Iceland restricted freedom of education

Iceland’s primary school system is rapidly deteriorating.

A third of Iceland’s young men are illiterate after ten years of study, and one in ten fourteen year old girls worries about being bullied in school. Iceland has some of the world’s most medicated children, and recent government efforts have only exacerbated the situation.

Nevertheless, Iceland has put restrictive education laws in place that make it nearly impossible for families to home educate their children.

It may be wrong to place the whole blame on the education system, but parents in Iceland simply don’t have any alternatives. Government approved education is mandatory. There are only a handful of alternative schools, and even these are forced to follow the state curriculum.

Basic economic principles teach us that a lack of competition leads to a lack of competence. Therefore, it is not surprising to see a monopolized school system like Iceland’s deteriorating at a rapid pace.

Homeschooling outperforms government education. It could be good way for many families to reverse the negative education trend in Iceland. Moreover, it is the natural right of parents to supervise the education of their own children.

Between 1995 and 2009, homeschooling was allowed only in a few cases as an exception from the system. In 2009, a regulation on homeschooling was introduced which requires that at least one parent hold a teaching license. Parents are also forced to follow a state sanctioned curriculum.

But many parents in Iceland are still fighting for their freedom of education!

This situation presents a unique opportunity for concerned citizens around the world to make a strong case for freedom of education and homeschooling.

P.S. By signing this petition, you can show your support for the efforts to change education regulations in Iceland. Furthermore, the case may eventually reach the European Court of Human Rights. If the Court agrees that restricting freedom of education to certified teachers goes against one of the main principles of any western constitution–equal rights before the law–the case for allowing homeschooling in other countries would be strengthened.

Thank you!
CitizenGO team
CitizenGO is a community of active citizens that seeks to defend life, the family and fundamental rights worldwide. To find out more about CitizenGO click here or follow us on Facebook or Twitter. This message is addressed to delmak.com@gmail.com. If you do not wish to receive emails from CitizenGO, click on this link.

Advertisements

School assignment to write about converting to Islam

This very assignment was given to a class on the Sunshine coast. As advised by a local MP, it was his daughter.

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/10/uk-stepfather-called-racist-for-complaining-about-stepdaughters-assignment-to-write-about-converting-to-islam

Would any British school have given an assignment to write about converting to Christianity? Of course not. If it had done so, Muslim students, their parents, and Islamic groups would be protesting vociferously, and the school would be apologizing. But in this case, it is the stepfather who is vilified for complaining. And so the Islamization of Britain gallops forward.

“‘I’ve been called a racist and a bigot’: Stepfather explains why he complained when school asked his girl, 12, to write a letter for homework about becoming a Muslim,” by Lara Keay, Mailonline, October 2, 2018:

A stepfather who slammed his 12-year-old’s school for making her write a letter about ‘converting to Islam’ has been called a ‘racist bigot’ and is terrified of violent repercussions.

Mark McLachlan, 43, complained to Kepier School in Houghton-le-Spring, Sunderland when he found the homework task in his stepdaughter’s planner.

He refused to let her finish the ‘letter to my family about converting to Islam’, claiming it was ‘brainwashing’ her about the religion and did not see what it would achieve.

But since posting about it on social media he says he has received a lot of abuse.

He told MailOnline: ‘My wife and I are terrified of the repercussions.

‘Any time anybody says anything negative about Islam they are torn to shreds.

‘I’ve been called a racist and a bigot, but I’m just terrified for my children and for the way this country is going.

‘In 50 years time I can see Britain becoming an Islamic state and my children and grandchildren are still going to be alive – I don’t want them wearing a niqab.’

Mr McLachlan, who has been with the 12-year-old’s mother for five years, said he was particularly outraged by the task because he thinks she is being given a ‘false representation of Islam’.

He added: ‘She was told to google ‘Why should I convert to Islam’, but if she had researched both sides and googled ‘Why shouldn’t I convert to Islam’ she wouldn’t have been able to sleep.

‘I’ve done it and the stuff that comes up is horrific.

‘My stepdaughter is coming home talking about the Prophet Muhammad and halal meat saying Islam is the religion of peace.

‘But if she watched the news and knew about all the atrocities Islam has caused all over the world, she would know it isn’t the religion of peace at all.’

The stepfather, who also has a daughter, stressed he has ‘nothing but respect’ for the deputy head of Kepier School, who was ‘completely understanding of his concerns.

He told MailOnline the teacher has agreed to hold a meeting to review the task and address his concerns.

Nicola Cooper, the school’s principal, said: ‘At Kepier we feel it is very important to introduce our learners to all faiths and cultures and we do this throughout the academic year.

