Via email;
Alberta Education Minister Dave Hancock has now tabled his “Education Act” in the Legislature. After its third reading in the fall, it will become the primary legislation that governs education in Alberta.
I just received it today. I’m only up to page 28 of 208 pages and have found an entire additional section not in the earlier School Act entitled “Diverse and Flexible Learning”. Compliance with the Alberta Human Rights Act is specifically named.
*16 *All courses or programs of study offered and instructional materials used in a school must reflect the diverse nature and heritage of society in Alberta, promote understanding and respect for others and honour and respect the *Canadian Charter of Rights* *and Freedoms *and the *Alberta Human Rights Act*.
Please keep in mind that the definition of “school” in this document also includes homeschool.
Link to the new Education Act is here.
Link to the currently used School Act.
So I should write a book called Mohammed Has Two Bombers and make alot of money selling it to Alberta school boards.
best comment all week
I want to see the sonsab1tches try to enforce this on home schoolers. I itch to join this battle, my Louisville Slugger is thirsty.
Bring it ON, monkeyboy.
Upon further consideration, and after shaking some of the berserker adrenaline off the ol’ keyboard, I have a thought.
This would be an EXCELLENT addition to a course on the nature, purpose and effects of government propaganda. Take the entire gamut of diversity crap you’re supposed to tell the kiddies and present it as part of a weekly “how to spot a Big Lie” lesson. Right after history and before shooting.
Start in kindergarten, go all the way through to grade 13. Forewarned is forearmed.
There just seems to be no end to the crap being forced down our throats.
Well, I hope they remember my pioneer ancestors who made the province what it is today vs. the “johnny-come-latelys”.
Diversity is not new for Alberta, but we assumed people would integrate and most did, very well. The first nations people should have been granted land vs. Treaty 7. Not too late for that.
And there I was under the impression that Alberta, at least nominally, had a democratically elected “conservative government”…..and was not a protectorate of the SEIU teachers unions and AVAAZ…..
This the sort of thing that makes the Wild Rose party wild….Whiskey Tango Foxtrot….
Well, Kate, when you stated your emailer mentioned home school, I became interested. However, I am not convinced that your emailer has it quite right.
The emailer did quote the section 16 correctly which is on page 30 but (s)he suggests that it is new. That is not entirely true as is evidenced by Section 3(1) found on page 20 of the existing legislation. It is Section 3(2) in the existing legislation that I cannot find in the proposed legislation that may concern some of your readers.
The existing:
Diversity in shared values
3(1) All education programs offered and instructional materials
used in schools must reflect the diverse nature and heritage of
society in Alberta, promote understanding and respect for others
and honour and respect the common values and beliefs of
Albertans.
(2) For greater certainty, education programs and instructional
materials referred to in subsection (1) must not promote or foster
doctrines of racial or ethnic superiority or persecution, religious
intolerance or persecution, social change through violent action or
disobedience of laws.
I restate the proposed for convenience:
Diversity and respect
16 All courses or programs of study offered and instructional
materials used in a school must reflect the diverse nature and
heritage of society in Alberta, promote understanding and respect
for others and honour and respect the Canadian Charter of Rights
and Freedoms and the Alberta Human Rights Act.
Although there are differences between the old section 3(1) and the proposed section 16, the similarities are evident. However, it appears as though Section 3(2) is being removed.
Brent, I think it’s the naming of the Alberta Human Rights Act that makes this a little more concerning.
If you read this old CBC article about the Red Deer hate crimes case, Darren Lund, the teacher who issued the complaint states he would like to see any awarded funds go to the Alberta Teachers Association’s diversity, equity and rights committee.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2007/11/30/boissoin-ruling.html
I’m no lawyer but doesn’t that sound like teachers will now be able to be professionally punished if they don’t teach to the AHRA?
And now that I think of it, it will mean that school board sanctioned homeschool supervisors will be obligated to turn parents in parents who are teaching topics that go against the AHRA.
I can’t find a section title named “Diverse and Flexible Learning” in the old School Act. Am I missing it? It is an ironic title to choose for naming the AHRA as its governance.
It all sounds like indoctrination rather than education to me.
I think what normally happens in cases like this is that the Act is written not by the elected minister but by the department bureaucrats according to their own agenda, and the minister, since he doesn’t really have any clear ideas of his own, goes along with it.
*
ah, yes… “diverse & flexible learning”… we already
have that here in ontario. at the university of toronto,
no less.
wonder what the pre-req is for “flogging 101”.
*
Oh noes! Teaching Da Kidz about Rights and Freedoms? Da horror!
I agree with your sarcasm Alex. Kids are being taught to do whatever the government says and to be intolerant of anyone who believes in human rights and freedoms.
Leslie:
I’ll try to address the issues you mention – in no particular order.
I can’t find a section title named “Diverse and Flexible Learning” in the old School Act. Am I missing it?
