Education for Sustainable Development in Washington State
June 20, 2012
Education for Sustainable Development
in Washington State
June 2012
The United Nations has declared the years 2005 to 2014 to be the decade for Education for Sustainable Development.
According to the UN Bruntland Commission: “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
In reality, it is a philosophy of redistributing wealth and destroying freedom.
Creating Global Citizens
It’s actually official. Washington State law states that the goal of basic education is to produce global citizens. The law reads:
“A basic education is an evolving program of instruction that is intended to provide students with the opportunity to become responsible and respectful global citizens“1 (emphasis added)
Many school districts are using We the People:The Citizen and the Constitution produced by the Center for Civic Education and funded by the federal Department of Education. Lesson 37 discusses how the definition of American citizenship might change, implying that America must change to accommodate diverse immigrants rather supporting the expectation that immigrants learn and embrace the American ideals of the Founders. The study question on page 203 asks, “What advantages might be offered by world citizenship? What disadvantages? Do you think that world citizenship will be possible in your lifetime?”
On page 247 is the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights alongside our country’s founding documents. The National Council for the Social Studies has focused the curriculum on notions like diversity, “common good” (reduced individual rights), and social justice.2
The concept of US sovereignty and the American ideals of life, liberty, and property are anathema to beliefs in global citzenship, equal outcomes, social justice, and environmentalism and thus must be “evolved” out of the curriculum.
School-to-Work
Children are now called “human resources”, and education has been redefined as career training. Education was originally meant to equip children with basic academic skills. Now the customers of education are the businesses; students are to be processed for a planned workforce in a planned economy.
As envisioned by NCEE president Marc Tucker in his “Dear Hillary” letter and in the resulting Dept.of Labor’s SCANS report “Learning a Living,”3 public high schools and even some middle schools now put their students into government-defined career tracks. Other academic courses and electives must be dropped to make room in the schedule.
Sustainable development proponents fear that too affluent a society will cause too much consumption and expansion—for example, too many engineers will result in more factories, bridges, dams, cars, and high-tech products all of which, they feel, harm the environment. They envision a future of global workers with equal living standards and wage-earning, not entrepreneurial, jobs. No wonder they have emphasized group-work, de-emphasized individual work, and dumbed down education.
Common Core State Standards
Instead of continuing to allow the sovereign states to set their own standards and assessments, the current federal administration is promoting (unconstitutional) national standards and assessments. These have been written by unelected, unaccountable non-governmental organizations and incorporate “sustainable development” views.
“Sustainability” Curriculum
The Washington State K-12 Integrated Environmental and Sustainability Education Learning Standards were issued in September 2009 and align with national and federal guidelines.4These guidelines show how the sustainable development worldview must be integrated into social studies and science at all grade levels and into other subjects if possible. Remember that federal Department of Education guidelines align with UNESCO’s.5
There are also strong spiritual overtones of earth-reverence in sustainability education. Some Washington schools teach the UN Earth Charter which describes what peoples’ attitudes toward the earth should be. The UN Earth Charter is kept in an “Ark of Hope”, a chest built to resemble the Ark of the Covenant of the Bible, but carved with the New Age symbols of earth, air, fire, and water.6 In some Washington schools children say the Pledge of Allegiance to the Earth.
Early Learning
Washington State legislators, following federal guidelines, are trying to implement a system of universal preschool (House Bill 2448, attempted in 2012.) If passed, the bill would, as a side-effect, weaken private and religious preschools. The state’s early learning plan is to eventually supervise the raising of all children from birth. These children would also be assessed and their personal data entered into the data base.
Data Collection
Little publicized is the data-collection component of the education agenda.
Children will be assessed at every grade, including kindergarten and possibly in preschool in the future. Since the curriculum no longer emphasizes facts and information, these will be assessments of attitudes and behavior. Results will be stored in a lifelong, longitudinal database.7
Meanwhile, privacy laws are being gutted so information can be shared by more bureaucrats without parental notification or permission.8 The government will have a lifelong dossier on every person.
