Friday, March 17, 2017

Silencing of speakers far more common at colleges for the very privileged

The Brookings Institution has put together an interesting analysis of colleges where students have attempted to shut down or shout down speakers. Using some data gathered by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, Brookings made a chart showing a correlation between students from wealthier homes and the tendency to disinvite speakers. Here’s Brookings’ description of the chart:

In the figure below, we plot every university in America based on the proportion of students from families with incomes in the top quintile (vertical axis) and from the bottom quintile (horizontal). Marked in red are the “disinvitation colleges” described above. The pattern is clear: the more economically exclusive the institution, the more likely the students have attempted to hinder free speech.

Note that this is not measuring student performance on standardized testing or grades. This is purely looking at family income of the students attending these schools. It’s the most privileged kids who are most likely to be arguing for silencing views that aren’t sufficiently progressive.

There is an obvious irony here. The students shouting down speakers and demanding safe spaces are more likely to come from wealthy homes. And don’t suggest these students have rejected privilege because they know it is bad from their own first-hand experience. Remember, these are young adults who are currently enrolled in schools that cater to the wealthy. They aren’t criticizing privilege after having abandoned it. They are living it. That’s certainly the case at Middlebury College where, as I noted last week, tuition (plus room and board) costs about $65,000 a year.

Looking at this chart, you have to wonder if some of what is driving this campus shout down behavior on the left is simply guilt. No doubt these students really believe the things they say they do about income inequality, racism and intersectionality. And yet, many of them must be aware that, by their own lights, they are part of the problem. What is needed then is some form of progressive absolution, preferably one where someone else pays for their sins. That would certainly help explain the demi-religious character of these protests. These students aren’t just making a point, they are driving out a scapegoat.

No doubt there are many progressive students at other colleges, the ones that don’t cater exclusively to the wealthiest homes. Perhaps those schools can’t afford as many controversial speakers or perhaps the students there don’t feel the same need to prove their bona fides as the progressives from wealthier backgrounds do.


UK: Tory revolt forces rethink of education funding plans

Justine Greening, the education secretary, has been told by many MPs they cannot accept cuts to the budgets of schools in their constituencies

Plans to change the way that schools are funded are widely expected to be withdrawn by the government amid mounting protests from Conservative MPs.

A senior Tory MP told The Times that the scale of dissatisfaction among colleagues was so great that ministers would have to revise their proposals. They could backtrack within weeks.

Revising the funding formula would be controversial because it almost certainly would mean cutting additional funding for children from less well-off families, given that no extra money was announced in the budget.

Ministers have hosted a series of meetings with Tory MPs, who have told them that they cannot accept cuts to the budgets of schools in their constituencies. This month Justine Greening met MPs from the northwest, including George Osborne, the former chancellor, who told the education secretary wryly: "Now you see why I didn't do this."

The coalition government twice abandoned similar attempts to replace the system of giving block grants to local authorities to distribute money to schools with a national funding formula. Ms Greening already has delayed its introduction until next year.

In another blow to the proposals, the f40 group of largely semi-rural and rural local authorities, which claim to do worst under the existing system, attacked the formula, saying that it risked "replacing one unfairness with another".

"We are alarmed that so many schools are losers and we fail to understand why this should be the case when those schools were already poorly funded and well below the national average," 38 of the council leaders said in an open letter to Theresa May.

They included the leaders of large Tory councils such as Buckinghamshire, Hampshire, Kent, Oxfordshire, Warwickshire and North Yorkshire.

Critics have long complained that London and other urban areas get more than shire areas under the present system, with Tower Hamlets in east London getting the equivalent of œ7,000 per pupil, while Wokingham in Berkshire gets œ4,000 per pupil.

The new national formula lowers the proportion of per-pupil funding from 76 per cent of total school revenue to about 72.5 per cent, to give greater weight to additional needs such as deprivation and low prior attainment. This is likely now to be reversed.

A consultation paper said: "The formula will recognise educational disadvantage in its widest sense, including those who will not be benefiting from the pupil premium but whose families may be just about managing."

David Laws, the former Liberal Democrat schools minister and chairman of the Education Policy Institute think tank, said: "Delivering a new schools funding system at a time when education budgets are under severe pressure is highly challenging politically. If the government seeks to pacify Conservative MPs by shifting money away from more disadvantaged areas, then this would undercut the government's stated intention to try to boost social mobility."

An education department spokeswoman said: "We are consulting on the factors that will make up the formula and we know it is important that we get this right. This second stage of the consultation will run until March 22."


Undisciplined Australian classroms holding kids back

I have been saying this for years -- JR

Things you would find in a classroom: a student pointing a replica gun at the teacher, an entire class deciding to ignore the teacher in silent protest, chairs thrown, threats and overturned desks.

Teachers came forward to tell the ABC about the biggest classroom disruptions they experienced.

It did not stop there. One teacher had three Year 9 boys skip her class and smear their poo all over the school gymnasium walls, while others had been cursed with the full spectrum of offensive profanities.

The list went on…and on.

Therefore, it would not come as a surprise that two global reports have revealed Australian classrooms are among the most disorderly of the OECD nations.

Australia has a "problematic situation" in terms of classroom discipline, according to the report on the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA).

"About one-third of the students in advantaged schools, and about half of those in disadvantaged schools, reported that in most or every class there was noise and disorder, students didn't listen to what the teacher said, and that students found it difficult to learn," the report said.

Tasmania and New South Wales are problem areas

About 14,500 students from around 760 schools participated across Australia in PISA. Using science classes as a sample, it said on that average:

 *  More than 44 per cent of Australian students indicated there is noise and disorder

 *  Half of students in Tasmania and nearly half of students in New South Wales reported this problem occurring most frequently

 *  Students in Tasmania most frequently reported students don't listen to what the teacher says (48 per cent)

 *  In contrast, students in each of Victoria and Western Australia (30 per cent) and the Northern Territory (29 per cent) were least likely to report the teacher waits long for students to quiet down

Dr Sue Thompson from the Australian Council for Education and Research (ACER) said the environment is challenging for teachers.

"Level of noise and disorder reported in the classroom is one of the highest in the OECD [countries] and it's a problem at grade 4 and grade 8 level as well as at year 9 and 10 level," she said.

The respect is gone

The PISA report stated nearly 40 per cent of students in Australia attended schools where the principal indicated student learning was hindered by "teachers not meeting individual students' needs."