I can’t find a section named “Diverse and Flexible Learning” in either document; the only source that I can see is for that phrase is from the emailer. As I mentioned above there is a section 3 in the existing legislation called “Diversity in shared values” which has two parts to it (1) and (2). There is also a section 16 in the proposed legislation called “Diversity and respect”. If you examine the document for the existing legislation, you will also note the phrase “1999 c28 s3” under the section 3. I admit to speculating a little here, but this little addition suggests that section 3 was last modified sometime during 1999.
The differences between the existing section 3(1) (promote understanding and respect for others and honour and respect the common values and beliefs of Albertans.) and the proposed section 16 (promote understanding and respect for others and honour and respect the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Alberta Human Rights Act.) are not that great. Although there is an obvious difference, I suggest that the phrase “the common values and beliefs of Albertans” would be interpreted by any court to mean the common values and beliefs of Albertans as represented by the laws of Albertans/Canadians through their elected representatives. If anything, the new wording makes more obvious how a court would have ruled – should matters have ever reached a court – since at least 1999.
The problems in this matter are the Charter and the AHRA themselves. If the Charter and the Act could be changed (a tall order), then neither the existing nor the proposed Education Act would have any issues as far as the diversity sections are concerned. Until these are corrected, it should not surprise anyone that other legislation such as an Education Act must conform to these pieces of legislation – no matter how unpleasant that may be.
The issue of Lund vs Boissoin is an issue but the AHRT ruling was overturned by Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Wilson in 2009. Mr. Lund subsequently has appealed to an Alberta superior Court; I am not aware that that has been resolved. I had followed this case with some interest because I essentially agree with the message, but not the tone, that Stephen Boissoin stated in his 2002 letter: “the government schools should not be used as a tool for the normalizing of the idea of sexually immoral practices such as homosexuality, especially for impressionable young children”. Teachers, University of Calgary Education Professor Darren Lund, and others may disagree with Justice Wilson, but until his ruling is overturned, it will operate as a very large brake upon the abuse of authority by AHRC/T officials.
I’m no lawyer but doesn’t that sound like teachers will now be able to be professionally punished if they don’t teach to the AHRA?
I am not a lawyer either, but as I stated above, it looks to me that nothing substantial has changed in regards to s 3(1) going to s 16 since at least 1999. If the AHRA was a problem before, then it remains a problem; I do not see it increasing the problem, though.
And now that I think of it, it will mean that school board sanctioned homeschool supervisors will be obligated to turn parents in parents who are teaching topics that go against the AHRA.
Think about how this works in practice. I no longer live in Alberta, but when I lived in Alberta, we had a lot a freedom to select any school board in the province to work with – separate school board or government school board. The school board received funding for every home schooled student under its jurisdiction and some boards wanted increased funding. These boards are not irresponsible in their duties, but they are aware that their clients (the parents) have choices if they become too zealous. Competition works and this was (is??) a design feature of the Alberta home education legislative provisions. Although teachers as a group are more left wing (much more so) than I, not every one is unreasonable. We deliberately chose a board that would use supervisors who were reasonable. If I could summarize it in such a way, my observation is that the supervisors we chose would see the Boissoin issue much like Justice Wilson did as opposed to the way the Education Professor Darren Lund did. Your mileage may vary, but you may always change gas stations.
Final point – and I repeat. Some SDA readers may be more concerned with the fact that s 3(2) appears to be being removed.
(2) For greater certainty, education programs and instructional
materials referred to in subsection (1) must not promote or foster
doctrines of racial or ethnic superiority or persecution, religious
intolerance or persecution, social change through violent action or
disobedience of laws.
Thanks, Kate, for the bandwidth.
The leftards infiltrate any organisation of power. They have infiltrated the national Liberal party; they have infiltrated the Alberta Conservatives.
They infiltrate various public services, presumably even in Saskatchewan.
They usually destroy their hosts but not before doing massive damage to the public.
Wow, Kate, since when education is on your radar?
By the way, do you know that compliance with human rights act is mandatory in Ontario schools and the boards will allocate school space for muslim prayers under the act?
Quickly before work, Brent.
Diverse and Flexible Learning: Page 1 Section 1 of Table of Contents. The section didn’t exist in the old act. PDF page 3. Why is this an issue?
The result of the Lund case is less important than the reality that the Alberta Teachers’ Association was backing it. To what extent I don’t know, other than a complainant stated they would like to fortify the diversity/fairness committee with the cases’ spoils.
The ATA is the teachers’ professional association as well as the union.
So by adding the AHRA to the Education Act the pieces are in place to do all kinds of things including, I’m guessing, removing teachers’ licenses with the Act’s blessing if they get on the wrong side of the HR commission.
The old section s 3(2) being removed in the Act was a quietly important way to say, “We will fire high school teachers who preach holocaust denial.” You’re right, it’s gone now and the AHRA is the standard.
This is much different.
Sorry I should have said Page 1 “Division 1” of T of C.
“…reflect the diverse nature and heritage of society …”
Plagarism!!!