‘For example, next week we will be celebrating all faiths during National Inter Faith Week.

‘We welcomed Mr McLachlan into school earlier this week and were happy to explain to him how we explore all faiths and cultures.

‘Our Culture and Wellbeing programme of study is in line with the National Curriculum and we believe it provides the basis for a broad, balanced and engaging introduction to the areas typically taught in RE and PSHCE.’…

Education Common Core Agenda 21 Dumbing Down Australia

Dumbing down – Australia

The Commonwealth Minister for Education, Dan Tehan, must be congratulated for rejecting the curriculum model pushed by the OECD’s The Future of Education And Skills Education 2030 project that the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority is planning to adopt as the basis for the next iteration of the national curriculum. Even though the national curriculum has only recently been bedded down and it is impossible to know how effective it will be, Rob Randall, the CEO of the organisation responsible for the national curriculum, recently stated ‘ACARA is leading Australia’s participation in the OECD 2030 Education and Skills Project. It’s exploring the best ways to structure and design a curriculum that fosters competencies essential … in 2030’.  ……

https://www.spectator.com.au/2018/09/dumbing-down/

Why States Are Leaving Common Core in Droves – USA

After less than 10 years in the classroom, Common Core could soon be on its way out.

The Obama administration introduced Common Core in 2010, imposing burdensome new standards and tests in an attempt to create uniform educational content across the nation. Despite loud objections from parents, teachers, school leaders, and state officials, 46 states ultimately adopted the standards due to a combination of funding carrots and regulatory sticks.

But over the past few years, states have begun to reclaim their authority to set educational standards. Approximately a quarter of participating states have either downgraded their participation or withdrawn completely from the two new testing consortia introduced by Common Core.

One of those consortia—the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career—once had 20 state participants but now has fewer than four. Florida, for instance, an early adopter of Common Core, withdrew from the test consortium after finding that, among other issues, testing would occur over a 20-day period.

Maryland became the most recent state to roll back Common Core testing when officials there found that it overburdened teachers and didn’t help families.

How exactly? As The Baltimore Sun noted, it required schools to “clear their schedules for several weeks each spring, disrupting classes, and provide computers for students to take the tests in grades 3 through 8, as well as twice in high school.” Teachers lost valuable class time and encountered extensive disruptions.

Moreover, the test results were not delivered until the summer after the end of classes, thus limiting the ability of teachers to use the scores to improve classroom practice.

Maryland now plans to replace Common Core partnership tests with the Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program—a shorter program that delivers test results sooner. While it remains an open question how much of a genuine departure from Common Core this represents, Maryland is at least taking the first step in reclaiming its autonomy by defining how it will assess student progress.

After all, states are much better suited to evaluate students according to standards that parents care about. National standards like Common Core give priority to national testing, but most parents typically ascribe little value to such large-scale assessments. According to an American Enterprise Institute study, parents rank school safety, values, healthy environment, and curricula as significantly more important than school performance on state tests.

In fact, national standards don’t actually help families or local schools improve their education—they only help number-crunching officials who distribute funding. My colleagues, Lindsey Burke and Jennifer Marshall, have written that parents can gain more useful information from classroom assessments and conversations with teachers about their child’s education.

Moreover, Common Core standards actually encouraged mediocrity rather than higher academic achievement. As Burke and Marshall have noted, “The rigor and content of national standards will tend to align with the mean among states” since the national standards will be plagued by “the same pressures that detract[ed] from the quality of many state standards.”

Educators also say federal standards and assessments limit their own autonomy and capacity to innovate in the classroom. In his book “The Tyranny of Metrics,” Jerry Z. Muller writes, “Many teachers perceive the regimen created by the culture of testing and measured accountability as robbing them of their autonomy and of the ability to use their discretion and creativity in designing and implementing the curriculum of their students.”

By returning education to the local level, teachers and parents can work together to create the system that works best for their children.

Rather than following Washington’s dictates, states should reassert their standards-setting and assessment authority to better enable schools to respond to local families and teachers.

Maryland’s decision to replace these tests is a step in the right direction as the state works to re-establish how it will conduct assessments. Freed from the constraints of Washington, states can then look to each other for best practices and innovations while working with local communities to produce results.

One way states can solidify their own educational standards is by strengthening school transparency measures modeled after the independent reviews that are common in higher education, such as the Princeton Review or College Board. This would empower parents with clear information about school performance, enabling them to hold schools accountable for meeting the needs of their children, particularly when empowered with education choice options.

Maryland has not yet released the costs of its new tests, but other states that have similarly withdrawn from the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career paid a hefty price to replace it. For instance, Florida spent $220 million on a new test, meaning taxpayers there are still paying to get out of Common Core.