Not a Solution
Charter Schools – Recent charter bills have required charter schools to follow the same government education standards as public schools. Worse yet, their governance system of appointed boards would put them beyond the reach of tax-payers—no accountability to voters and taxation without representation.
Enhanced Statewide Teacher Evaluations – Non-academic criteria will be used. A good teacher would be one who taught the government’s worldview well, not one who taught facts and information. In addition, the ability of the local districts to manage their own staff would be further eroded.
Solutions
Abolish the unconstitutional federal Department of Education. Reinstate true local control, accountability, and responsiveness to taxpayers. Return to a knowledge-based curriculum. Intact families are a key part of helping children acquire strong academic skills. Family-friendly policies would also help and would be more effective than trendy and costly education programs.
Evaluating Issues
CURE uses the following criteria for screening and evaluating issues. A positive response to all questions is required to elicit our support.
- Are parental rights protected?
- Is it a fiscally responsible use of taxpayer funds, and is there direct accountability to the taxpayers?
- Has the program or teaching technique been validated by scientific research to show improvement in academics?
- Is true local control promoted?
- Is the program or bill consistent
with both the US and Washington State Constitutions?
We invite you to use these evaluation criteria to analyze local, state, and national policies for yourselves. Don’t buy into a program just because “experts” are promoting it.
* * * * * * * *
1 Revised Code of Washington, 28A.150.210
2 Curriculum Standards for Social Studies, National Council for the Social Studies, 1994, pg. 5.
3 “NCEE” is the “National Center for Education and the Economy”. The SCANS report is at http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/lal/ . “SCANS” is “Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills”.
4 (http://www.k12.wa.us/EnvironmentSustainability/pubdocs/ESEStandards.pdf)
5 UNESCO and Sustainble Development, http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001393/139369e.pdf , pg 4-5
7Learning a Living, SCANS report http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/lal/ , pg 65
8 http://yedies.blogspot.com/2011/06/ferpa-rules-changed-how-safe-is-your.html and http://grumpyelder.com/?p=932
* * * * * * * *
Tags: Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, global
Education for Sustainable Development
in Washington State
June 2012
The United Nations has declared the years 2005 to 2014 to be the decade for Education for Sustainable Development.
According to the UN Bruntland Commission: “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
In reality, it is a philosophy of redistributing wealth and destroying freedom.
Creating Global Citizens
It’s actually official. Washington State law states that the goal of basic education is to produce global citizens. The law reads:
“A basic education is an evolving program of instruction that is intended to provide students with the opportunity to become responsible and respectful global citizens“1 (emphasis added)
Many school districts are using We the People:The Citizen and the Constitution produced by the Center for Civic Education and funded by the federal Department of Education. Lesson 37 discusses how the definition of American citizenship might change, implying that America must change to accommodate diverse immigrants rather supporting the expectation that immigrants learn and embrace the American ideals of the Founders. The study question on page 203 asks, “What advantages might be offered by world citizenship? What disadvantages? Do you think that world citizenship will be possible in your lifetime?”
On page 247 is the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights alongside our country’s founding documents. The National Council for the Social Studies has focused the curriculum on notions like diversity, “common good” (reduced individual rights), and social justice.2
The concept of US sovereignty and the American ideals of life, liberty, and property are anathema to beliefs in global citzenship, equal outcomes, social justice, and environmentalism and thus must be “evolved” out of the curriculum.
School-to-Work
Children are now called “human resources”, and education has been redefined as career training. Education was originally meant to equip children with basic academic skills. Now the customers of education are the businesses; students are to be processed for a planned workforce in a planned economy.
As envisioned by NCEE president Marc Tucker in his “Dear Hillary” letter and in the resulting Dept.of Labor’s SCANS report “Learning a Living,”3 public high schools and even some middle schools now put their students into government-defined career tracks. Other academic courses and electives must be dropped to make room in the schedule.
Sustainable development proponents fear that too affluent a society will cause too much consumption and expansion—for example, too many engineers will result in more factories, bridges, dams, cars, and high-tech products all of which, they feel, harm the environment. They envision a future of global workers with equal living standards and wage-earning, not entrepreneurial, jobs. No wonder they have emphasized group-work, de-emphasized individual work, and dumbed down education.