Stolen from the pages of the Ontario Police Services Act, circa 1993, courtesy of Bob Rae.
Seems it takes Conservatives about twenty years before they start sounding like socialists…
Hancock is as red as Taliban Jack and twice as flakey. He has a long list of pinko feel good legislating. It’s CINO reds like Hancock and Red Ed Melmac that will finally sink the PC ship in the coming election. Albertans have had enough of the current left wing culture warriors impersonating Wild Rose Conservatives.
Leslie:
Diverse and Flexible Learning: Page 1 Section 1 of Table of Contents
Ahhh. Now I see it and I also now know why I missed it before. My oversight and my error. Thanks. I’m not sure that it changes anything; it is merely the name of a Divison and a similar section did exist before as I pointed out.
That the AHRA and the Charter are specifically mentioned is a difference but is not a significant difference since they have been implied since at least 1999. I think you and I see things differently here.
Your comments regarding the ATA backing the Lund case is one area where we see things the same, but only to the point where the ATA gets its way. Recent court cases in both Alberta (Queen’s Bench) and Saskatchewan (Appelate) favour common sense over political correctness (for the time being) and the Human Rights Commissions/Tribunals have been pared back a notch or two. Your fears would have been more valid three to five years ago. Notwithstanding that, part of the problem remains because the HRC/T remain. Yet, what they want to do is restrained by what they are able to do. I think this is key to our whole little discussion here.
Finally, twenty years of home schooling costing thousands of dollars continues to reward our family with its benefits for all our children. I suggest to any Alberta family troubled by the new legislation to pursue discovery of your options to remove your family from the government schools.
@neo: awesome posts.
@alex: thanks for dropping a hint regarding your age – I believe “oh noes” is a Tween webchat expression. Hopefully you’ll get a taste of Sharia rights and freedoms some time during your adulthood – when I’ll be mercifully dead and turned to dust.
Oh noes! Not da sharia! I’m so afraidzes!
Honestly, though, it’s very big of you to admit that you’re a coward. I respect your honesty, if not your attitude. Most of your buddies won’t come right out and admit that they’re pooping in their panties every time a muslim walks by them on the street.
Ah yes, the new “cowardice”: not being man enough to accept deeper cultural ramming. And like it.
I suppose it’s no stretch (heh) to assume that beta-males like Alex already do.
Oh great, another closet case.
Thanks for the good discussion, Brent.
As any good union should, the ATA has been dutifully pressuring the government of late in ways that would leave the door open for an anticipated increase its powers.
Some trivia:
Dave Hancock’s wife is an Edmonton high school principal.
Albertans, including homeschoolers, should give it some thought.
If we teach the things that school was developed to teach and only them, there is no way that we infringe on human rights.
Reading is a skill and has nothing to do with religion, ethnic background or sexual preference.
Writing and grammar is a skill and only in terms of gender class does it even approach human rights issues.
Mathematics is a universal language is is completely void of any muman rights issues.
The sciences should be kept to pure fact. pressure, volumetric principles, gravity are undisputable facts and should be the prime elements of the carriculum, not creationism, versus Darwinism, global warming and the like sould not be given undue time, in otherwords the concepts and definitions are sufficient.
History is a recount of what happend in the past and we should not try to assign our biases on the people and events that created the history, but doccument what transpired.
Social Studies should be about being arare of what issues are in the news, but no attempt should be made to influence the reaction of the students to these occurences, free speach should be encouraged with civililiy to one and another.
Health should present facts about nutrition, exercise, addictions and reproduction, but again the schools should be presenting facts not opinions.
Music Programs, homemaking/cullinary arts, industrial arts, graphic arts, atheletics and the like should be provided to develope well rounded individuals, but again I see no place for human right issues.
My belief is that we should look at our primary and secondary education system as a generic system to bring the knowledge and skill level in basic societical values to a standard level.
Postsecondary tades and technology programs, medical programs, economics programs and legal programs should then teach student to perform specific high level skills needed by society.
Lastly University programs in Political science, philosophy, humanaties and the like should be where we educate the leftists that our society sooo desperately needs (LOL).
Our education budgets should concentrate on primary/secondary education, since this affects all future citizens, and should be the primary objective.
The secondary objective should be the training and upgrading skilled workers that keep the economy functioning.
The lowest priority should be the university leftist trainining sector.
BTW How do you get a U of R graduate off of your front door step.
Pay them for the pizza!
My daughter just spend a whole school week preparing for its “Unity in Diversity Day” at her school. They celebrate food and culture from other countries around the world (I don’t think if you’re white you qualify). Unfortunately it is a UNESCO school and you wouldn’t believe the crap they teach them. Then I have to “unteach” her when she gets home.
It’s as bad or worse in ontario. I’ve started calling public schools exactly what they are: government schools; that is, institutes to indoctrinate our kids in state-approved dogma FIRST, and then, when all the pc-crap is inculcated, perhaps spend a bit of time on the 3R’s. Maybe.
mhb23re
at gmail d0t calm