Principals also flagged inadequate infrastructure "hindered teacher capacity to provide instruction", with the issue identified by 25 per cent of principals of students from disadvantaged schools compared to 12 per cent from advantaged schools.

But one caller the ABC said there was another factor at play disrupting the learning process. "I think the respect [for teachers] has gone," she said.

She added that teachers often tried everything they could to engage students. "We split them up, move them around, try and put seating plans in place, engage them one to one. When you've got 30 of them in a class though you've got all different needs at once," she said.

Discipline is the issue

Dr Sue Thompson said the Trends in International Maths and Science Study (TIMSS) also revealed the impacts of classroom disruption.

According to the TIMSS there was "a clear relationship between the achievement of Australian students and principals' reports of school discipline problems, with fewer discipline problems associated with higher achievement".

The Federal Education Minister Simon Birmingham said teachers and principals need more support, as well as parents playing their part in addressing the issue.

"Parents must be part of the solution this cannot be something that rests on the shoulders of teachers and principals alone because attitudes, respect are of course formed as much in the home environment and the rest of life as they are in the school community itself," he said.

He said he would examine whether policy needs improving, and discuss the issue with his state and territory counterparts.


Thursday, March 16, 2017

Black chancellor fails at U Mass Boston

He was an "inspiration".  Some inspiration!  Brown skin is not the key to wonderfulness.  Only racists would think so

Concerned about persistent financial problems at UMass Boston, the university board of trustees has significantly diluted chancellor J. Keith Motley's authority in the day-to-day running of the institution.

Trustees have allowed Motley's contract to expire and have hired former Bowdoin College president Barry Mills to oversee the nuts-and-bolts operation of the urban campus. On Monday, officials also named a new campus budget chief, replacing the longtime chief financial officer, who was fired in January.

The campus faces a deficit of up to $30 million, declining enrollment, overdue construction projects, and weakening fund-raising, according to UMass officials.

Adjunct professors have been laid off and research databases have been discontinued in an attempt to cut costs. In the history department, there's even a prohibition on photocopying, the department chairman informed professors last week.

Mills, who will earn $250,000, said the new arrangement will allow Motley to continue as the public face of the university while Mills addresses its challenges. Mills said he is not interested in becoming chancellor.

Barry Mills, formerly of Bowdoin College, will oversee some operations at UMass Boston. "I am there to run the university from the inside," Mills said in an interview with the Globe.

Victor Woolridge, a trustee who served as chairman until this year, acknowledged the need for an administrator like Mills to address pressing issues. He said his skills complement those of Motley, who was paid $422,213 last year.  "It's true, we did bring in Barry because we think there's some need for some help there, and we think he can bring some real strength to the organization," Woolridge said.

Motley was until recently the only African-American chancellor in the state university system, and many on the majority-minority campus, and in the city of Boston, look to him for inspiration.

In an interview with the Globe, Motley said UMass Boston is simply in a period of growth and transition, pointing to the many new construction projects underway. It is trying to juggle financial realities with the need to expand and update facilities in order to attract new students, he said. Motley said he welcomes Mills's help and does not plan to leave.

"I've never seen this as a crisis," Motley said. "This is not the first time that this campus has gone through some fiscal challenge."

The financial concerns at UMass Boston have escalated in the past year. University officials have known for at least three years that they needed to address a budget gap. This year trustees grew increasingly alarmed that the campus administration was not moving fast enough to deal with the fiscal problems, according to interviews with three board members.

Last month the board was told the campus's reserve in fiscal 2016 was less than half what it was in 2014, according to a copy of a report it received.

In addition, the operating margin at UMass Boston has grown from a $20 million surplus in fiscal 2010 to a deficit that could reach $30 million this year, according to a presentation campus officials gave last spring and new information from the central
UMass office.

Campus officials, meanwhile, believe they can shrink the deficit to below $15 million by the end of the fiscal year in June, according to a campus spokesman.   The latest in a series of budget cutting measures were announced Thursday in a memo from the provost that said the reductions are necessary because other planned cuts have not happened yet.

The memo from provost Winston Langley called for the elimination of nonessential travel and a reduction in the number of summer courses, among other cuts.

Mills's contract gives him the same powers as the chancellor. He reports to Motley but is in close contact with Meehan and the board. He has hired Robert Connolly, the former longtime UMass spokesman, to help him navigate the political landscape on campus.

"It's a compliment to Keith that he recognized that he needed someone to help him with some of the details and the complexities that the campus has," said Rob Manning, chairman of the trustees.

Mills's contract does not include other pay and perks that college presidents typically enjoy.

Motley's three-year contract expired in January and, in an unusual move by trustees, has not been renewed, according to the central UMass office. Typically, contract renewals are negotiated six months before the agreement expires.

The chancellor said UMass Boston is simply in a period of growth and transition. The campus is building its first-ever dormitory that will house 1,000 students starting in 2018.

"This allows for us to continue to work hard, but it also allows for me to have a partner internally to connect some of the dots that we need to connect that I can't do by myself," Motley said Thursday as he prepared for a fund-raising trip to Florida.

At Bowdoin, Mills is credited with increasing the school's endowment by $1 billion to $1.4 billion, replacing student loans with grants for all students on financial aid, doubling minority enrollment, and increasing campus sustainability.

Mills's skills could be welcome at the Boston campus, where the endowment is $74.4 million and fund-raising has declined in recent years, from $14.7 million raised in fiscal 2013 to $10.5 million last year. In May, the campus's chief fund-raising official, Gina Cappello, died in a car crash.

Enrollment at UMass Boston declined from 17,000 in the fall of 2015 to 16,800 last fall, and in the nursing program, a signature of the Boston campus, it dropped from 1,500 to 1,300, according to the school.

Motley and other trustees say one main reason for the enrollment decline is the major construction projects that have ripped up the campus and made it difficult to navigate, much less park. The projects are delayed and have cost more than expected.

The cuts have demoralized faculty as they try to pursue research and teaching. The library discontinued its subscription to many online databases, especially those used by the humanities department, according to professors in that department.

Recently, departments have been asked to return money they had already been allocated. History department chairman Tim Hacsi wrote to his staff on March 6 to say the administration had requested $6,000 be returned. He asked professors to refrain from making photocopies for class unless absolutely necessary.

