Teaching Human Rights

               This post is a summary of a teaching material published at http://www.un.org/wcm/webdav/site/visitors/shared/documents/pdfs/Pub_United%20Nations_ABC_human%20rights.pdf

         Teaching Human Rights talks about us as human beings. It talks about the process of teaching and learning the significance of the inherent "dignity and worth of the human person" which is the "foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world" (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, preamble). And it talks about the rights that belongs to us all. These are lessons for life. In this sense, human rights education means not only teaching and learning about human rights, but also for human rights: its fundamental role is to empower individuals to defend their own rights and those of others. The realization of human rights is our common responsibility, and its achievement is entirely dependent on the contribution that each and everyone will be willing to make. Human rights may be generally defined as those rights which are inherent in our nature. They are based on humankind`s increasing demand for a life in which the inherent dignity and worth of each human being are accorded respect and protected. Their denial is not only an individual tragedy but also creates conditions of social and political unrest, sowing the seeds of violence and conflict within and between societies and nations. Since the adoption of the UDHR, human rights have become central to the work of the United Nations. Within the United Nations system, human rights are furthered by a myriad of different mechanisms and procedures. Not least of these activities to promote human rights is human rights education. The U.N. assembly affirmed that "human rights education should involve more than the provision of information and should constitute a comprehensive life-long process by which people in all strata of society learn respect for the dignity of others and the means and methods of ensuring that respect in all societies. Central to this text is the idea that teaching about human rights is not enough. For this reason the largest part of this text consists of activities. These create opportunities for students and teachers to examine the basic elements that make up human rights - life, justice, freedom, equality and the destructive character of deprivation, suffering and pain - and then to use them to work out what they truly think and feel about a wide range of real-world issues. Teachers carries a great responsibility for communication of the human rights message. Opportunities to do this may vary: human rights themes may be infused into existing school subjects, such as history, literature, arts, geography, or may have a specific course allocated to them. Human rights education may also be pursued through less formal education arenas such as after-school activities and youth forums. Ideally, a human rights culture should be built into the whole curriculum, as part of the established curriculum in the social and economic sciences and humanities. The history of human rights tells a detailed story of efforts made to define the basic dignity and worth of the human being and his or her most fundamental entitlements. These efforts continue to this day. Research has shown that some upper primary and secondary school students suffer from lack of confidence that limits their ability to socialize with others. It is difficult to care about someone else`s rights when you do not expect to have any yourself. Where this is the case, teaching for human rights could require going back to the beginning and teaching confidence and tolerance first.The focus of human rights education is not outward but also inward on personal values, attitudes and behaviour. For the basic principles of a human rights culture to survive, people must continue to see a point in defending them: "I have a right to this. It is not just what I need. It is my right."  Unless people have the chance to work out such reasons for themselves, they will not claim their rights when they are with-held or taken away, or feel responsibility to defend the rights of others. At its most complex, hypocrisy raises profound questions about how to protect and promote the human dignity. The fact that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have global validity and applicability is very important for teachers. By promoting human rights standards, the teacher can honestly say that he or she is not preaching. Teachers have a second challenge, however: to teach in such a way as to respect human rights in the school itself. For learning to have practical benefit, students need not only to learn about human rights but to learn in an environment that models them. This means avoiding any hipocrisy. At its simplest, hypocrisy refers to situations where what a teacher is teaching is clearly at odds with how he or she is teaching it. A human rights culture attempts to define principles for the positive conduct of all human behaviour. What follows are issues involved in realizing these principles. As some of these issues may prove to be controversial, the teacher`s sensitivity and discretion are required. Teachers who want to concentrate on specific issues ( e.g. world development, prisoners of conscience, privacy, anti-racism or anti-sexism ) should present them in a human rights context. This general understanding will provide depth. Teachers who specialize in different aspects of human rights should work side by side to provide understanding in depth.     