More states should follow Maryland’s path and extricate themselves from the massive federal overreach that is Common Core. Greater transparency coupled with real choice in education—not centralized government—will strengthen education in states across the country.




COMMON CORE IS UN AGENDA 21

Common Core is an integral part of UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development: globalization is the standardization of systems. Whether the system is law enforcement or land use or government, the standardization, harmonization, and integration of all international methods of management is essential for total control.
Education is the flash point for embedding system acceptance in all sectors of the population.  Standardized propaganda is developed for pre-kindergarten to post graduate school; this is what is meant by ‘Life Long Learning.’

Breaking down traditional methods of learning in order to re-socialize the populace is the goal.  Obedient, dependent people who are constantly being propagandized will provide the ‘human capital’ to fully implement UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development.

Regardless of the content of this nationalized and internationalized system of behavioral modification, the goal and outcome will be to fundamentally destroy the individual’s rights.

https://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/common-core-is-agenda-21.html

Bettina Arndt : Conservative bigot on campus tour

LaTrobe UniversityLast month a bedraggled bunch of chilled protestors gathered on the frosty lawns of La Trobe University protesting the proposed talk on campus by ‘conservative bigot Bettina Arndt’. Funny that. Here’s a conservative bigot who spent her early career being accused of being a sex fiend and was once banned for two years from live TV and radio for mentioning unmentionable topics.

I’ve come the full circle, previously in trouble with the conservatives for talking too openly about sex and now in strife with the fainting-couch feminists who control our universities and deny women any agency in determining their own sex lives. These social warriors are presenting our campuses as unsafe for young women, claiming they need protection from predatory males – even in the face of the dismal failure of the Human Rights Commission’s million-dollar survey which found not a skerrick of a rape crisis. The survey found 99.2 per cent of female students reported not a single incident of sexual assault in the preceding two year period, not even an undesired touch or grope from a stranger on the train en route to campus. The only real complaint was an excess of unwanted staring.

Yet they have bullied the universities into endless virtue-signalling exercises pretending the emperor still has clothes, with 24-hour rape help lines, counselling services and sexual consent courses.

When La Trobe cancelled my scheduled talk about the rape crisis to the student Liberal Club, the administration claimed my presentation failed to align with the values of the university and its campaign against sexual violence. The talk is now going ahead. But as I write, Sydney University has been stalling for twelve days, claiming that the Liberal Club’s application for a venue for my scheduled talk on September 11 was still being processed. Normally clubs are given venues for such talks within days. No doubt the university is hoping that if they stall the problem will go away but when I alerted the press to what was happening, VC Michael Spence announced the student group would be charged for extra security. So, the conservative students are to be punished for the aggressive actions of the feral activists.

We now have a generation of students being indoctrinated through sexual consent courses to believe every sexual interaction, the slightest kiss or touch, or progress towards further physical intimacy must be preceded by a yelp of enthusiastic consent – otherwise we’re talking rape. Never mind that this means that the intimacy most of us enjoy must be rape.

This is preparing the groundwork for pushing these ‘yes means yes’ concepts into law. Already the NSW Law Reform Commission has been asked to consider enthusiastic consent requirements as part of a review of sexual consent laws. The Commission has been flooded with submissions, particularly from women’s groups and academic lawyers supporting these changes, with only a handful of brave people speaking out against them. Yet legal authorities across the United States are now expressing concern about the damage to due process rights for the accused from these new affirmative standards which have been adopted a number of American states and an estimated 1,400 universities. Recently 28 of the Harvard Law School faculty published an open letter denouncing the shift in the burden of proof that has resulted from such laws.

Enthusiastic consent laws are only one tiny plank of the feminist campaign. In the past year, we’ve seen universities caving in to the pressure to have committees take on the role of investigating and determining sexual assault cases, using ‘victim-centred’ investigative practices. I spent eight months last year supporting a PhD student at Adelaide University under investigation by one such committee which had the power to withhold his degree if he failed to cooperate.

Earlier this year over 150 American criminal lawyers, law professors and scholars signed an open letter denouncing these victim-centred investigative practises. ‘By their very name, their ideology, and the methods they foster, “believe the victim” concepts presume the guilt of an accused. This is the antithesis of the most rudimentary notions of justice. In directing investigators to corroborate allegations, ignore reporting inconsistencies, and undermine defenses, the “believe the victim” movement threatens to subvert constitutionally-rooted due process protections,’ said the letter.

