PARENTS ARE FIGHTING THE WRONG BATTLE!!!!!!!!!!
The No. 1 problem facing parents/teachers going up against Communist Core is: the United States Department of Education which is tied into the international UNESCO, OECD, etc.
Parents will never bring their public or private schools back to local control and academics as long as the United States Department of Education is NOT abolished…and that means all its labs and centers as well.
The source of every rotten bit of Communist Core can be traced back to the U.S. Department of Education, its labs, centers and UNESCO.
Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. If they do tell you otherwise, they are either uninformed or lying.
Instead of running all over the country, funded by Heritage Foundation and other neocon groups, getting legislation passed to kill Communist Core, parents should be raising big bucks to put ads in every state newspaper, The Wall Street Journal, all major city newspapers DEMANDING THAT THE U.S. DEPT. OF EDUCATION BE ABOLISHED.
Remember how Reagan used that promise to get elected President in 1979?
Why? Because the Republicans at that time, in late seventies, knew Americans would vote for him if he promised to get rid of the Department.
I recall at the time that a high percentage of public school teachers supported Reagan for that very reason.
Sure would be nice if parents understood what I am trying to say.”
“We education researchers, some of whom are involved in the Exposing the Global Road to Ruin through Education disc sets raised $5000 in 1985 to put a full page ad in The Washington Times to expose these treasonous agreements which President Ronald Reagan. We also raised $5000 to hold a press conference at the National Press Club to expose these agreements. The disc sets, and one cd (disc #8) which includes superb written submissions, are FREE to view at deliberatedumbingdown.com and at Charlotte Iserbyt You Tube Channel.
Our people had better read every word of these agreements, especially the sections on educational exchanges, curriculum development, and technology! They should, at the same time, read “Soviets in the Classroom…America’s Latest education Fad”, 1989, which covers not only these agreements, but the Carnegie Corporation’s Agreement (President David Hamburg) with the Soviet Academy of Science which included development of computer courseware in critical thinking for early elementary school children. For the Marxist change agents implementing Communist Core and other diabolical programs, Critical Thinking is Marxist Thinking. Lenin, himself, defined “thinking” as being NOT absolute, but evolving. Doesn’t that sound familiar?
Is it any wonder it was Reagan who arranged for public/private (corporate fascist) partnerships necessary for implementing the Soviet polytech (school to work) system necessary for planned economy, going in right now? Exactly what Carnegie Corporation called for in 1934 in Conclusions and Recommendations for the Social Studies?
Is it any wonder he did not fulfill his promise to abolish the U.S. Dept. of Education?
People should focus, focus, focus. There is one and only one action which will take care of the problem facing our nation today in education:
THE UNITED STATES MUST ABOLISH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION WHICH IS IN BED WITH ALL EDUCATION MINISTRIES AROUND THE WORLD AND TAKES IT ORDERS FROM UNESCO. HOW MANY PEOPLE REALIZE THAT IN 1970 NINETEEN OF UNESCO’S EDUCATION ADVISORS, OUT OF TWENTY, CAME FROM COMMUNIST COUNTRIES?
And our people pick away at Communist Core, thinking it is something new, not going after the ever-increasing international control being carried out by the U.S. Dept. of Education.
THE GENERAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS, click here.
Soviets In The Classroom: America’s Latest Education Fad, click here.
Here are some excerpts from “Soviets in the Classroom…”
1. Cambridge-based Educators for Social Responsibility (ESR) project, “Educating for New Ways of Thinking: An American-Soviet Institute.” Two such institute sessions have been held (one in Leningrad the summer of 1989) at which “Soviet and American educators examined classroom theory and practice in critical thinking about social and political issues and worked on recommendations and resources for improving the ways we teach about each other’s country, and on A Source-Book for New Ways of Thinking in Education: A U.S.-Soviet Guide for use by teachers and students in both countries.”
“Critical thinking” is the latest fad to hit our children’s classrooms. N. Landa’s Lenin: On Educating Youth, published by the Soviet state-controlled Novosti Press, quotes Lenin on “thinking” as follows:
To pose a real question means to define a problem which demands a new approach and new research…. Sometimes accepted truth no longer answers as a solution for a serious and pressing problem. The school should cultivate in pupils the ability to perceive scientifically evolved truths as stages along the endless road of cognition—not as something stationary and set.
