quebec.  Follow closely.

Why are families and parents in Canada treated so much like breeders for the state machine which “needs” children to process   —  one-size-fits-all, for the “The Common Good”?  I hope these Quebec cases provide a cautionary tale for the Rest of Canada (ROC).

What is needed, when governments fund, produce, and monopolize services is for the consumers/clients/captives to have enforceable rights and remedies as obligatory policy.  If these rights are not in place  –  when citizens can have some safeguards against state oppressiveness  –  the state should step aside, trust its people and offer free choice of programs it funds through equitable vouchers.

At this point, as we seem to be incrementally becoming more “socialized” I see no option but to look at the urgency for enforceable parent rights  –  for special education needs, general education and day care. A good starting point would be look at these parent rights as compiled from good practices of the past.  http://education-advisory.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/parent_-rights_-and_-their_-children.pdf

The Progressive Agenda Being Fulfilled  

(by Tunya Audain 100815, comment to Blog School for Thought (SQE) on topic “Saying it as it is” 100814 

http://www.societyforqualityeducation.org/index.php/blog/read/saying-it-as-it-is/ ) 

The deterioration of language skills is real and deliberate.  It is a pervasive trend with direct connections to teacher 

training where progressivism is the norm.  Canadian Deans of Education have signed onto an Accord to produce teachers 

to assume social and political roles, to contribute to social change and community transformation. 

I recently read an article http://www.educationnews.org/commentaries/book_reviews/97169.html 

"John Dewey, Dumbing Down, and The Scandal of Dyslexia".  The author concludes that Dewey and his buddies, being 

socialists, “They were sick of individualism, the pioneer spirit, free enterprise, and people doing their own thing. John 

Dewey wanted you to be a happy member of a group. You didn’t need that much literacy or knowledge. Dewey actually 

saw these as impediments. He calls, especially in the early grades, for sharply curtailing the study of literature, history, 

math, science, geography and such, in order to make room for social activities, specifically, ‘cooking, sewing, manual 

training’”. 

“To advance his sociopolitical visions, Dewey was eager to dilute content and diminish learning.” 

All this is in line with what John Taylor Gatto has been saying in his “Dumbing Us Down. The Hidden Curriculum of 

Compulsory Schooling”.  Several times a winner of “Teacher of the Year Awards” in New York, when he quit teaching 

he said he no longer wished to “hurt kids to make a living.“ 

Today I found this guest column (from EducationNews) by a teacher also deploring poor English and grammar in this 

article “Grammar problems caused by ‘hyper-constructivism’”. http://betrayed-

whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/2010/08/grammar-problems-caused-by-hyper.html  (from the blog, Betrayed*) 

Robert Archer faults “constructivism” which, unfortunately still exists in teacher training.  It’s a form of discovery-

learning and had Dewey as one of the historical figures influencing this development. (See Wikipedia for constructivism).  

This is what Archer said:  “Somehow, this grammar-is-imbedded movement is supposed to help students naturally take in 

what proper grammar is (i.e., grammar by osmosis). It’s very much a hyper-constructivist approach to education; the 

students are supposed to “discover” proper grammar on their own as they read good pieces. Then, somehow and some 

way, they are to emulate these proper mechanical structures in their own writing. And if the students don’t quite “take it 

all in,“ the teacher may take 2.5 minutes here and there to show them what a damn verb is.” 

Is all this deliberate, manufactured, dumbing-down? To create a class of poorly educated mass with another class of elitist 

rulers?  Sounds very Plato to me – philosopher kings!  Isn’t this what socialism is all about—We are all equal, but some 

are more equal than others? 

We need to find more essays and material about this deliberate capture of curriculum by left-wing progressives for their 

political purposes.  I found an excellent article on the hijacking of art education for the purpose of social justice, etc..  

Very, very perceptive and scary. http://www.aristos.org/aris-10/hijacking.htm   

Of course, science, math, literature are already seeing social justice themes but I haven’t seen any articles (good 

references) as persuasive as the above art article. 

Am I a conspiracy freak?  I don’t think so.  I see the progressive agenda being actualized everywhere.  Progressives are 

about a number of things, but their main thing is uniformity.  NO CHOICES.  That’s why they love government 

monopoly education.   

* Betrayed, the blog sounds like a great place to visit.  This is their write-up: 

Betrayed – Why Public Education Is Failing http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/ 

Betrayed is an online chat forum for parents, teachers and community members to offer their thoughts on what’s wrong 

with public education and how to make it work better for the students…Help teachers and parents take back the classroom 

from those who have stolen it.                      