Hacsi said he understands the school is facing hard times and needs to make cuts, but he would like it if administrators would communicate more clearly. "Any transparency would be a big plus," he said.


Principal forced to publicly apologize after students wear red, white, and blue

According to outraged liberal snowflakes in Iowa, it's blatantly racist to wear the colors of the American flag to an American high school basketball game:

Supporters of the Des Moines North High School basketball team, many of whose players are from refugee families, were offended when fans of Valley High School's basketball team wore red, white and blue last week, The College Fix reports.

"This is an example of BLATANT racism," said Ty Leggett, a Valley High School alum, on the Valley High School - WDMCS Facebook page. "ALL participating should have been pulled and banned from ALL VHS extracurricular events for the remainder of the year! As a parent, I'd be mortified that my son or daughter thought this way, acted in this fashion and refrained from taking a stand against this 21st century inexcusable behavior!"

Herein lies the issue: Valley High School's student body is predominantly white. So by wearing the colors of the American flag to a game against a more diverse school, "it strongly implies that the other team, the less white team, is less American."

Oh, boy.

As Valley High student Mallorie Paige Sander aptly pointed out:

This country is the United States of America and our country colors are red, white, and blue no matter what color of skin you have or what race you are. The intentions to offend anyone by wearing USA themed clothing was no where in the thoughts of any of our student body, why would it be?

Yes, we do all live in America - but the problem is that it's near impossible for liberals to separate race from identity. And according to the liberal mindset, any white American who displays any hint of nationalism must by default be a racist.


Education's 4C's do not exist without the 3R's

Jennifer Buckingham comments from Australia:

Almost every day, a new evangelist for so-called '21st Century' learning makes a heartfelt plea for schools to throw off the shackles of having to teach children to be proficient readers and fluent writers, competent in arithmetic, and knowledgeable about the world they live in.

Instead of the 3 'R's, which is code for old-fashioned and fusty, these visionaries argue schools should focus on the 4 'C's -- creativity, critical reflection, collaboration, and communication (what a stroke of luck they all start with the same letter!).

Apart from the obvious observation that the 4Cs came in quite handy prior to the current century, there are a couple of problems with this argument.

Foremost, the 4Cs depend upon the 3Rs. A person cannot think creatively or critically if they don't know anything to think creatively or critically about. Likewise, a child who cannot read will not easily acquire knowledge and a child who cannot write will struggle to effectively communicate what they know and think. Sadly, there are hundreds of thousands of Australian students who cannot read or write.

Furthermore, it is a serious but common misconception that the 4Cs are generic skills, whereas cognitive science research has shown they are domain specific. That is, thinking critically and creatively about physics is different to thinking critically and creatively about English literature. Sophisticated levels of communication require explicit knowledge of the subject matter in question.

The generic skills misconception derives from the constructivist theory of learning -- that children are naturally disposed to seek knowledge and understanding, and only require adults to facilitate their self-guided journey of discovery. This is the 'learning how to learn' trope that was invalidated by scientific research not long after Vatican II.

Nonetheless, constructivist theory continues to lead many schools to embrace inquiry-based learning pedagogies, even though there is copious evidence that they are much less effective than other methods for children learning new and difficult concepts and facts, especially when compared to explicit instruction.

And, despite the evidence, new multimillion dollar, architect-designed schools are being built specifically to encourage and accommodate inquiry-based learning pedagogies. (Meanwhile, high performing primary schools are putting the walls back into open classrooms because they know they don't work.)

It is easy to be seduced by the idea that children only need a wifi-connected tablet computer, a bean bag, and a caring adult nearby to gain all the complex knowledge the best brains in history labored over for centuries. But the reality is that children will always need the 3Rs, and expert teaching -- and by extension, expert teachers -- are still necessary.


Wednesday, March 15, 2017

Choosing Diversity Over Literacy in NYC

Black kids must be taught by black teachers even if the teacher can't read and write.  And that is supposed to HELP blacks?

Because an insufficient percentage of minority teacher candidates passed the tests.

If one is looking for a reason why the nomination of Betsy De Vos for secretary of education was fought tooth and nail by progressives defending an indefensible status quo, look no further than New York. The state Board of Regents aims to deep-six a literacy test for those applying to teach in public schools. In addition, they will allow applicants who “barely fail” a performance test to be certified, based on other “mitigating factors” that include teacher recommendations and grade point averages. Why? Because an insufficient percentage of minority candidates passed the tests in previous years.

Currently prospective teachers are expected to pass four exams, including the Academic Literacy Skills Test (ALST) and the edTPA, a test that requires teachers to videotape their lessons. Both of the tests were added as part of the hiring requirements during an overhaul that began in 2009. At that time, the Board of Regents reasoned that more rigorous qualification standards, especially those focused on literacy and classroom performance, would ensure students better levels of education.

Times have changed. Such ambitions will be swept aside by those who believe a commitment “diversity” is more important than hiring teachers who can actually read.

“In 2013-14, only 48 percent of aspiring black teachers and 56 percent of aspiring Hispanic teachers passed the exam, compared to 75 percent of prospective white teachers,” explains Chalkbeat columnist Monica Disare. “That has prompted concern that trying to solve one problem created others, keeping more teachers of color out of classrooms just as the state is trying to boost those numbers.”

Make that incompetent teachers.

After those results came in, hand-wringing quota-mongers made it clear where they stood. “The statistics are quite alarming,” said Harriet Fayne, dean of Lehman College’s School of Education in the Bronx. “Diversity of the workforce, absolutely, is critical,” said Senior Deputy Commissioner Ken Wagner, who nonetheless insisted it is important “to send a very clear message that it should be difficult to enter the profession.”

Not exactly. Blaming tests themselves for producing a lack of diversity has become a cottage industry for the Left, and they have taken to the courts to get either the tests themselves, or the results they produce, nullified.

The most egregious example was the city of New Haven’s attempt to toss out the results of a firefighter’s test for promotion to captain and lieutenant, because only white candidates passed it. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled 5-4 in favor of the test-takers. In doing so they negated a ruling by the original U.S. District judge, who tossed the case pre-trial in 2006, as well as the Second Circuit Court of Appeals' unanimous affirmation of that dismissal — one joined by Sonia Sotomayor prior to her Supreme Court appointment.

