Author Topic: Senate Bill Would Fund ‘Parent Replacement Centers’ For 5 More Years (CNSNews.com)  (Read 877 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rangerrebew

  • Guest
Senate Bill Would Fund ‘Parent Replacement Centers’ For 5 More Years

(CNSNews.com) –  A Senate-passed education bill would extend an existing federal program [1] that funds “full service community schools” for another five years.

Such schools provide comprehensive year-round, around-the-clock social services to students and their families, but critics refer to them as “parent replacement centers.”

The Full-Service Community Schools Act of 2015 (S. 1787 [2]) introduced by Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) was added on as an amendment to the Senate reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act [3] called the Every Child Achieves Act of 2015 (S.1177 [4]).

The reauthorization easily cleared the Senate on an 81-to-17 [5] vote on July 16.

A congressional conference will reconcile the Senate bill with the House's Student Success Act [6] (H.R.5), which passed July 8 on a 218-to-213 party-line vote [7]. However, the House reauthorization of NCLB does not contain funding for full-service community schools.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Full Service Community Schools Program has awarded $55.2 million [8] to various applicants since FY 2008, with preference given to groups that operate in the White House’s designated Promise Zones [9].

The department filed a notice [10] in the Federal Register on May 6 soliciting applications for the program, which will be paid for by The Fund for the Improvement of Education (FIE).

Applicants, defined as “consortia consisting of a local educational agency and one or more community-based organizations,” can request up to $500,000 for each of five years, for a maximum of $2.5 million. So far this year, the department has awarded 12 grants totaling $5.2 million [11].

According to the Coalition for Community Schools [12], there are an estimated 5,000 full service community schools currently in operation in the U.S. “Using public schools as hubs, community schools bring together many partners to offer a range of supports and opportunities to children, youth, families and communities,” the group’s website states.

Brown’s amendment would extend funding for five years for schools that participate “in a community-based effort to coordinate and integrate educational, developmental, family, health, and other comprehensive services through community-based organizations and public and private partnerships.”

According to his bill, such schools must agree to provide “not less than 3 qualified services …and not less than 2 additional qualified services” to students both before and after school, on the weekends and during the summer “to meet the holistic needs of children”.

The type of services that would be provided are based on a “needs assessment that identifies the academic, physical, social, emotional, health, mental health, and other needs of students, families, and community residents.”

They include: “early childhood education…remedial education… enrichment activities…nurse home visitation services…teacher home visiting…summer or after-school enrichment…mentoring and other youth development programs…child care services…nutrition services…primary health and dental care… mental health counseling…and parenting education” among others.

Each school would have a full-time staff of “specialized support personnel” for “planning, coordination, management, and oversight of qualified services at each school to be served, including the role of the school principal, partner entities, parents, and members of the community.”

The bill would also provide grant money to states for five years to help them develop and evaluate more “full-service community schools.”

“Community schools have a proven track record of connecting students and their families to critical services. This amendment will help expand this model so more students can access essential resources like medical care and after-school care,” Brown said in a statement [13]. “This will ensure that students can focus their attention on succeeding in school.”

But some education experts are warning about the danger of turning public schools into “hubs” for what they say is not education, but social engineering.

The idea of using public schools to create community “hubs” is “modeled after the Soviet system” and is “part of Hillary Clinton’s ‘It Takes A Village to Raise a Child’ philosophy," noted Charlotte Iserbyt, a former senior policy advisor at the U.S. Department of Education and author of Deliberate Dumbing Down of America [14].

“This is basically the government schools taking over the duties of families. It’s very scary,” agreed Dr. Karen Effrem, president of Education Liberty Watch [15].

“At least the House was strong and wise enough not to allow such an amendment,” which she says “turns schools into a second or even first home for children and reduces parents to ‘breeders and feeders’.

 “I have been fighting against both the data-mining of students and the psychological profiling of students for many years,” Effrem told CNSNews.com. “This program is horrible because it continues the great expansion of federal psychological profiling of children, and it also will result in a ton of data-mining of students and their families about very non-academic subjects.

“It will not only run your life, but control what your kids are taught,” she said. “A big part of it is the mental health screenings of children and families that really opens the door for a tyrannical imposition of thought and conscience norms by the government. 

“The National Center for Education Statistics and the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Education are already collecting data on bullying incidents that have to do with perceived gender identity and sexual orientation. And there are already violence prevention programs that talk about kids as potentially violent or mentally unstable if they make statements about LGBT students or religion,” Effrem pointed out.

