NationStates Jolt Archive

Here is the text of the proposal:
Free Speech in the Classroom

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights


Strength: Significant


Proposed by: Brown Stick Men

Description: DEFINING The Classroom as any place where structured education takes place: including but not limited to, government sactioned primary (or elementary) schools, high schools or other places of secondary education and colleges and universities. As well as privately run counter-parts to the above.

ASSERTING Teachers, professors and other educators will be free from persecution, imprisonment, or other forms of harrassment from the government for what is taught in a classroom setting so long as such teaching or speech is does not violate established laws or limitation on speech in the individual nation.

NOTING this resolution does not affect an individual nation's right to set any curriculam they see fit or limit leaders or school officials from ensuring that educators follow established laws.

REPEALS The Right To Learn About Evolution as being too specific and out of the scope of the charter of the UN. The argument being that this resolution does a far better job of protecting all ideas in a classroom regardless of a nation's technical level or cultural, social and religious ideals. With this resolution in place, no nation can completely outlaw any educational idea without outlawing free speech in general, which is already outlawed by various other resolutions.

CONCLUSION The UN should be concerned that all citizens are properly educated, this resolution clarifies that a teacher's speech cannot be limited because of a educational setting.

I made this proposal because it seems that while I feel educational freedom is already covered by the UN, a significant number of members don't as evidenced by "The Right to Learn about Evolution". I've introduced this as a compromise that hopefully addresses those concerns by specifically recognizing classroom teaching as free speech/expression. But by also recognizing that individual nations have the right to place limits as they see fit, and to set their own curriculum, as they see fit.

I understand that as written the proposal breaks the rules by repealing the other proposal. My apologies for that mistake, it was something I somehow missed. My suggestion is that it be rewritten to nullify "The Right to Learn About Evolution" (which should then enable us to repeal it easily).

Since this one looks like it won't gather enough support I'd love to hear everyone suggestions for how it can be better and will resubmit it after this one is offically gone.

I totally endorse this proposal.

REPEALS The Right To Learn About Evolution as being too specific and out of the scope of the charter of the UN. The argument being that this resolution does a far better job of protecting all ideas in a classroom regardless of a nation's technical level or cultural, social and religious ideals. With this resolution in place, no nation can completely outlaw any educational idea without outlawing free speech in general, which is already outlawed by various other resolutions.


UN proposal rules dictate that repeals must be seperate proposals from a replacement resolution. In order to do what you want to do, you need to repeal Right to Learn About Evolution then submit a replacement proposal.

Free Speech in the Classroom

A resolution to improve worldwide human and civil rights.


Category: Human Rights


Strength: Significant


Proposed by: Brown Stick Men

Description: DEFINING The Classroom as any place where structured education takes place: including but not limited to, government sactioned primary (or elementary) schools, high schools or other places of secondary education and colleges and universities. As well as privately run counter-parts to the above.

Free speech in a "structred education[al]" system? If it's "structured" then the teachers should not have "freedom" of speech... Nor should the students. Everything should be free within the confines of the curriculum.

If a math teacher is going to be discussing politics in her classroom, she is going to be fired for not following the curriculum of study.


ASSERTING Teachers, professors and other educators will be free from persecution, imprisonment, or other forms of harrassment from the government for what is taught in a classroom setting so long as such teaching or speech is does not violate established laws or limitation on speech in the individual nation.

Contradictory.


NOTING this resolution does not affect an individual nation's right to set any curriculam they see fit or limit leaders or school officials from ensuring that educators follow established laws.

Then why have it?


REPEALS The Right To Learn About Evolution as being too specific and out of the scope of the charter of the UN. The argument being that this resolution does a far better job of protecting all ideas in a classroom regardless of a nation's technical level or cultural, social and religious ideals. With this resolution in place, no nation can completely outlaw any educational idea without outlawing free speech in general, which is already outlawed by various other resolutions.

Illegal...


CONCLUSION The UN should be concerned that all citizens are properly educated, this resolution clarifies that a teacher's speech cannot be limited because of a educational setting.

Contradictory.

The Representative from Tekania reveals his hand:
http://img112.echo.cx/img112/9943/readthestickies5la.jpghttp://img112.echo.cx/img112/2601/readthefaq5yd.jpghttp://img112.echo.cx/img112/7448/illegalproposal2yd.jpg

UN proposal rules dictate that repeals must be seperate proposals from a replacement resolution. In order to do what you want to do, you need to repeal Right to Learn About Evolution then submit a replacement proposal.
This is entirely correct.

~ Frisbeeteria ~
NationStates Forum Moderator
Forum and Game Rules (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=416023)

Free speech in a "structred education[al]" system? If it's "structured" then the teachers should not have "freedom" of speech... Nor should the students. Everything should be free within the confines of the curriculum.