In New York, the battle over teacher test discrimination has gone on for over 20 years. As far back as 1996, black and Hispanic teachers filed suit in New York City, and in 2012, Manhattan Federal District Court judge Kimba Wood ruled an older state-certification test used until 2004 to measure teachers' knowledge of liberal arts and sciences was racially discriminatory.

The “logic” in this ruling and countless others is always the same: because the minority candidates were failing that test in greater numbers, the burden is placed public officials to prove such tests serve a valid purpose. “Instead of beginning with ascertaining the job tasks of New York teachers, the two LAST examinations began with the premise that all New York teachers should be required to demonstrate an understanding of the liberal arts,” Wood wrote in her opinion.

Imagine that.

Columnist James Joyner cuts through the subterfuge. “One would think that to be ruled racially discriminatory would require affirmative proof of either discriminatory intent or specific discriminatory content,” he writes. “But, no: mere differential results along racial lines apparently puts the burden of proof on the state.”

The ALST is also the target of a lawsuit. And as Daily Caller columnist Blake Neff so aptly puts it, the plaintiffs are arguing “that there is no clear evidence strong literacy skills are essential for a teacher.”

What about the students themselves? “I want to ask Judge Wood would she be willing to have any of these teachers teach her own children or grandchildren, and I would bet my life she’d say no,” stated National Council on Teacher Quality president Kate Walsh, whose group advocates tougher certification requirements. “They’re saying, at the risk of not appearing racist, or at the risk of having to make a hard call against adults, I’m going to sacrifice the best needs of kids.”

In New York, sacrificing the needs of kids is standard operating procedure. And it comes courtesy of the usual suspects. “The move to eliminate the reading test reflects the corrupting influence of the state’s teachers unions,” writes NY Post columnist Bob McManus. “Former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver may be on his way to prison, but his successor, Carl Heastie of The Bronx, still calls the tunes with the Regents — and the unions still choreograph the speaker.”

What they are choreographing is the continuing failure of a decades-long status quo where minority children routinely underperform, relative to their white and Asian counterparts.

Note that in virtually every progressive discussion about “minorities,” Asians are conspicuously absent from the mix. That’s because Asians not only outperform blacks and Hispanics, but whites as well. Thus characterizing them as minorities constitutes a mortal threat to those who worship at the altar of “disparate impact,” an odious, but government-enforced concept that presumes bias absent any evidence of it, based solely on statistical outcomes.

The mixture of statistical outcomes and Asians has produced another inconvenient reality utterly anathema to progressive New Yorkers: Asians have once again dominated the group of students who passed the test for admission to NYC’s eight elite high schools in the upcoming academic year. They secured 52.5% of the total seats, while 28% of whites, 6.5% of Hispanics and 3.8% of black students made the cut.

What to do? “Mayor de Blasio, the City Council and New York’s education establishment are discussing eliminating the single test in favor of interviews and portfolios — with extra credit for exemplary attendance!” McManus reveals.

In other words, if excellence in and of itself doesn’t accrue to the progressive agenda, embrace the race-based mediocrity required to produce the “proper” outcome.

“If minority kids are forced to attend lousy schools staffed with teachers who lack skills, it’s cheating the very group — minorities — that such a policy is meant to help,” the Post editorial board explains. “When will New York’s educrats put the interests of kids first?”

The answer is never, not as long as the same unions and their political lackeys who despise accountability remain in control. Even more insulting, these educrats are apparently immune to the reality that under-qualified teachers producing under-qualified students — who in turn become the under-qualified teachers of the future — insures a never-ending cycle of educational bankruptcy.

Educational bankruptcy that is acceptable, as long as “diversity” is served.


Don't look now, but the Thought Police are right behind YOU...

Peter Hitchens

I have a brilliant suggestion for a new TV detective drama. Its glamorous but sternly correct heroine is newly in charge of enforcing 'diversity' among the domes and towers of Oxford.

She lingers in its donnish common rooms, listening out for incorrect remarks and swooping righteously on those who 'stereotype minorities'.

As usual there are false leads and picturesque panoramas of Oxford embowered in water meadows. Unlikely suspects are revealed in the final minutes as homophobic reactionaries – or even Christians.

At the end of each episode we see handcuffed offenders being led away to police cars, their heads pushed down by officious constables as they bend to take the seat of shame.

Actually some of this is happening now. The arrests are a little way off still, but the nasty snooping is going on, and careers are in danger. We know this because of what happened to former Lord Chancellor Michael Gove when he recently attended a dinner at an Oxford College.

Before he sat down, his hosts gave Mr Gove a warning. He should be 'aware' the college had a diversity officer. He wondered why there were warning him. He was told: 'The job of the diversity officer… was to be alive to any comments in informal conversation or formal teaching that might be thought to be capable of giving offence to third parties.'

'So anything that seemed to stereotype, show disrespect towards minorities or create a climate in which an individual might feel their dignity infringed was to be recorded,' reflected Gove.

The culprit would be warned to stop. But if he persisted, he would be 'disciplined'.

Gove concluded: 'The job of the diversity officer in an explicitly intellectual institution was thus… to reduce the range of opinions expressed and thereby limit intellectual diversity.'

He will not name the college. But I researched and found that All Souls, famous round the world for its concentrated brainpower, does indeed have such a diversity officer. Its Warden, Professor Sir John Vickers, says he 'does not recognise the description'.

But I think I do. The College website boasts: 'The knowledge and awareness of diversity issues in the College has improved considerably in the last four years with the appointment of a Diversity Fellow.'

One of that official's achievements has been 'reminding colleagues of the importance of upholding equality principles in all aspects of College life'.

We know that students themselves are often childishly intolerant. But is liberty safe when a great institution of learning such as All Souls behaves like this?

Universities are supposed to be places where everything can be discussed freely. If Oxford is reduced to sending thought policemen to stalk its quadrangles, then what hope is there for those who speak out of turn in a normal workplace or anywhere else where willing narks are listening and officious ears are flapping?


Australia: Muslim leader claims authorities have been 'turning a blind eye' to radicalised students at Punchbowl Boys High School for 'years'

A prominent Muslim community leader claimed extremism has been a problem at Punchbowl Boys High School for at least six years.

Jamal Daoud said he heard concerns about radicalisation at the Sydney public school since 2011, and the NSW Government should have acted years ago.  'It's been going on for years,' he claimed.

