K.

2.5K posts

K. banner
K.

K.

@K02568

I'm a mother, pissed off about what critical constructivists with a Messiah complex have done to my kids' education. BSc, MSc Psychology

เข้าร่วม Kasım 2022
1.5K กำลังติดตาม650 ผู้ติดตาม
K.
K.@K02568·
@IrishTimesBiz Modern architecture is a tool for demoralisation. Ugly, cold, and uninviting.
English
0
0
33
672
K.
K.@K02568·
I would encourage anyone that's willing to submit FOIs asking for definitions of terms such as these! This is how we hold them accountable and expose the manipulation. "Climate action", equity, and sustainability are tied in curricular docs and background papers define sustainability as having 3 parts - environmental, social, and economic. They say environmentalism alone is not enough. What is meant by social and economic sustainability? Well, the redistribution of social and economic capital to achieve a "just and equitable" future, of course! And just as you have said, this is achieved through climate action, or in other words, radical activism.
English
0
1
4
54
ChainOfThought
ChainOfThought@0x445352·
It would also be interesting to hear how they define "climate action" and any constraints that might come with that : is climate action an appeal to people to take sensible conversation measures or is it about civil disobedience? (Extinction Rebellion (for example) were invited in by then minister Eamon Ryan : this group is known for violent and extreme activism , and it gives us a clue about how climate justice people within the system think about civil society, rule of law, property rights etc)
English
1
0
2
28
K.
K.@K02568·
Here's a tactic that everyone needs to be able to spot in education and policy: ** the valorization of normative anchors ** • Take a contested or loaded concept and attach it to something already widely seen as obviously good. • Repeat that pairing relentlessly in policy documents, strategies, guidelines, trainings, media, and institutional communications until the pairing feels natural and morally unquestionable. Over time, the contested concept "borrows" the legitimacy of the anchor. To question the contested component of the pairing feels like questioning the anchor itself (which would make you a very bad person). Here's an example (a very important one): “Social justice” is an essentially contested concept. It has multiple, incompatible definitions. The version being pushed in curricula is not based on Catholic social teaching, nor classic liberal social justice. Many would reject it if they knew what it actually means. So instead of clearly defining the term, curricular documents are intentionally ambiguous about their intended meaning. But more importantly, they pair "social justice" with "human rights" - an obvious good in most people's minds. They talk endlessly, write endlessly, and produce endless policy documents about the importance of education based on social justice and human rights. As a result, social justice within the curriculum feels like an unquestionable good. It is very hard to say "I don't want my kids taught about social justice" without appearing as if you are standing in opposition to human rights as well. By using this tactic, they don’t have to persuade us through honest argument to accept something we might otherwise reject. Instead, they manipulate what we perceive as normal, good, and moral, until rejection feels impossible.
K. tweet media
English
2
7
14
618
K.
K.@K02568·
@Ferng6Ferng This is the way. As parents, we have the duty of helping our kids navigate what's happening to them in schools. They're not being taught to think at school, so we need to do that work with them at home. Good work 💪
English
1
0
6
25
Scary Times
Scary Times@Ferng6Ferng·
@K02568 Absolutely. Though given my teens questions around the CPHE course content, as a family we've deconstructed the pretty hollow notion of human rights at this point too!
English
1
0
3
33
K.
K.@K02568·
@0x445352 You nailed it. I have chased the NCCA on their definition of social justice and you would not believe the wild goose chase I have been sent on. I have written a piece on this, hopefully will get it out soon!
English
1
0
5
45
ChainOfThought
ChainOfThought@0x445352·
Exactly this . The highlighted section is unambiguously political and requires the reader to accept as given word-concepts such as "social justice" and "sustainability" . The child is expected to share the teacher's definition of these terms without anyone ever having written them down, much less debated them. ("fairness" is another word that is endlessly bandied about) . (the use of the word "resilience" is also interesting but that's a whole other story, but it's enough for now to say it's not about helping the child grow a thick skin)
English
2
0
4
65
K.
K.@K02568·
@HMcEntee Stop giving our money away.
English
0
0
4
35
Helen McEntee TD
Helen McEntee TD@HMcEntee·
I welcome today’s decisions to move forward with the €90 billion EU loan for Ukraine and adopt the 20th sanctions package on Russia.
English
753
21
214
260.5K
K.
K.@K02568·
@NewstalkFM In other words, 75% of people have been unsuccessfully brainwashed by the relentless climate alarmism propaganda. Great stuff.
English
0
0
4
45
K.
K.@K02568·
Classic narcissist behaviour. Varadkar is not remotely sorry for the contempt he showed towards rural Ireland and ordinary workers. He’s sorry that, in a moment of hubris, he let the mask slip and we all saw it. His “I went too far” is not an admission of wrongdoing and he certainly doesn't care that he may have offended people. The only thing he regrets is that he exposed his own elitist disdain.
Irish Independent@Independent_ie

Leo Varadkar says he ‘went too far’ and apologises for urban v rural Ireland comments buff.ly/QonXAth