If a math teacher is going to be discussing politics in her classroom, she is going to be fired for not following the curriculum of study.

Well I see your point, the name perhaps should be something more along the lines of "Educational Freedom" or maybe "The right to learn about anything"? The idea is that a teacher can't be harrassed, jailed, etc. for doing his or her job. The proposal specifically says they can be disiplined for breaking the rules such as the math teacher discussing politics as you mentioned.

ASSERTING Teachers, professors and other educators will be free from persecution, imprisonment, or other forms of harrassment from the government for what is taught in a classroom setting so long as such teaching or speech is does not violate established laws or limitation on speech in the individual nation.

Contradictory.

I don't see how. Lets take the evolution issue that sparked this whole thing: If I teach evolution in my science class and the government doesn't like it, they can't throw me in jail for doing so. They can take evolution out of the curriculam and fire me if I teach it anyway but they can't throw me in jail if I start a private school and teach evolution there.

If you feel its contradictory then how about examples as to why or how it could be worded better.

Then why have it?
Because (as I stated when I started this thread) a significant number of members in the UN feel that certain ideas need to be protected in education. I don't nessicarily agree with that but i'm looking for a compromise by attempting to protect all ideas that can be taught.

Illegal... :rolleyes:
Thank you and all the other Capt. Obviouses that pointed this out. I said that myself when I started the thread, it was an honest mistake, I missed that in the rules. I'm looking for suggestions on making it better so it can be resubmitted.

Unfortunately I have to agree with Tekania.

This resolution effectively does nothing, other than appease those nations who thought we needed The Right To Learn About Evolution. As that resolution passed, I think those nations are already appeased.

I've been trying to think of ways of attacking the issue from other angles. My biggest concern is still about making sure that teachers teach the curriculum that they are employed to teach. So maybe a proposal that prevents the government from limiting curriculums (quite difficult in a government run school system). Or a proposal that allows anyone to open a private school if they want to teach something outside of the government school curriculum. There'd have to be limits on what these private schools would be allowed to teach because I'm sure most nations wouldn't like it if schools teaching bomb construction were allowed to open willy-nilly! Maybe limiting to school teaching theoretical ideas...

Anyway, I'm rambling. I don't think either of the above ideas are particularly good but maybe they're a starting place for thinking about this issue slightly differently...

This resolution effectively does nothing, other than appease those nations who thought we needed The Right To Learn About Evolution. As that resolution passed, I think those nations are already appeased.

well I'm trying to appease the nations that think its a really bad idea while making sure the nations who like it are still somewhat happy that something that protects the same right is in place.

My biggest concern is still about making sure that teachers teach the curriculum that they are employed to teach.
That's what I was trying to accomplish by making the proposal specifically say they can't teach anything illegal and can still be fired for not teaching what they were employed to teach. I think the problem is its just not flushed out enough to make that clear. The intent is that the government still has power over what is taught in a tax-payer funded school but the goverment:

Doesn't have the power to harass or jail people over educational issues (unless its something illegal)
Doesn't have the power to supress education in a private institution
Can't make ideas themselves illegal, only exclude ideas from the curriculum

So maybe a proposal that prevents the government from limiting curriculums (quite difficult in a government run school system).
Well I don't like that because really I think that's what most people, myself including don't like about the Evolution resolution.

Or a proposal that allows anyone to open a private school if they want to teach something outside of the government school curriculum. There'd have to be limits on what these private schools would be allowed to teach because I'm sure most nations wouldn't like it if schools teaching bomb construction were allowed to open willy-nilly!
The private school idea is where I'm trying to go with the current proposal. The limit would be anything that's illegal already in an individual nation. I don't think its in the UN's best interest to decide for a nation 'good' ideas and 'bad' ideas. For instance in Brown Stick Men we wouldn't have a problem with a bomb construction class since there are legitimate uses for bombs, we have a problem with bombs being used for illegal means, i.e. killing people or destroying property.

Anyway, I'm rambling. I don't think either of the above ideas are particularly good but maybe they're a starting place for thinking about this issue slightly differently...

I really think we have a lot of the same ideas the proposal just needs to be much clearer.

Interesting proposal. But I think that this would open a greater door to other issues that will need to be addressed. A classroom is a structured environment that need to be monitored by the educational staff and should be held accountable to meeting the standards set forth.

I am in full support of free speech to the students, they should be allow to discuss and form groups to discuss all forms of matters. I however, DO NOT, believe that this should apply to members of the educational staff of primary (elementary) or secondary (junior high or high) schools.

The class room needs to stay neutral in all matters. The students are there to learn the facts of the world, history, math, native language, and a variety of electives. In most places to graduate they need to meet minimum basic standards. The job of teachers on the staffs that are paid (in most cases) by the taxes collected is to make sure the students have the skills needed to meet those standards, not to use the class room as a soap box for what ever topic suits them.