'I had a friend whose son attended the school and was worried about extremism... there was violence and radical name-calling,' he told the Daily Telegraph.

Mr Daoud claimed the government had 'turned a blind eye' to students who were supporting Islamic extremism and called for a 'holistic' approach to the problem. 

He said radicalisation 'spread like a disease' and the source needed to be investigated - including looking into mosques linked to the school.

'It is an organised process that starts at home, school and at the mosque,' Mr Daoud said.

'My friend whose son attended the school himself ended up becoming radicalised and the things he had once seen as wrong, he started to see as right.'

Punchbowl High's Muslim convert principal Chris Griffiths and his deputy Joumana Dennaoui were dumped earlier this month after an investigation.

NSW Education boss Mark Scott said Mr Griffiths blocked an anti-radicalisation program, which lead to them being removed from their positions.

The school was identified as one of 19 New South Wales schools at risk of radicalising Muslim students.

It followed a series of allegations by staff, parents, and students into Mr Griffiths' running of the school, with Mr Scott conceding it was 'off the rails'.

Mr Griffiths allegedly stopping female teachers from participating in official events such as the Year 12 graduation ceremony.

He was also said to be trying to make the school Muslim-only, preventing police liaison officers from entering - with 'actively hostile' relations so bad they couldn't get in for 2.5 years.

Police were 'concerned about his rhetoric' and felt he was leading students down a 'dangerous path', after they had good relations when his predecessor Jihad Dib was in charge.

'Students were being told that if 'the pigs' stop you, to film them and refuse their directions,' a senior constable told the Telegraph.

Several employees claimed non-Muslim staff were verbally attacked, including with threats of beheading, by Muslim students declaring themselves ISIS sympathisers.

Non-Muslim students said they were bullied into attending Muslim prayers, lectures on the Koran and cut their hair to conform to Islam.

Another student allegedly attacked a teacher last year after refusing to participate in an anti-radicalisation program.

There was no suggestion either Mr Griffiths or Ms Dennaoui condoned the threats or incidents, but they were not reported to police.

Then, just as Mr Griffiths' replacement Robert Patruno took over, two men of Middle Eastern appearance, aged 19 and 20, allegedly threatened him. 'We're going to get you. We're going to f*** you up, you dog. F*** you,' the men allegedly said, according to the Telegraph.

Undeterred, Mr Patruno vowed to tackle radicalisation and sexism at the school by implementing the Stronger Communities Working Together program - and fly the Australian flag every day.

'It all comes down to education. If there is those values in the school, I'm going to address them. I'm not going to turn my back on them,' he said.


Tuesday, March 14, 2017

Betsy DeVos: President Trump delivers on education promises

President Trump’s first address to the joint session of Congress was clear: promises made, promises kept. The president promised to shake up the status quo in Washington, and he has. From keeping Carrier in the United States to nominating the highly qualified Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, our president continues to follow through on his word.

He’s also delivering on his promises for education.

The president made a point during the campaign to highlight the problems low-income families face in accessing a quality education. We cannot hope to get America back on track if we do nothing to improve education for the poorest among us.

The achievement gaps in education result in hundreds of billions of dollars of lost economic potential every year. And these gaps disproportionately harm minority students. Currently, more than 40% of African-American male students do not graduate high school.

These are more than just stats. They are the product of long-term trends.

For too long, Washington has focused on issuing edicts from its bubble, rather than empowering and amplifying solutions found at the grassroots level. We need to retire Washington’s top-down approach and instead empower answers from the bottom up.

But we also know the answer is not simply an increase in funding. As we saw under the Obama administration, one of its main initiatives was the “School Improvement Grants,” which pumped $7 billion into some of our most underserved schools. The only problem was that as the administration was walking out the door, it released a report showing that the grants had zero impact in improving test scores, graduation rates or college preparedness.

We cannot rely on throwing money at this problem like administrations past. Instead, we need to enact serious, substantive reforms that go to the source of the problem.

This work has already begun. On Tuesday, the president signed an executive order that elevates the initiative on historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), giving them greater access to policymaking in the White House.

Their history was born not out of mere choice but out of necessity, in the face of racism, and in the aftermath of the Civil War. HBCUs remain at the forefront of opening doors that had been unjustly closed to so many. They made higher education accessible to students who otherwise would have been denied the opportunity.

We must follow their lead and apply that same thinking to our K-12 system because the same reality exists: Too many students live without access to quality schools. These children and teenagers are assigned to failing schools based solely on the ZIP code in which they live. If they don’t have the means to move to a better school district, then they’re trapped.

This is not only unfair, it is also unjust.

The left continues to say they have a monopoly on compassion for our country’s poor, yet they consistently oppose the very reforms that can do the most good to close the education gap. The numbers continue to show that increasing school options has a positive effect on students generally, and an even greater impact on poor and minority students. If we truly want to provide better education to underserved communities, then it must start with giving parents and students school choice.

Trump has delivered on his promise to support school choice and offer students access to quality options. No child, regardless of her ZIP code or family income, should be denied access to quality education.

Together, we can help our nation’s students: those trapped in underperforming schools and those slipping through the cracks. One of those students was Denisha Merriweather, a guest of the first lady at Tuesday’s address. Denisha is living proof that school choice can break the cycle of poverty and provide transformative change. As a result of Florida’s Tax Credit Scholarship Program, Denisha became the first in her family to graduate high school, college and, later this May, with a master’s degree in social work. Denisha’s story is but one example of the opportunity we should afford to millions of students across our country.

Kids are 100% of our future. It is imperative that we do everything we can to ensure they each have an equal opportunity to a school where they can learn and thrive. The next generation deserves no less.


What Revolution? As American Campuses Roil, Israeli College Students Crack Open the Books

Donald Trump's victory over Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election has set off a wave of hysteria across American college campuses. From 'The West Wing' levels of righteous indignation before Election Day, the Zeitgeist settings at many institutions of higher learning have since been ratcheted up to DEFCON 1 nightmare scenario. 

Dear reader, just take a look at what's passing for higher education today: the banning of 'controversial' speakers, a failed attempt to ban hummus (chickpea paste) from campus dining halls, the creeping trend of 'bias response teams' that are thinly veiled thought police thugs, filing of a legal brief by nearly 20 U.S. universities against President Trump's executive order suspending travel to the United States by citizens of seven mostly Muslim countries.

And, to quote Al Jolson in 'The Jazz Singer,' "you ain't heard nothin' yet."