1. Choice

2. Information

3. Be Heard & Consulted

4. Special Assistance

5. Involvement

6. Safeguards

7. Appeal

• For a Printable PDF of this Article Click Here
  

“Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.” (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948)

1. to obtain sufficient details about schools to enable them to make informed choices about schools
2. to receive specific, understandable information about their child’s progress; strengths and weaknesses
3. to see all student records and files on their child, to expect that the information therein is confidential and respects the privacy of parents and student, and to request that inaccuracies and damaging information be removed
4. to obtain information about any program in which their child is engaged, the rationale for the program, the evaluation methods used, and the credentials and job description of those implementing the program
5. to visit and observe any programs involving their child
6. to easy access to those working with their child (teachers, principal, specialists)
7. to receive information about school services — including alternatives in the system, procedures, rules, and to be informed about changes
8. to see that the public school board is operated as an open public business, that is, that the public has a right to see all policies, budgets, minutes, and official reports, and to see that decisions are made at public meetings.

1. to understand the principles, aims and programs of formal education so that they can support, enrich and provide home follow-through to school programs. At times, parents have also found it necessary to have this basic understanding in order to provide external remediation or tutoring.
2. to have their child excused from programs or prescribed reading which offends the values of the home, when specifically requested
3. to consultation before fundamental changes are made which affect the parents, the child, or the total school climate
4. to participate in evaluation procedures affecting their child’s programs, and in formulation of policy, goals and shape of education
5. to be involved in the event their child is to be suspended from school. The student has the right to “due process” and parents and student are part of the affected parties to be heard before judgment or action is taken and before the student is suspended for just cause.

1. to expect safeguards which protect their children from physical, intellectual and emotional negligence or abuse;
2. to receive assurance that their school does not allow unauthorized invasions of their child’s privacy or property (e.g., questionnaires which pry into family life, searches of lockers)
3. to expect that parental permission is required before psychological, psychiatric, or medical assessment and/or treatment of the child are undertaken;
4. to expect strict supervision over new programs, innovations and experiments, and that parents have special rights in these instances:
   • to receive a written description of the program, rationale, goals and supporting references;
   • to grant or refuse permission for their child’s attendance
   • to receive satisfaction that the program is run by qualified, well-prepared personnel
   • to be involved in the ongoing evaluation.

• England: It shall be the duty of the parent of every child of compulsory school age to cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable to his age, ability, and aptitude, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise. (Education Act, 1944)
• United States: The first School Laws in America (1642) underlie the system to this day: “Universal education of youth is essential to the well-being of the State. The obligation to furnish this education rests primarily upon the parents.”
• Canada: “The responsibility is placed by law upon the parents or guardian to educate their children.” (You and the Law, 1973)
• The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) supports this parental duty.

Parent Power

(By Tunya Audain 100326, comment to blog Report Card by Janet Steffenhagen Vancouver Sun Education Reporter on: “Provincial parent group not in trouble, president says” 100324)

Why do parents have to beg for recognition from their school systems?

I’ve attended parent advisory meetings which spent most of the time on fund-raising matters.  Current “advisory” councils differ little from the PTA meetings of old where the groups were the lapdogs of the teacher unions and the administration.  

Research reveals tons of evidence that “parent involvement” helps students. And such research will even point to the progress and evolution of such relationships.  From participation to involvement to engagement to consultation to advisory to collaboration to partnership and so on.  As if each degree of greater servility and fund-raising is some great advance!

It’s all a wicked deceit for the present education establishment to say it welcomes any real instrumental role for parents.

Thus, it is not any consolation that the current president of the BCCPAC says she is ramping up her campaign:  “Parent involvement is old hat – we want to be partners now.”

What will partnership give you in a dysfunctional, corrupt, counterproductive, and bureaucratic system?

Parents should not be beggars but should actually be running the schools.  As they have been doing for 21 years in New Zealand. Each school has its own site-based school board with a majority of the decision-makers being parents.

In 1989 when the NZ government did an audit and found that two-thirds of the money allocated to education never reached the classroom they abolished regional school boards.  They now have 2460 individual school boards.

Parents here are really wasting their wonderful time and energy in a system which treats them with tokenism at best and arrogance and disdain at worst. 

Just look at some of the workshop topics that New Zealand parents-as-trustees will be choosing at their 21st AGM this July.

- student achievement       – balancing the books          – national standards       – your board as the “good employer”        – valuing our children and young people          – formal disciplinary procedures          – leading change   – principal performance agreements            – the chairperson: the most rewarding role of the board     – the board and its leadership role                  – effective relationships: touchy/feely – productive or destructive?                        – self-review: a key enabler of board performance  

And get this. They will be honoring long-term trustees who have served for 10, 15 and 21 years!