Last month, at an international conference on men’s issues in London, a chilling speech was given by retired social worker Patrick Graham who, along with four elderly men, spent years living with the fall-out from false allegations from a delusional woman accusing them of being part of a paedophile ring. Graham had never met his accuser who has admitted to making multiple previous false rape accusations. Her bizarre accusations against the men included torture and forced abortion, never investigated by the police. The case collapsed when defence lawyers were finally given access to communication between the police and the accuser showing how readily the police were duped by her absurd delusions. Despite the case being dropped the false accuser retains her £22,000 victim’s compensation.

This was just one of a series of notorious UK rape cases dropped before trial last year following revelations of deliberate withholding of key evidence by prosecutors and police, as part of feminist promoted victim-centred justice. In the ensuring scandal which followed, the former DPP stepped down and it was decided all rape and serious sexual assault cases should be reviewed. The police have now announced they are ditching their previous practice of ‘believing all victims’.

Whilst overseas the feminist push through the institutions is occasionally coming unstuck, here it continues unabated, with our universities as the breeding ground for a new generation of young women set to see themselves as victims, to tilt laws, rules and regulations in favour of women and demonise and deny basic legal rights to men. Speaking out on university campuses is intended to alert ordinary students, and perhaps staff as well, to the fake rape crisis as one small example of how the universities are being manipulated by feminist ideology so divisive to male/female relations and so dangerous for men. We have talks in the pipeline at University of Queensland, Canberra, and Murdoch, with many more student groups interested in hosting the events.

We’ve received a strong response to my crowd-funder to help student clubs with venue and travel costs, as more universities come on board. (https://www.gofundme.com/h9qp7) Please spread the word for more free speech on campuses.

 

https://www.spectator.com.au/2018/09/conservative-bigot-on-campus-tour/

Indonesians Govt to Send 5,000 Muslims to Australia

 to Obtain Doctorate Degrees, With a Focus on Islamic Studies

Jakarta. The directorate general of Islamic education at the Ministry of Religious Affairs signed a cooperation agreement with the Australian Technology Network of Universities (ATN) to send 5,000 Indonesian students to Australia for their PhD studies, at the Embassy of Australia in Jakarta on Wednesday (10/08).

The director general, Kamaruddin Amin said that the agreement will help university lecturers further their education, especially in the field of Islamic studies.

“The vision is to develop Indonesia into a center for Islamic education, especially being a Muslim majority country,” Kamaruddin said.

He added the program has been backed by the government, with Rp 500 billion ($38.2 million) allocated in the state budget which will be used to fund student scholarships. He also revealed that the program falls in line with the ministry’s plans to build an international Islamic university in 2017 in Sawangan, Depok, West Java.

The scholarships given by the ministry will also be issued to students who wish to undertake other career paths, as ATN believes that a PhD will help Indonesian students venture further in their careers and help develop the country.

According to ATN executive director Renee Hindmarsh, the collaboration will not only strengthen the relationship between Australia and Indonesia, but will also help provide the students access to a world-class education.

“We hope that students who choose to study in one of our member universities will be able to graduate and step into the professional world and be able to create jobs for the future,” Hindmarsh said.

ATN is a consortium consisting of five Australian universities which are Queensland University of Technology (QUT), University of Technology, RMIT University, University of South Australia and Curtin University.

 

 

 

Source

I took on Hizb ut-Tahrir. And I won

In a separate event at the University of Western Sydney in May last year, organised by the Muslim Students’ Association, women were consigned to the back of the room.
In a separate event at the University of Western Sydney in May last year, organised by the Muslim Students’ Association, women were consigned to the back of the room.

Without a hint of irony the next 10 tweets called me a racist. An Islamophobic bigot, a liar and a whore.

It was a swarm.

Hizb ut-Tahrir fans were enraged over an opinion piece I wrote for The Daily Telegraph in 2014 that shamed the Islamist group for sending women to the back of the room at their public lecture on the war in Syria.

I wrote that it was as terrible as Mississippi blacks being sent to the back of the bus in segregated America. And it is.

People should be judged for their character, intelligence, ideas and abilities — not their skin colour or gender.

On Friday, the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal ruled the event’s organisers broke the law when they gave me no choice but to sit at the back section of the room or leave.

The Tribunal has ordered them to make sure that everyone in their organisation understands that gender segregation is not compulsory.

They have to put up signs at their venues and in all published promotional material to make this clear.

Islamists argue that gender segregation is “separate but equal”, and voluntary — a free religious choice.

But secular Muslims exposed this idea as false. Lejla Kuric, a former Bosnian refugee, is among those who have pointed out that women are subject to social coercion if they step out of line in the West — and has written about how in countries where gender segregation is enforced women are severely held back in every aspect of life.