Students need the facts of the world given to them. Not to be feed an unedited line of unknown and possibly unsafe rhetoric. For example, what if a history teacher is extremely religious and decided to teach history according only to the views of the bible, or contradicted the class room’s history book with his churches view of the matter.

I mean no disrespect by the afore mentioned example, this is just one of the many possible exploitations possible by this proposal. Teachers need to follow approved guidelines and standards set out by the facility. They should be free and protected to believe and live there lives as they want outside of the classroom with no repercussions to their jobs. However that has no place in the classroom.

Students must be allowed to develop their own opinions with the fact they will be given in the classroom, the news that they collect from current events, and the upbringing provided by their family. They should not be subjected to possible brainwashing or personal opinions by those entrusted to educate them.

Of course I am referring to primary and secondary mandated education only. This does not apply to voluntary education (college) that is paid for by the students, or by student loans, government grants, what have you. At this point in their live most student will already have the necessary skills to dissimulate the information given to them and will be less susceptible to coercion.

In its current form we would be unable to offer our support to this resolution.

Minister to the UN
Henry Peabody

I really think we have a lot of the same ideas the proposal just needs to be much clearer.

Agreed.

The private school idea is where I'm trying to go with the current proposal. The limit would be anything that's illegal already in an individual nation.

The intent is that the government still has power over what is taught in a tax-payer funded school but the goverment:
Doesn't have the power to harass or jail people over educational issues (unless its something illegal)
Doesn't have the power to supress education in a private institution
Can't make ideas themselves illegal, only exclude ideas from the curriculum

I think this is clearer than the actual propoal as a statement of your aims so maybe rewording along these lines.

Just to ensure that I completely understand the point though, is the idea (really simply) that anyone can set themselves up as a private institute of education teaching whatever they like, provided they aren't breaking any other laws?

Thank you and all the other Capt. Obviouses that pointed this out. I said that myself when I started the thread, it was an honest mistake, I missed that in the rules. I'm looking for suggestions on making it better so it can be resubmitted.

Well, if you understood it, then why have it in there?

Simple solution is remove that line and create a seperate proposal to repeal. That is the only way to abide by present guidelines for submission.

I have a question though. Perhapse it is out of cultural barrier to the concept, but; How would a teacher be "jailed or harrassed" for "teaching in the curriculum"? Since it seems illogical for a state to develope a curriculum, and then jail their own people for teaching in it...

Just to ensure that I completely understand the point though, is the idea (really simply) that anyone can set themselves up as a private institute of education teaching whatever they like, provided they aren't breaking any other laws?

Exactly, the other thing I'm trying to do is make it so that the government can't change curreculum or pass laws after the fact to fire or worse throw someone in jail for teaching something relevent. Say a teacher in a history class talks about atrocities committed by their own nation in a war, their government shouldn't be able to step in and then claim it shouldn't be taught. That's the trickier part because calling that 'Free speech' opens up the possibility that anything could be taught in any class.

I'll try to write another proposal later today and post it here to clear these issues up.

Well, if you understood it, then why have it in there?

Because that's what I had, and instead of making another proposal I felt it would be better to have a discussion with other members about the basic idea thus making a better overall proposal.

Simple solution is remove that line and create a seperate proposal to repeal. That is the only way to abide by present guidelines for submission.

Agreed, but other people have pointed out things in the proposal that aren't clear, so instead of having another proposal that is sure to fail we'll have one that has a chance of making it to a general vote.

I have a question though. Perhapse it is out of cultural barrier to the concept, but; How would a teacher be "jailed or harrassed" for "teaching in the curriculum"? Since it seems illogical for a state to develope a curriculum, and then jail their own people for teaching in it...

Politicians are typically fickle. And the UN deals with lots of different types of governments. Also the government might not have an official curreculum, for example they could just decide one day to make a portion of history they don't like illegal to teach and threaten teachers with jail or harassment over it. Actually having a set curreculum would avoid some of these issues all together. Perhaps the new proposal should require the government to come up with a curreculum for government funded schools that they would have to abide by. The UN wouldn't set what is taught but it would ensure that everyone has a base in their nation for what is acceptable and what is not.

Thank you and all the other Capt. Obviouses that pointed this out. I said that myself when I started the thread, it was an honest mistake, I missed that in the rules. I'm looking for suggestions on making it better so it can be resubmitted.

Well, according to my experience in the forum, that is definitely not the way to get it.

I've created a new thread with a rough draft of a new proposal using the ideas here. It has not been submitted yet. I want to make sure it's a better proposal before doing so.

The thread is Educational Freedom.