While young Americans are being exposed to toxic levels of illiberal education, their Israeli peers are quietly slogging through their studies without the benefits of frat parties, safe zones or such illuminating courses as 'The Art of Walking' or 'The Joy of Garbage.'

Many American campuses are warping liberal arts education so as to indoctrinate today's naïve students into becoming tomorrow's social justice warriors. And while approximately 60% of all freshmen college students in Israel major in the social sciences and humanities, college life here isn't widely perceived as an ideological training ground for cultural revolution. Rather, Israelis tend to regard higher education as just another stage on the long rite of passage from youth to adulthood, nestled somewhere in between serving in the Israel Defense Forces, a post-army trip to India and starting one's own family.

Why is there such a discrepancy between the respective attitudes to higher education in the United States and Israel?

"Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains," Winston Churchill said. And indeed, age may be a factor in how Israeli and American college students approach their education.

According to a recent Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) study, Israelis are the oldest students in the world. The study shows that in Israel, the median age for obtaining an undergraduate degree is slightly above 27, compared with an OECD average of just over 23.

The good news is that students who tend to be more mature and serious than peers abroad has resulted in Israel having the second-highest percentage of adults with a post-high school degree among OECD member states. However, there's trouble afoot in Israel's halls of academe. The country's higher education system is fossilized, operating with outdated methods and at an inadequate academic level, ultimately sending many students out into the workforce unprepared.

This disconnect between academia and employment is a problem Israeli students share with their American counterparts. In the United States, enrollments at colleges and universities nationwide peaked at more than 21 million in 2010, but have been sliding ever since. Out of control tuitions, ballooning student debts and shrinking opportunities in certain professions are three probable reasons for this decline.

If history is an accurate guide, then many of today's student radicals on American campuses will outgrow this acting out phase and go on to assume prominent roles in business, the arts and, of course, politics. Meanwhile, Israeli college graduates will probably have to pursue a good, stable life after receiving their diplomas while under periodic threat of armed conflict. The former group is hell bent on wreaking chaos, while the latter can't avoid it.

However, whether guided by dreams of social upheaval or social mobility, today's world-beaters will eventually come to realize that "education is not preparation for life; education is life itself."


Here’s How Your Tax Dollars Are Going To Mexico

Federal student loans have been criticized by Conservatives for many years now. These loans, backed with no collateral on the students’ part, have inflated the price of colleges over the last decades, rising the price to over $50,000 per year in some colleges. Not only do they burden our debt, but they finance useless degrees such as “gender studies” that will leave these students with no employment prospects out of college.

Could it get any worse? You bet. The Daily Caller reports:

Just over 30 percent of America’s college students with student loan debt admit that they plan to fritter away part of their federally-subsidized loan funds to pay for sun-and-beer-soaked spring break trips this year.

LendEDU, a student loan marketplace website, documented this startling fact in a nationwide survey of 500 students currently attending America’s colleges and universities.

The survey shows that 30.6 percent of debt-laden students say they are using student loan funds to pay for airfare and hotels, and to generally party hard on a super-fun vacation during their post-mid-term breaks.

That’s right, your tax dollars are now being used to finance decadent spring break to Mexico for Spring Break. Mexicans can make money from these irresponsible students, and you’ll be left footing the bill.


Monday, March 13, 2017

Why Betsy DeVos’ Support for School Choice Will Help America’s Schoolchildren

According to her opponents during her Senate confirmation hearing, Betsy DeVos, President Donald Trump’s choice for secretary of education, is guilty of wanting to privatize the public schools.

To be sure, the nominee’s critics are entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts. Here are the facts: DeVos believes that all children are entitled to the same educational opportunities regardless of income or ZIP code.

If you want a more accurate picture of DeVos, some journalists in her home state are more likely to paint it for you.

A Detroit News op-ed praised her record of compassionate interest in the individual welfare of children, calling her “a woman devoted to helping kids succeed regardless of their socio-economic background.”

And for this, certain members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee attempted to paint her as an enemy of public schools.

DeVos’ crime is that she, along with a majority of Americans, favors school choice. But solid research demonstrates why DeVos’ views are not only consistent with those of most parents, but also upheld by facts, evidence, and common sense.


School choice programs put power back into the hands of parents, who are best equipped to decide what type of education their children receive. Impersonal bureaucratic agencies cannot do this adequately.

School choice levels the socio-economic playing field by giving low-income families the same educational opportunities that high-income families have. A Harvard study of a New York City initiative found that minority students who received a school scholarship  “to attend private elementary schools in 1997 were, as of 2013, 10 percent more likely to enroll in college and 35 percent more likely than their peers in public school to obtain a bachelor’s degree.”

Similarly, the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program, which awards need-based annual scholarships for private schools to D.C. schoolchildren, has empowered thousands of low-income and minority students to escape underperforming, failing, or unsafe schools. A study commissioned by the Department of Education found that participants saw a 21 percentage point increase in graduation rates.

A nationally representative survey by Education Next of parents in charter, district, and private schools found that private and charter parents are more satisfied with their children’s schooling than parents whose children attend district schools.

A study conducted by John Merrifield of the University of Texas at San Antonio on school choice scholarships in San Antonio’s Edgewood School District found an approximately 17 percent increase in public school graduation rates that could be attributable to the scholarship program. The improvement appeared to be one of the responses to increased competition in the education sphere.

It’s clear that school choice does not undermine the public school system economically or rob resources from it. In fact, it has proven to be more cost-effective.

School choice empowers economically underprivileged kids and encourages racial diversity. And it simply does a better job of equipping parents to put their children in the best school environment suited to their children’s unique needs—whether traditional public, charter, or private school.

Isn’t that what this discussion is all about?

It is immoral for us as a people to lock children into a life of poverty because we lock them into severely underperforming schools.

Nevertheless, we are likely to see a heated battle take place next week when it comes to DeVos’ confirmation vote.

Here’s something to keep in mind, though: More than half of the Senate Democrats on the education committee considering her nomination either attended private or parochial schools themselves, or have children or grandchildren who do.

Why the opposition?

High school seniors’ reading achievement scores have not improved for at least two decades and have even dropped five points compared to 1992. Likewise, seniors’ math performance has also stagnated for at least a decade and has dropped since 2013.