English
7
31
172
2.4K
K.
K.@K02568·
@MiltonAlex98318 The government are increasingly acting without the consent of the people and instead prioritising supranational agendas. It is a mistake for them to assume that the people will not rise in response to this dying democratic legitimacy. They will eventually learn.
English
0
1
2
105
Alexander Milton
Alexander Milton@MiltonAlex98318·
@K02568 Well said. The Govt is insisting on IMPOSING gender ideology in schools over the clear alarm of parents (and the general public). Govt has absolutely NO mandate to do this. Why are they?
English
1
1
4
143
K.
K.@K02568·
People need to understand what is really driving the school divestment programme. The Department and the NCCA see religious ethos - but more specifically, Catholic ethos - as an obstacle to the full realisation of their new educational project. The quickest way to remove that obstacle is to persuade the public that divestment is about choice and building a more inclusive, pluralistic education system where children of all faiths and none can access schooling without having any religion imposed on them (sounds like a reasonable proposition). This is not, however, the true motivation for change. The reality is, that the removal of religious ethos is necessary to clear the way so that the new, state-endorsed belief system can move to the centre of school life, unhindered. The push for patronage transfer is happening in parallel with sweeping curricular reforms at every level of education. These reforms are largely centred on teaching our children a particular way of understanding the world - a comprehensive belief system in its own right. When we think about various contentious content that has recently appeared in our children’s schools (e.g., gender identity content, family A and family B, age-inappropriate sex content etc.) it's easy to mistake these as entirely distinct and unrelated issues. But they are not. The real aim in each of these seemingly separate lessons is not really for our children to learn about the surface issues - its to help them, through repetitive exposure, adopt a specific moral and social ontology. Each of the controversial topics in the curriculum are taught through this specific lens. The goal then, is for this lens to become the only lens through which kids understand their personal, social, and political world. Catholic ethos in schools currently provides one of the last remaining bulwarks against the advancement of this ideology into every aspect of school life. The NCCA and Dept understand that success in getting children to fully embody a true believer in their ideology rests on removing exposure to any competing belief system. Once you remove religious patronage, the national curriculum can function as an almost totalising tool for indoctrination into the belief system and the reproduction their ideology. With religious patronage removed, no serious counterweight to the State imposed ideology exists in schools. I might be more open to divestment if what was replacing religious ethos were genuinely neutral. So-called "multidenominational" models are not neutral. Once religious ethos is gone, the vacuum this will create will not remain empty. The State's ideology is waiting to fill the void. This is, in my view, an existential threat to the social order. This is not hyperbole. The belief system they are imposing on our children is like a cancer - it eats away at much healthier ways of being, knowing, and relating. It makes people less functional in the real world. This form of education is not education at all, it is indoctrination into a totalising belief system. I understand that the divestment programme has the support of the Catholic Bishops and I believe this comes from a place of genuine goodwill and a sincere desire to foster real pluralism. They are trying, in good faith, to make space for every child. But this goodwill is being taken advantage of to advance an agenda that only becomes apparent when you examine recent curricular reforms and policy changes in detail, and so i believe their support, however well intentioned, is ultimately misplaced. The alternative to current arrangements is not pluralistic education. Although the vast majority of primary schools are currently denominational, they are nonetheless inclusive. I can assure you that, in schools that transfer patronage, your family will not be made to feel welcome or your beliefs included if they differ from the State's on issues such as gender, "diversity", or how we should understand social reality.
K. tweet media
English
19
100
248
23.1K
K.
K.@K02568·
@jan_har @SeanDubIreland Yes absolutely. It started very gradually within the NCCA and then significantly ramped up around 2020. Over the last 6 years, with every new redeveloped specification, the emphasis on woke or whatever else you want to call it has become increasingly central and blatant.
English
0
1
2
157
janice smyth
janice smyth@jan_har·
@K02568 @SeanDubIreland Ireland is gone woke beyond belief at this point they are guinea pigs for this ideology . All of what you’re saying here is happening years especially in ET schools .
English
1
1
8
250
Cllr. Emer Tóibín
Cllr. Emer Tóibín@UnityakaAontu·
This is excellent. While it is measured, it is also very startling.
K.@K02568