More recently, an article in Education Week (4–9–86) entitled “Are Teachers Ready to Teach Pupils to Think?” laments the fact that graduating college seniors show little evolution of alternative views on any issue, tending to treat all opinions as equally good, tending to hold opinions based largely on whims or unsubstantiated beliefs, and hesitating to take stands based on evidence and reason. Summing up a decade of research in the 1960’s, O.J. Harvey laments that very high percentages… [of educators] “operated in cognitive styles grounded in absolute assumptions—viewing reality in terms of good/bad, right/wrong, and either/or, while attributing goodness and truth to wise and all-knowing authorities.”
One doesn’t have to have a Ph.D. to accurately predict what U.S.-Soviet jointly developed critical thinking curricula will look like. Do American parents want their children exposed to this type of education, especially when it will also be on computer where they can’t get their hands on it?
2. The Carnegie Corporation’s exchange agreement with the Soviet Academy of Sciences has resulted in “joint research on the application of computers in early elementary education, focusing especially on the teaching of higher level skills and complex subjects to younger children.” (“Higher level skills” is often a euphemism for “critical thinking skills,” or values, attitudes, etc.) Carnegie’s 1988 one-year, $250,000 grant is funding implementation of this program, coordinated on the American side by Michael Cole, Director of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition at the University of California, San Diego.
3. The American-Soviet Textbook Study Project began in 1977, was suspended in 1979 when Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan, and resumed in 1985 under the Geneva Agreement. At a conference held in Racine, Wisconsin in November 1987, the U.S. representatives acquiesced to the Soviet insistence that American textbooks should present a more “balanced” (i.e., friendly) discussion of Lenin and should give the Russians more “credit” for their role in World War II. A.M. Rosenthal of the New York Times said in a December 8, 1987 editorial that American educators solemnly discuss with Soviet educators the mutual need for textbook revision, just as if the state did not censor every single book published in the Soviet Union and the Russians could write as they pleased. That is comedy, if you like it real black.
4. Scholars from the American Council of Learned Societies and the Ministry of Education of the Soviet Union met in the United States in 1986 and agreed to establish a Commission on Education that will be responsible for joint scholarly relations in pedagogy and related fields between the United States and the Soviet Union. Some major joint U.S.-Soviet project themes are: Methods of Teaching and Learning School Science and Math Subjects Using Computers; Theory of Teaching and Learning; Psychological and Pedagogical Problems of Teaching in the Development of Pre-School and School-age Children, and Problems of Teaching Children with Special Needs.
5. Scholars from the American Council of Learned Societies and the Ministry of Education of the Soviet Union met in the United States in 1986 and agreed to establish a Commission on Education that will be responsible for joint scholarly relations in pedagogy and related fields between the United States and the Soviet Union.
Some major joint U.S.-Soviet project themes are: Methods of Teaching and Learning School Science and Math Subjects Using Computers; Theory of Teaching and Learning; Psychological and Pedagogical Problems of Teaching in the Development of Pre-School and School-age Children, and Problems of Teaching Children with Special Needs.
6. The Copen Foundation/New York State Education Department/Soviet Academy of Sciences agreement “links students, teachers, administrators in U.S. and Soviet schools by computer and video-telephone lines.” Mr. Copen declared Soviet officials are especially interested in studying the effects of telecommunications on intercultural understanding, teaching methods, and learning outcomes, and that the Soviets have assigned five scientists to monitor the project.
7. This agreement should be challenged on constitutional grounds since Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution says, “No State shall, without the consent of Congress,… enter into any agreement or compact with another State, or with a foreign power.
Sure would be nice if parents understood what I am trying to say.”
Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt
Former Senior Policy Advisor
U.S. Department of Education
To order the updated abridged 2011 version of “the deliberate dumbing down of america”, it is available from 3D Research at Amazon.com.
To view all of Charlotte’s posts – in the search engine type in “Charlotte Iserbyt”.