In discussing the state of public education in America, U.S. News & World Report offered a bleak and candid assessment. “In urban school districts across the country,” an education reporter wrote in 2015, “student performance is flat, poor, and minority students are experiencing staggering inequalities, and the picture is especially troubling for black students.”

And this is the status quo we’re trying to protect?

It’s been pointed out that in the 1960s, there were low moments in education policy where individuals once stood in front of the schoolhouse door trying to keep minority children out. Now, there are some who would stand in front of the doors of failing schools to keep minority and other children in.

It’s time for a new way of thinking, and DeVos represents that. She has been a successful champion of school choice in Michigan and has helped bring similar opportunities to Florida, Louisiana, and other states.

She has what it takes to guide our nation’s education policy.

It’s time to stop playing politics with our nation’s children. Let’s work together for the reform that’s needed to do something big and bold to help our nation’s greatest treasure—the next generation.


UK: Israeli Apartheid Week is ugly, but it shouldn’t be banned

Both critics and supporters of Israel must have free speech

The end of February and the move into March marks an important time on the campus calendar, and it is not the celebration of the burgeoning spring season. No, this is the time of year when the anti-Israel activists dust off their mock checkpoints and papier mâché guns and prepare to irritate their fellow students with endless flyering. This is Israeli Apartheid Week (IAW).

I have written previously that the whole awful shebang belongs in the sick bucket, and I stand by it. Those behind IAW, closely tied to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel, have no interest in furthering debate on Israel and Palestine, or indeed in helping Palestinians. IAW is quite clearly an exercise in demonising Israel, based on a premise that is completely false. Like any other country, there is much to criticise about Israel’s politics, but Israel is not, and never has been, an apartheid state. Besides, there is both right and wrong on both sides of this conflict; campaigns like IAW, which seek to reduce a highly complicated situation to a battle between goodies and baddies, are highly disingenuous.

But like it or loathe it, the whole bogus roadshow pitches up at campuses across the world like clockwork every year, with different timings for different countries. This week there are events happening in Ireland and France; last week it was Britain’s turn. Except, this, IAW’s 13th year, is slightly different. Instead of the usual tradition of being offered free rein to use campuses as a playground for anti-Israel hyperbole, some activists found their events were blocked.

IAW events at Central Lancashire, Exeter and University College London were cancelled. Many are blaming universities minister Jo Johnson, who prior to IAW sent a letter to the head of Universities UK calling for a crackdown on anti-Semitic incidents on campus, and citing IAW events as a possible cause for concern. In the letter he reminded Nicola Dandridge, chief executive of Universities UK, of the government’s adoption last December of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of anti-Semitism. The definition has been subject to much criticism, and has been accused of outlawing criticism of Israel, as it highlights ‘targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity’ as anti-Semitism. Although the statement adds that ‘criticism of Israel similar to that levelled against any other country cannot be regarded as anti-Semitic’, and the government also added a similar caveat.

But Johnson’s concerns are not unfounded. Anti-Semitism is a real problem on British campuses. Recently, Holocaust denial leaflets were found on four different campuses, including Cambridge, and swastikas were painted at Exeter. Moreover, most Jewish and pro-Israel students spend IAW feeling intimidated on campus, or avoiding it altogether.

War On Want, in its write-up of IAW, complained that: ‘Some universities placed draconian restrictions on IAW events, including last-minute “risk assessments”, imposition of external moderators, securitised pre-registration processes, and even potentially unlawful cancellations. Students were not given clear information about these restrictions… These restrictions created an atmosphere of fear and intimidation on university campuses.’ Middle East Monitor also released a video showing clips of pro-Palestinian students talking about coming up against restrictive university measures and sometimes finding their events cancelled.

Ironically, this has been the experience of pro-Israel students for years. Their events are frequently subject to dubious last-minute cancellations and restrictions, and protests from anti-Israel activists frequently disrupt and even halt talks by Israeli speakers. Last November, Israeli speaker Hen Mazzig literally had to run off the UCL campus for his own safety. So forgive me if my first thought in response to the complaints about restrictions on IAW is ‘diddums’.

However, the event at the University of Central Lancashire, a panel discussion on the boycott of Israel, including anti-Israel activist Ben White, was cancelled, according to the university, because it was felt it may breach the new anti-Semitism definition. It turned out that grassroots group North West Friends of Israel had led a campaign to stop the event. There were also reports of threats of legal opposition against IAW events in the UK. And organisations the Israel Britain Alliance and Campaign Against Anti-Semitism launched legal campaigns against IAW. Meanwhile, the Israeli ambassador to France has asked French mayors to ban IAW events (taking place this week) in their towns and cities.

While the other universities in the UK which cancelled events cited procedural or practical reasons, they appear to have been under significant pressure to clamp down on IAW events. In what was possibly a misguided desire to address the very real problem of anti-Semitism on campus, universities appear to have capitulated. In response, an open letter in the Guardian signed by 243 academics called out universities for restricting free speech.

The fight for open debate about Israel and Palestine on campus is a tough one. Campaigns like IAW and BDS demonise Israel, and in doing so demonise those who support Israel. It is not a shock that pro-Israel and Jewish students at some of the most virulently anti-Israel campuses, such as SOAS and Kings College in London, often feel discriminated against and intimidated. And that anti-Israel activists are now posing as free-speech martyrs must irritate pro-Israel students who have so often found themselves silenced.

But defending free speech means defending it for everyone. If pro-Israel students and activists fail to do so, they’ll have no defence when their own events are censored. IAW is undoubtedly an ugly campaign. But it should not be censored. The answer is more speech, not less.


Ivy League 2017

 James Fisher said he couldn't attend classes at the University of Pennsylvania because one his white professors refused to denounce his white privilege. Fisher is black, and he wrote an article about his mental anguish published in his university's newspaper The Daily Pennsylvanian. "I stopped going to his class for a month. With different emotions going through my head from not only this class but from the Trump election, I did not want to step foot into another white space until I made sure that my mental health was restored," Fisher wrote.

The paper said Fisher is from the Bronx, NY and in his picture looked fairly normal. He must have learned some toughness living there and he's only in his sophomore year at UPenn. Is this what can happen to a man after only one year in an Ivy League school these days? He can get completely rattled by a white man who doesn't think the way Fisher believes he should? Fisher claims his professor is nice, but Fisher claims being in his presence is still traumatizing:

    "These are the types of things that happen when white teachers do not want to acknowledge their privileges; they can psychologically hurt their students. It is not enough to be aware of your privilege. It is also not enough to be a nice person. Your niceness does not mean that you are not capable of contributing to racial systems of oppression."

