Former Wynne adviser , U of T prof Benjamin Levin facing child porn charges
Toronto Sun | July 8, 2013
Police have charged a University of Toronto professor and a former member of Premier Kathleen Wynne’s transition team with child pornography offences. . . .
Levin — a former deputy education minister in Manitoba — served as advisor to the Wynne government from January until June 12, 2013. . . .
Whether guilty or innocent, I think we should be more interested in what policies are being worked on. Each of the institutions below is like its own universe in terms of information. Readers might have points they want to raise about educational policies:
His website at OISE (Ontario Institute for Studies in Education) at the University of Toronto. This contains his research.
For example, he has a book published at (Julian Huxley’s) UNESCO:
The International Academy of Education (IAE) and IIEP [International Institute for Educational Planning] are launching a new publication
System-wide Improvement in Education by Ben Levin is the 13th booklet in the Education Policy Series, published jointly by the two institutions. . . .
System-wide Improvement in Education
Booklet N° 13. Ben Levin, 2012, ISBN: 978-92-803-1365-9
The point that stands out in this document is the goal of unifying everyone involved in administering education.
From a normal person’s point of view, why should there be a need for so much unity? Why should everyone be educated in the same way? And of course, some of us believe that parents should be in charge of education and there should be complete freedom as to how they go about it.
Furthermore, some of us realize that the education system is really a propaganda system designed to mold minds–for the creation of a certain type of society–and I think that is maybe illustrated by the contents of his book.
Obviously there is a clear intention expressed by those who work at globalist policy think-tanks that they want to turn society into an even more unified collectivist entity than it is now. That’s why there is an emphasis on behavior change, on early childhood education and on adult (lifelong) education (see the quote below).
From page 18:
. . . It is not enough for a state or national government to be fully committed, difficult as this is in itself. Many if not most schools and, where they exist, districts or regional authorities, must also share the goals and purposes of reform and improvement. . . .
. . . Behaviour often changes before beliefs. So everything must be biased towards action and learning rather than, as is traditional, endless planning before acting. . . .
How is that level of unity even possible? (Well, there are several techniques described in Brave New World. And we are living in a conditioned society already, and that’s how it becomes a reality.)
He calls on the managers to be unified, having a “common purpose”. a phrase he uses elsewhere. From page 30:
Although ministries of education typically have the lead responsibility for implementing education reforms and improvements, only rarely do they have the capacity to do this work effectively. Typically, they are organized and staffed to make and enforce policies, distribute funds, and solve administrative or political problems. They have few people who understand school improvement, few systems to support it, and few procedures that focus on it. Their senior management teams are not necessarily used to working collaboratively.
To support real change, education ministries need a good level of internal coherence. Though typical, it is not acceptable for different units to work with schools independently, making different, uncoordinated demands; senior ministry leaders must work to create and then enforce a sense of common purpose that will allow the system as a whole to focus on what is truly important. Only then will an improvement programme have a chance of success.
The appendix to this booklet lists the characteristics of an effective ministry. . . .
I haven’t heard the term “change knowledge” before (used below). He also refers to the term “guiding coalition” several times. From the conclusion on page 31:
. . . Although use of change knowledge is increasing internationally, prospects remain mixed. There are three main reasons for this. First, the use of change knowledge does not promise the quick fix or satisfying of an ideological agenda that political pressures often demand. Governments are almost always under more pressure to ‘do something’ than to demonstrate that recent policies have been successful. Second, this more complex approach to reform is difficult to grasp, and if the desired change is to become widespread and the strategies consistently applied, the approach must be understood and embraced by many leaders simultaneously (‘the guiding coalition’). Given leadership turnover and the many competing pressures faced by governments and school systems, this is a tall order. Third, lasting improvement does require deep cultural change of schools, which many people resist, tacitly or otherwise. It requires patient, hard, unrelenting effort over a period of years. . .
. . . The next phase of large-scale education improvement will have greater emphasis on strategies that affect all classrooms and on elements that foster ongoing quality and equity or are essential for societal reform. Reforms primarily focused on structure and governance should be less dominant. Countries will pay more explicit policy attention to the quality of the teaching force (OECD, 2011), principals, and other leaders, while recognizing the importance of increased professional motivation for educators derived from public respect and positive pressure. Other elements in a more comprehensive approach to ‘capacity building with a focus on results’ will include greater attention to early childhood (from conception to age 5), well-being of students of all ages, and adult education, particularly as a complement to the development of young children. . . .
Here we have the term “well-being” again–as we get ready for the highly medicated UN and banker-planned post-prosperity world of austerity.
I have some questions. We should all be questioning think-tanks, policy institutes, universities and international organizations that claim to be “reforming” society:
Is this a legitimate function of government?
Should these private unelected “globalist” institutions have a direct line to government and should they be instructing them what to do?
Should people with a particular agenda of societal change (whatever it is) be hanging out with Justin Trudeau and the premier of Ontario?
Shouldn’t each citizen at least be first in line to tell the government what do about the education of their own children? Wouldn’t this relate to our beliefs and aren’t our beliefs going to differ somewhat? How much “unity” should there be?
Shouldn’t we stop assuming that government has common-sense interests at heart?
Shouldn’t we stop assuming that government thinks like us and works for us–when there is zero evidence to show this?
Do most people even know about these organizations like UNESCO?