“Of course, this is incredibly subjective and open to all sorts of political correctness. Who’s going to define what the norms are?” she asked.
Source URL: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/senate-bill-would-fund-parent-replacement-centers-5-more-years

(CNSNews.com) –  A Senate-passed education bill would extend an existing federal program [1] that funds “full service community schools” for another five years.

Such schools provide comprehensive year-round, around-the-clock social services to students and their families, but critics refer to them as “parent replacement centers.”

The Full-Service Community Schools Act of 2015 (S. 1787 [2]) introduced by Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-OH) was added on as an amendment to the Senate reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act [3] called the Every Child Achieves Act of 2015 (S.1177 [4]).

The reauthorization easily cleared the Senate on an 81-to-17 [5] vote on July 16.

A congressional conference will reconcile the Senate bill with the House's Student Success Act [6] (H.R.5), which passed July 8 on a 218-to-213 party-line vote [7]. However, the House reauthorization of NCLB does not contain funding for full-service community schools.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Full Service Community Schools Program has awarded $55.2 million [8] to various applicants since FY 2008, with preference given to groups that operate in the White House’s designated Promise Zones [9].

The department filed a notice [10] in the Federal Register on May 6 soliciting applications for the program, which will be paid for by The Fund for the Improvement of Education (FIE).

Applicants, defined as “consortia consisting of a local educational agency and one or more community-based organizations,” can request up to $500,000 for each of five years, for a maximum of $2.5 million. So far this year, the department has awarded 12 grants totaling $5.2 million [11].

According to the Coalition for Community Schools [12], there are an estimated 5,000 full service community schools currently in operation in the U.S. “Using public schools as hubs, community schools bring together many partners to offer a range of supports and opportunities to children, youth, families and communities,” the group’s website states.

Brown’s amendment would extend funding for five years for schools that participate “in a community-based effort to coordinate and integrate educational, developmental, family, health, and other comprehensive services through community-based organizations and public and private partnerships.”

According to his bill, such schools must agree to provide “not less than 3 qualified services …and not less than 2 additional qualified services” to students both before and after school, on the weekends and during the summer “to meet the holistic needs of children”.

The type of services that would be provided are based on a “needs assessment that identifies the academic, physical, social, emotional, health, mental health, and other needs of students, families, and community residents.”

They include: “early childhood education…remedial education… enrichment activities…nurse home visitation services…teacher home visiting…summer or after-school enrichment…mentoring and other youth development programs…child care services…nutrition services…primary health and dental care… mental health counseling…and parenting education” among others.

Each school would have a full-time staff of “specialized support personnel” for “planning, coordination, management, and oversight of qualified services at each school to be served, including the role of the school principal, partner entities, parents, and members of the community.”

The bill would also provide grant money to states for five years to help them develop and evaluate more “full-service community schools.”

“Community schools have a proven track record of connecting students and their families to critical services. This amendment will help expand this model so more students can access essential resources like medical care and after-school care,” Brown said in a statement [13]. “This will ensure that students can focus their attention on succeeding in school.”

But some education experts are warning about the danger of turning public schools into “hubs” for what they say is not education, but social engineering.

The idea of using public schools to create community “hubs” is “modeled after the Soviet system” and is “part of Hillary Clinton’s ‘It Takes A Village to Raise a Child’ philosophy," noted Charlotte Iserbyt, a former senior policy advisor at the U.S. Department of Education and author of Deliberate Dumbing Down of America [14].

“This is basically the government schools taking over the duties of families. It’s very scary,” agreed Dr. Karen Effrem, president of Education Liberty Watch [15].

“At least the House was strong and wise enough not to allow such an amendment,” which she says “turns schools into a second or even first home for children and reduces parents to ‘breeders and feeders’.

 “I have been fighting against both the data-mining of students and the psychological profiling of students for many years,” Effrem told CNSNews.com. “This program is horrible because it continues the great expansion of federal psychological profiling of children, and it also will result in a ton of data-mining of students and their families about very non-academic subjects.

“It will not only run your life, but control what your kids are taught,” she said. “A big part of it is the mental health screenings of children and families that really opens the door for a tyrannical imposition of thought and conscience norms by the government. 

“The National Center for Education Statistics and the Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Education are already collecting data on bullying incidents that have to do with perceived gender identity and sexual orientation. And there are already violence prevention programs that talk about kids as potentially violent or mentally unstable if they make statements about LGBT students or religion,” Effrem pointed out.