Day of Teachers 2014

               Last Wednesday, October 15th all the Brazil celebrated the day of teachers. So this post is a tribute to these very important professionals. Many times do not so recognized as they should be. This post is a summary of two articles. The first with the title of, "World Teachers` Day 2014." Published in October at http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/events/prizes-and celebrations/celebrations/international-days/world-teachersday-2014 .    The second with the title of, "Value teachers as much as education." This article was published in March of 2014  at http://www.providencejournal.com/opinion/commentary/20140315-value-teachers-as-much-as-educat

                Teachers are an investment for the future of countries. What today`s children will face in adult life can not be predicted and so the teachers of today and tomorrow need the skills, knowledge and support that will enable them to meet the diverse learning needs of every girl and boy. This year, we celebrate the 20th anniversary of World Teachers`Day. The day commemorates the adoption of the ILO/UNESCO Recommendation concerning the status of teachers in 1966. This recommendation is morally binding for all countries. In many countries, the quality of education is undermined by a deficit of teachers. 1.4 million teachers are missing in classrooms by 2015, according to the UNESCO. Added to the challenge of numbers is one of quality: all too often, teachers work without resources or proper training. It is essential that teachers remain a priority. The Global Thematic Consultation on Education in the Post-2015 Development Agenda states the essential for supporting teachers` effectiveness: 1) good conditions of employment, including appropriate contracts and salaries, and prospects for career progression and promotion;  2) good conditions in the work environment, based on creating schools contexts that are conducive to teaching;  3) high-quality training for teachers, based on respect for human rights and the principles of inclusive education. 4)  effective management, including teacher recruitment and deployment. The international community and governments need to stand united to support teachers and quality learning worldwide, but especially in those countries where the highest number of out-of-school children exists. This Teachers` day UNESCO and its partners invite all to help spread the message that invest in teachers is key. After all, an education system is only as good as its teachers.

              I am a high school student, and my university search has begun, and this include questions about our anticipated university majors and career plans. The way people react to our answers provides important insights into societal values: When young people say they aspire to be physicians, lawyers, or scientists, are they assumed to be intelligent and ambitious? What about those who want to be teachers? When I have revealed that this is my plan, I have been met with a less than enthusiastic response. Sometimes it seems like my years of hard work and diligence in school have been reduced to this one question, and my answer leaves some unimpressed. I have been taught to value my teachers and that education is sacred. Yet my interest in education as a career does not seem to be celebrated by society, nor necessarily seen as a positive reflection of my intellect or academic achievements. Could it be possible that the lack of respect for the profession is a driving force behind the underperformance of our nation`s education system? One country with different values and better results than ours is Finland. In PISA tests Finland has achieved strong results. Finland is often studied because of its focus on reforming its education system, a process that began in the 1980s and culminated in its current status as one of the top-performing education system in the world. One obvious cultural difference between Finland and the U.S. is the respect shown for individuals in the teaching profession. It is said that Finnish teachers are looked upon as favorably as doctors, engineers and economists. This is reflected in their compensation. In Finland, there is more non-teaching classroom time, and this time is spent on lessons plans, discussions with other teachers, curriculum development, and so on. This foster the culture of a learning community in which continual improvement and professional development are encouraged. Research shows that countries with the best scholastic performance typically pay teachers a higher wage than countries with lower performance. Countries that have succeeded in raising the status of teaching as a profession have done so not only by increasing compensation but also by giving teachers a voice in educational reform. The education of our children should be one of our top priorities, especially given our academic outcomes relative to those of other countries. Perhaps the answer to the concerns about our education system is a simple one: Our society should value teachers as much as we ask our students to value education. A shift in the collective attitude toward teaching may be surprisingly beneficial. 

Privacy From State Snooping Defines a True Democracy

              This post is a summary of two articles. The first with the title above was published in April of 2012, at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/03/privacy-state-snooping-true-democracy. The second was published in August 2012 at  http://www.salon.com/2012/08/05/privacy_why_it_matters_much_more_than_you_think/