Common Core State Standards
Instead of continuing to allow the sovereign states to set their own standards and assessments, the current federal administration is promoting (unconstitutional) national standards and assessments. These have been written by unelected, unaccountable non-governmental organizations and incorporate “sustainable development” views.
“Sustainability” Curriculum
The Washington State K-12 Integrated Environmental and Sustainability Education Learning Standards were issued in September 2009 and align with national and federal guidelines.4These guidelines show how the sustainable development worldview must be integrated into social studies and science at all grade levels and into other subjects if possible. Remember that federal Department of Education guidelines align with UNESCO’s.5
There are also strong spiritual overtones of earth-reverence in sustainability education. Some Washington schools teach the UN Earth Charter which describes what peoples’ attitudes toward the earth should be. The UN Earth Charter is kept in an “Ark of Hope”, a chest built to resemble the Ark of the Covenant of the Bible, but carved with the New Age symbols of earth, air, fire, and water.6 In some Washington schools children say the Pledge of Allegiance to the Earth.
Early Learning
Washington State legislators, following federal guidelines, are trying to implement a system of universal preschool (House Bill 2448, attempted in 2012.) If passed, the bill would, as a side-effect, weaken private and religious preschools. The state’s early learning plan is to eventually supervise the raising of all children from birth. These children would also be assessed and their personal data entered into the data base.
Data Collection
Little publicized is the data-collection component of the education agenda.
Children will be assessed at every grade, including kindergarten and possibly in preschool in the future. Since the curriculum no longer emphasizes facts and information, these will be assessments of attitudes and behavior. Results will be stored in a lifelong, longitudinal database.7
Meanwhile, privacy laws are being gutted so information can be shared by more bureaucrats without parental notification or permission.8 The government will have a lifelong dossier on every person.
Not a Solution
Charter Schools – Recent charter bills have required charter schools to follow the same government education standards as public schools. Worse yet, their governance system of appointed boards would put them beyond the reach of tax-payers—no accountability to voters and taxation without representation.
Enhanced Statewide Teacher Evaluations – Non-academic criteria will be used. A good teacher would be one who taught the government’s worldview well, not one who taught facts and information. In addition, the ability of the local districts to manage their own staff would be further eroded.
Solutions
Abolish the unconstitutional federal Department of Education. Reinstate true local control, accountability, and responsiveness to taxpayers. Return to a knowledge-based curriculum. Intact families are a key part of helping children acquire strong academic skills. Family-friendly policies would also help and would be more effective than trendy and costly education programs.
Evaluating Issues
CURE uses the following criteria for screening and evaluating issues. A positive response to all questions is required to elicit our support.
- Are parental rights protected?
- Is it a fiscally responsible use of taxpayer funds, and is there direct accountability to the taxpayers?
- Has the program or teaching technique been validated by scientific research to show improvement in academics?
- Is true local control promoted?
- Is the program or bill consistent
with both the US and Washington State Constitutions?
We invite you to use these evaluation criteria to analyze local, state, and national policies for yourselves. Don’t buy into a program just because “experts” are promoting it.
* * * * * * * *
1 Revised Code of Washington, 28A.150.210
2 Curriculum Standards for Social Studies, National Council for the Social Studies, 1994, pg. 5.
3 “NCEE” is the “National Center for Education and the Economy”. The SCANS report is at http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/lal/ . “SCANS” is “Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills”.
4 (http://www.k12.wa.us/EnvironmentSustainability/pubdocs/ESEStandards.pdf)
5 UNESCO and Sustainble Development, http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001393/139369e.pdf , pg 4-5
7Learning a Living, SCANS report http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/lal/ , pg 65
8 http://yedies.blogspot.com/2011/06/ferpa-rules-changed-how-safe-is-your.html and http://grumpyelder.com/?p=932
* * * * * * * *
Tags: Agenda 21, Sustainable Development, global