People need to understand what is really driving the school divestment programme. The Department and the NCCA see religious ethos - but more specifically, Catholic ethos - as an obstacle to the full realisation of their new educational project. The quickest way to remove that obstacle is to persuade the public that divestment is about choice and building a more inclusive, pluralistic education system where children of all faiths and none can access schooling without having any religion imposed on them (sounds like a reasonable proposition). This is not, however, the true motivation for change. The reality is, that the removal of religious ethos is necessary to clear the way so that the new, state-endorsed belief system can move to the centre of school life, unhindered. The push for patronage transfer is happening in parallel with sweeping curricular reforms at every level of education. These reforms are largely centred on teaching our children a particular way of understanding the world - a comprehensive belief system in its own right. When we think about various contentious content that has recently appeared in our children’s schools (e.g., gender identity content, family A and family B, age-inappropriate sex content etc.) it's easy to mistake these as entirely distinct and unrelated issues. But they are not. The real aim in each of these seemingly separate lessons is not really for our children to learn about the surface issues - its to help them, through repetitive exposure, adopt a specific moral and social ontology. Each of the controversial topics in the curriculum are taught through this specific lens. The goal then, is for this lens to become the only lens through which kids understand their personal, social, and political world. Catholic ethos in schools currently provides one of the last remaining bulwarks against the advancement of this ideology into every aspect of school life. The NCCA and Dept understand that success in getting children to fully embody a true believer in their ideology rests on removing exposure to any competing belief system. Once you remove religious patronage, the national curriculum can function as an almost totalising tool for indoctrination into the belief system and the reproduction their ideology. With religious patronage removed, no serious counterweight to the State imposed ideology exists in schools. I might be more open to divestment if what was replacing religious ethos were genuinely neutral. So-called "multidenominational" models are not neutral. Once religious ethos is gone, the vacuum this will create will not remain empty. The State's ideology is waiting to fill the void. This is, in my view, an existential threat to the social order. This is not hyperbole. The belief system they are imposing on our children is like a cancer - it eats away at much healthier ways of being, knowing, and relating. It makes people less functional in the real world. This form of education is not education at all, it is indoctrination into a totalising belief system. I understand that the divestment programme has the support of the Catholic Bishops and I believe this comes from a place of genuine goodwill and a sincere desire to foster real pluralism. They are trying, in good faith, to make space for every child. But this goodwill is being taken advantage of to advance an agenda that only becomes apparent when you examine recent curricular reforms and policy changes in detail, and so i believe their support, however well intentioned, is ultimately misplaced. The alternative to current arrangements is not pluralistic education. Although the vast majority of primary schools are currently denominational, they are nonetheless inclusive. I can assure you that, in schools that transfer patronage, your family will not be made to feel welcome or your beliefs included if they differ from the State's on issues such as gender, "diversity", or how we should understand social reality.

English
2
4
13
487
K.
K.@K02568·
@indepdubnrth My son has been using this for 3 years and is now doing his Junior Cert. Not a single student in his year got above a 50 on their mocks because for 3 years they have learned about Greta and pronouns instead of English and don't have a damn clue what they're doing now.
English
0
0
10
213
Dr. Marcus De Brun
Dr. Marcus De Brun@indepdubnrth·
This is my daughter's first year secondary school English textbook, for the subject: 'English'. Why does it have some 20 pages devoted to people who do not wish to take ownership of their biological gender? When did this 'issue' become part of the secondary English curriculum?
Irish Education Alliance@education_irish

@indepdubnrth @Ciarraiabu2 I know, this gender ideology NONSENSE has infiltrated all subjects. This English textbook, Louder Than Words, is full of it!!! #EducateDontIndoctrinate #EducationNotIndoctrination

English
13
110
334
10.4K
K.
K.@K02568·
A very good piece and well worth the time to read 👇 "The disgust directed at the fuel protesters is not really about their methods, it is about the discomfort of watching people do loudly and disruptively what the rest of the country does quietly and continuously: opt out of a system that doesn’t work and try to protect themselves by whatever means are cheapest."
Sinéad O’Sullivan@SineadOS1

The enshittification of Ireland and the hollowing out of our institutions is the single largest threat to Irish civil society and prosperity. In this damning piece, I'm going into more detail about the graph I posted yesterday: why it's happening in Ireland, why the way we're thinking about the protests is entirely wrong, and what this means for our collective governance. Link to the article is below!

English
0
0
1
263
K.
K.@K02568·
@_KylieJender @MakingSenseInfo I have not seen anyone put together a comprehensive summary and critique yet - I'd like to do so myself when I get some time. All the "progressive" reforms we are adopting have already been tried and failed elsewhere.
English
2
0
1
44
K.
K.@K02568·
PISA doesn’t measure the education system of today, it measures how 15 year olds have been taught over roughly the last 10 years. Ireland scored very well in PISA 2022, but those students came through before the latest wave of NCCA / Dept of Ed reforms. The real verdict on this new curriculum will come when today’s primary pupils sit PISA in the mid 2030s. I predict (and fear) we will see a serious drop in outcomes as a result of reforms.
Informal Economy@EconomyInformal

Reading Performance (PISA) Ireland🇮🇪: 516 Japan🇯🇵: 516 Korea🇰🇷: 515 Estonia🇪🇪: 511 Canada🇨🇦: 507 US🇺🇸: 504 NZ🇳🇿: 501 Australia🇦🇺: 498 UK🇬🇧: 494 Poland🇵🇱: 489 Italy🇮🇹: 482 Germany🇩🇪: 480 Spain🇪🇸: 474 France🇫🇷: 474 Türkiye🇹🇷: 456 Greece🇬🇷: 438 Mexico🇲🇽: 415 Colombia🇨🇴: 409 @OECD

English
4
16
68
8.3K
K.
K.@K02568·
Bí Cineálta isn't simply an anti-bullying policy, it is a tool for shaping our children's moral understanding. The problem is that it is also an example of what C.S. Lewis called the poison of subjectivism. Grateful to @Genspect for publishing this piece 🙏 Link in comments 👇
K. tweet media
English
1
6
20
426