WOMEN’S RIGHTS OVERLOOKED IN THE NAME OF RACIAL ‘TOLERANCE’

Alison Bevege was determined that Hizb ut-Tahrir
Alison Bevege was determined that Hizb ut-Tahrir would not get away with discrimination. (Pic: News Corp)

In their Draft Constitution of the Khilafa State, Hizb ut-Tahrir state that they want full Sharia, including gender segregation under a Caliphate. By imposing it at their events they are normalising it.

But the Tribunal drew a line on Friday: the rule of secular law trumps the demands of the religious in the public square.

It was a long road from October 2014 when I was first directed to the back of the room.

After filing the original complaint with the Anti-Discrimination Board there was a long stretch of email mediation with Ismail al-Wahwah on behalf of the group.

I wanted a public apology, a guarantee they would not impose it on the unwilling and for them to donate to charity.

But the dispute dragged on.

In May 2015 it landed before the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal and I asked for the maximum compensation for charity — $100,000.

I obtained an immensely helpful hour of free legal advice at Kings Cross’s Inner City Legal Centre, plus another two at Kingsford Legal Centre, and researched the law online at the Austlii website.

But disaster struck.

 Hizb ut-Tahrir is not a registered organisation. They keep their leadership secret. The public face of Hizb ut-Tahrir is only “media spokesmen”. There is no legal entity to sue.

After much effort, the Tribunal gave leave to join the five “media spokesmen” to the complaint along with the association that rents the rooms they use, Public Forums Incorporated.

There were then seven respondents — and I had no addresses to send notification of the case to.

Without successfully serving documents on at least one of them, every time, it would die.

After discovering Seven News reporter Bryan Seymour had previously written about Hizb ut-Tahrir I asked him if he had any addresses. He did not — but he covered my story and stood by me every step of the way. He was always fair, even when I was called a bigot by my detractors.

The Tribunal summonsed the addresses of the top five leaders from NSW Police and the Roads and Maritime Service so I could serve papers, and the photocopying began.

Submissions of more than a hundred pages had to be copied four times for the Tribunal, one for each of the seven respondents, one for me, plus a couple of spares. It took hours — days, every time.

I posted them and they all came back: “Return to sender”.

I had to hire process servers to chase them around town.

Bankstown Sheriffs Office served Ismail al-Wahwah a couple of times. Another process server managed to find Wassim Doureihi and Ismail al-Wahwah at the KCA Centre with a group.

At one point, I posted a notification in the comments section of the Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia Facebook page. It was deleted and they fixed it so I could never do that again.

I scanned the documents and emailed, Facebooked and tweeted notifications. I stuck letters to the door of their room at the KCA Centre and on the Public Forums Incorporated mailbox.

I tried to serve directly to Uthman Badar’s address once but his mother said he had gone to Pakistan indefinitely.

Hamza Qureshi indicated on Facebook that he would be at a university talk on Orientalism — so I took my paperwork there, only to be humiliated by the MC who pointed me out to the room and announced I was a racist while lecturer Yassir Morsi smirked beside him. I did not even get to serve the documents.

Their supporters taunted me on Twitter and on Facebook saying I had no legal entity to sue.

But the Tribunal ruled that Hizb ut-Tahrir is an unincorporated association that broke the law and Ismail al-Wahwah is legally responsible for their discrimination.

No money was awarded but I don’t care about that. It is the principle that counts. It might seem trivial to those of us living in a land used to freedom, but if we don’t defend the rule of secular law, it will be eroded.

The best part is that brave progressive and secular Muslims such as Maajid Nawaz and the Muslim Reform Movement tweeted their support and are celebrating the win. For that I am deeply grateful.

We stand together in this fight.

 

 

 

There has to be a will to bring us together – Andrew Bolt

THINK AGAIN – An Interview with Andrew Bolt. An agnostic who publically defends the Christian faith and believes Islam needs reform

Calvary Christian Church

  • Q & A bias against Christians
  • Media treats Christian church different to Muslims
  • excessive courtesy to Islam
  • 5 journalist subjected to threat to their lives here in Australia
  • I see the link between the chritian faith and the freedoms i enjoy, its no coincidence that the freer societies in the world are almost universally Christian.
  • I think Humility is what is missing
  • You are living on the fat of Christianity
  • Foreign Minister Julia Bishop described radical Islam as a greater threat to world peace than communism was during the height of cold war
  • as the twig is bent, so grows the tree. Jesus very different to Muhammod
  • Julia Bishop said to truly defeat Islamic state we need to challenge and repudiate its idealogy
  • Islam and Ideology –  an artificial distinction. need to say reform “What” The “What” is the Koran
  • The Church should be very explicit about its teachings.