It's sad that Fisher is evidently coming unglued. I'm not a mental health professional, but it seems there are other issues going on with him and he's blaming a "nice" white guy for his problems. But why did the university newspaper provide space for his embarrassing article? That's what I'm wondering. Looking into this, I discovered the paper is entirely student-run, but it's funded by the university, which is private and not part of the state of Pennsylvania as, say, the University of Maine is. Pennsylvania taxpayers are not funding it, except as they pay taxes to the federal government which provides assistance for some of its students to attend there or to attend any other college. In that sense, I'm paying too and so is every other American taxpayer.

I also learned that 250 students work for the newspaper and elect an all-student board every year which makes editorial decisions like publishing Fisher's article. I saw no disclaimer such as the typical: "Opinions expressed here are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect the views of this newspaper." Seeing something like that might have provided me some comfort

Fisher's article ran under a headline identifying it as part of a continuing series called: "Spilling the Real Tea" which runs every two weeks. Given the university was established in 1740, I wondered if it was some reference to the Boston Tea Party during which revolutionaries spilled British Tea into Boston harbor in protest against the British government. When I googled the expression, all that came up were examples of people using it. Judging from context clues, it seems to mean something like "telling the real truth."

Is that what the elected board of students at a prestigious university believe James Fisher is doing? Telling the real truth? Must be, since I see he's published three other articles in the same space. Is this indicative of how absolutely crazy it is on American campuses today? It would seem so. I'll leave you with another quote from Fisher:

    "It is not enough that you are sorry for the injustices caused by your people. It is not enough that you read one article on the Black Lives Matter movement because your black friend recommended it to you. It is not enough that you gave your black students extensions on their papers because Trump got elected. The truth is, you as a single person cannot make up for the horrific things that white people have done to us throughout human history. But that does not mean that you do not have the power to stop yourself from oppressing the students that you teach every day."

Remember, it costs $70,000 a year to go to the University of Pennsylvania today. What a deal, huh?   


Sunday, March 12, 2017

UK: Established grammar schools must offer lower pass marks to poorer pupils

It is entirely reasonable for Grammars to do all they can to get poor but bright kids into their classes -- but admitting poor and dumb students undermines the whole point of a selective school.  This is politics gone mad

All existing grammar schools will be forced to offer lower 11-plus pass marks to poorer children or embrace similar radical moves to end the middle-class stranglehold.

Reforms to be announced next month will compel grammars to increase their intake of children from deprived backgrounds in an attempt to counter criticism that they are elitist.

The move is intended to open the best selective schools to Theresa May’s “ordinary working families” but is likely to provoke hostility in the largely Conservative-run areas where most grammars are in place.

Ministers have previously stated that the new generation of grammar schools planned by Mrs May must show that they will accept significant proportions of disadvantaged pupils.


We Hear You: The NAACP, Political Correctness, and School Choice

Editor’s note: Today your letters include thoughtful responses to a commentary by school choice activist Virginia Walden Ford and to a Daily Signal supporter’s appeal about making a difference on important issues. Want to write us? You’ll see how below. —Ken McIntyre

Dear Daily Signal: I agree with Virginia Walden Ford’s commentary article. The NAACP has become useless because the leadership has devolved from their original goals of helping black people advance (“I’m a Black Woman Whose Relatives Fought for Civil Rights. I’m Disappointed in NAACP’s War on School Choice”).

The NAACP has become a political arm of the Democrats.

Education is the most important goal in bringing anyone out of their past and into a brighter future. I can attest to that goal, because my mother felt the same way. I am a native American from Alaska, and did experience hunger and poor conditions.

My grade school teacher told my mother that I was a slow learner, so pushed me to do my homework and not just finish what was assigned but all the problems.

I was held back in the first grade, but I made that up in the seventh grade. I graduated to the eighth grade and did well. My mom sent me to a parochial boarding school, even though it put a burden on her.

I excelled and graduated as a valedictorian with a degree in electronics, even though I missed a year due to tuberculosis. Electronics was in its infancy and “solid state” was the new term. I worked as a failure analyst in the position of supervising lab engineer.

All children should be afforded the same opportunities as I received. The education system has become abysmal because of political correctness. It is no longer acceptable to hold back students even if they are failing at their current grade.

There are also the great experiments that have failed the children. The current fad, Common Core, is the worst because your answer could be wrong and still be judged correct.

I would like to see a spaceship sent to Mars with the calculations wrong, with the engineer explaining how he arrived at the wrong calculation—and he would not be fired.

Parents should be able to determine where to send their children to receive the best education. I sent my children to another school district because their school ranked in the bottom one-third. The problem was that the teachers would lower their course for the bottom of the class, and my sons were bored. There was no challenge to keep their minds busy.

The other problem was discipline. The teachers were not allowed to correct unruly children because it would “hurt” the children mentally. Charter schools do not have those problems, because the children can be expelled and the teachers do help the slow learners.


Students at Sydney boys' high 'at high risk of Islamic radicalisation' after the school's top student fled to Syria to join ISIS

Students at a boys' high school were 'at high risk of radicalisation' because one of the top pupils fled to Syria to join Islamic state after he graduated.

Parents have told The Australian students at Canterbury Boys High School in southwest Sydney began the government-funded anti-radicalisation program last year - after their 2013 dux Samir Atwani joined Islamic State.

Punchbowl Boys High School was also reportedly identified as needing the specialist program, but the school refused and principal Chris Griffiths with his deputy Joumana Dennaoui were later dismissed.

The Education Department would not confirm which schools were in the program, saying it would breach privacy and operational rules.

Another spokesperson for the department had said the program, School Communities Working Together, was not a 'deradicalisation program' - but a 'proactive program designed to support students'.

The Education Department said it had conducted an 'extensive appraisal of the school's policies, procedures and management'.

The investigation was prompted by its refusal to participate in School Community Working Together, department boss Mark Scott said.

Staff made a series of serious complaints in 2016.

Women teachers had been prevented from participating in official events such as the Year 12 graduation ceremony, it was alleged.

Daily Mail Australia has approached Canterbury Boys High School and the Department of Education for comment.