           As we welcome the glimmers of democracy in Burma and applaud the heroic struggle for freedom and rights in countries such as Russia, China and Syria, it beggars belief that Britain now contemplates a law that will allow police and security services to access data from every phone call, email, internet connection and text message, without a warrant. The millions who suffer under dictatorships will be astonished that we are about to let slip, with so little protest, the freedoms for which they continue to sacrifice so much. Privacy from state snooping is the defining quality of any true democracy. If the bill next month is made law, Britain will overnight become a substantially less free country, our status as one of the beacons of freedom seriously diminished. This is among the most serious threats to freedom proposed anywhere in the democratic world. It compete with the very worst authoritarian laws and the last government`s morbid obsession with personal information. Those promoting the law, which will allow real-time surveillance of a person`s communications and their web usage, insist that the state only wants to know who is calling who, and the content of message, emails will remain private. It is an assurance that should be treated with the greatest scepticism for two reasons. The law of function creep means that opressive measures passed to address terrorism and crime are invariably deployed in much less threatening contexts. For example, the spread of surveillance under the last government`s Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act resulted in local councils using counter-terror methods to mount undercover operations against fly-tippers and those suspected of lying in school applications. Once the police have these powers to insist that internet and phone companies hand over our data without our knowledge, it will be a short step for the same people to argue that they need to start reading our communications. These things ought to be a deal-breaker for the coalition because they go against everything Liberals Democrats they believed before the last election, and indeed against the coalition agreement itself, which placed an emphasis on privacy and civil liberties. Perhaps one thing in the politicians defence is that both the surveillance bill and the proposal to greatly increase secret hearings were inspired by civil servants and agency heads, rather than politicians: this is the agenda of the unelected officials who never have to go before the electorate and can run their affairs without being inconvenienced by too much public scrutiny. The bill, if becomes law, will vastly increase state power, which is why officials have been lobbying for measures like these. Politicians are there to defend us against such people. When the head of MI5 (Military Intelligence section 5), United Kingdom Security Agency, Jonathan Evans, make these suggestions, they should be told in no uncertain terms that they are unacceptable in a democracy. It is worth fighting in an age when google and the phone companies know so much about us already? The answer comes from the german philosopher Wolfgang Sofsky, who wrote: "Privacy is the citadel of personal freedom, it provides defence against expropriation, importunity and imposition, against power and coercion." The more practical objection is that police and security services are capable of getting things wrong as well as abusing a system that allow such power over ordinary citizens. Given the countless cases of police misconduct and present worries about the standards of Britain`s police, it is probably wise not to hand them such an intrusive tool. This surveillance system is the instrument of a Kafkaesque state that grants itself the right to universal suspicion, while enjoying the protection of a new law, that allows evidence of official misconduct to be heard in secret.

             The greatest threat to privacy in contemporary America is a pervasive indifference. Many citizens are willing to give up a certain amount of their personal information to obtain credit cards, post photos on Facebook. After all, if you you are not doing anything wrong, what do you have to hide? At least that is the logic flitting through many minds. Read it to jolt your imagination into new territory, and to understand why privacy that many of us sacrifice so readily ought to be held more dear. Garret Keizer, a writer who lives in Vermont, points out, "the chief purpose of privacy is to reconcile his profound desire to be let alone with his faith in community and collective enterprise. Yankee reticence combined with town-hall meeting citizenship , reminiscent of Robert Frost`s belief that good fences make good neighbors. Keizer aims to show that privacy, and respect for privacy, are core humanist values that should be enshrined in the heart of any society aspiring to social justice. He argues this against two distinct points of view that treat privacy as uninportant. The first, and by far the most common, regard privacy as a relatively minor right that can and often should cede precedence in favor of commerce and security. But there is another type of skepticism toward privacy rights. To the tech moguls who seems to think we ought to blithely hand over our personal information, he retorts. "If privacy were not a good thing, the wealthier would not enjoy more of it than less wealthy do." Keizer`s observations on the embattled privacy of the poor, the distinctions between privacy and loneliness and the essential link between the degradation of public life and disrespect for the sanctuary of private life will serve readers of all political flavors.  I am not totally sure if Keizer successfully demonstrate the compatibility of privacy and to each according to its need. Yet I am entirely convinced by Keizer`s argument that a society that does not value personal privacy can not plausibly claim to value humanity. This may be a far bigger conundrum than one slender book can solve, but the book "Privacy" by Keizer is a step in the right direction.