“Of course, this is incredibly subjective and open to all sorts of political correctness. Who’s going to define what the norms are?” she asked.
Source URL: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/senate-bill-would-fund-parent-replacement-centers-5-more-years
« Last Edit: August 24, 2015, 03:42:49 pm by rangerrebew »

rangerrebew

  • Guest
Nazi Education

written by Trueman C N
 

Education played a very important part in Nazi Germany in trying to cultivate a loyal following for Hitler and the Nazis. The Nazis were aware that education would create loyal Nazis by the time they reached adulthood. TheHitler Youth had been created for post-school activities and schools were to play a critical part in developing a loyal following for Hitler – indoctrination and the use of propaganda were to be a common practice in Nazi schools and the education system.

Enforcing a Nazi curriculum on schools depended on the teachers delivering it. All teachers had to be vetted by local Nazi officials. Any teacher considered disloyal was sacked. Many attended classes during school holidays in which the Nazi curriculum was spelled out and 97% of all teachers joined the Nazi Teachers’ Association. All teachers had to be careful about what they said as children were encouraged to inform the authorities if a teacher said something that did not fit in with the Nazi’s curriculum for schools.

Subjects underwent a major change in schools. Some of the most affected were History and Biology.

History was based on the glory of Germany – a nationalistic approach was compulsory. The German defeat in 1918 was explained as the work of Jewish and Marxist spies who had weakened the system from within; theTreaty of Versailles was the work of nations jealous of Germany’s might and power; the hyperinflation of 1923 was the work of Jewish saboteurs; the national resurgence which started under the leadership of Hitler etc.

Biology became a study of the different races to ‘prove’ that the Nazi belief in racial superiority was a sound belief. “Racial Instruction” started as the age of 6. Hitler himself had decreed that “no boy or girl should leave school without complete knowledge of the necessity and meaning of blood purity.” Pupils were taught about the problems of heredity. Older pupils were taught about the importance of selecting the right “mate” when marrying and producing children. The problems of inter-racial marriage were taught with an explanation that such marriages could only lead to a decline in racial purity.

Geography taught pupils about the land Germany had taken away from her in 1919 and the need for Germany to have living space – lebensraum.

Science had a military-slant to it. The curriculum required that the principles of shooting be studied; military aviation science; bridge building and the impact of poisonous gasses.

Girls had a different curriculum in some regards as they studied domestic science and eugenics – both of which were to prepare young girls to be the prefect mother and wife. In Eugenics, girls were taught about the characteristics to look out for in a perfect husband and father.

Indoctrination became rampant in all subjects. At every opportunity, teachers were expected to attack the life style of the Jews. Exam questions even contained blunt reference to the government’s anti-Semitic stance:

“A bomber aircraft on take-off carries 12 dozen bombs, each weighing 10 kilos. The aircraft takes off for Warsaw the international centre for Jewry. It bombs the town. On take-off with all bombs on board and a fuel tank containing 100 kilos of fuel, the aircraft weighed about 8 tons. When it returns from the crusade, there are still 230 kilos left. What is the weight of the aircraft when empty ?”

 

Other questions would also include areas the government wanted taught by teachers in the nation’s search for a master race:

“To keep a mentally ill person costs approximately 4 marks a day. There are 300,000 mentally ill people in care. How much do these people cost to keep in total? How many marriage loans of 1000 marks could be granted with this money?”

 

 PE became a very important part of the curriculum. Hitler had stated that he wanted boys who could suffer pain……….“a young German must be as swift as a greyhound, as tough as leather, and as hard as Krupp’s steel.” PE took up 15% of a school’s weekly timetable. Boxing became compulsory for boys. Those who failed fitness tests could be expelled from their schools – and face humiliation from those who had passed such tests.

In 1937, pupils were give the choice of studying Religious Instructions or not.

For boys considered special, different school were created. Those who were physically fitter and stronger than the rest went to Adolf Hitler Schools where they were taught to be the future leaders of Germany. Six years of tough physical training took place and when the pupils from these schools left aged 18, they went to the army or to university. The very best pupils went to Order Castles. These were schools which took pupils to the limits of physical endurance. War games used live ammunition and pupils were killed at these schools. Those who graduated from the Order Castles could expect to attain a high position in the army or the SS.

From 1935 on, after the Nuremburg Laws, Jewish school children were not allowed to attend schools. The Nazi government claimed that a German pupil sitting next to a Jew could become contaminated by the experience.

The sole purpose of this educational structure was to create a future generation that was blindly loyal to Hitler and the Nazis.

http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/nazi-germany/nazi-education/
« Last Edit: August 24, 2015, 03:46:10 pm by rangerrebew »