Committee did not conduct serious analysis on IB

To the Editor:

I’m writing in response to last week’s letter regarding International Baccalaureate in the Bedford High School. The committee members determined “IB was a vital asset to our high school,” but left many criticisms never fully analyzed or addressed.

IB hasn’t been criticized in Bedford only, this program has been criticized by School Board members, parents, teachers, students and even state Ccongressmen.

IB is in partnership with the United Nations. U.S. lawmakers are talking about cutting funding to the U.N. due to the rampant fraud and abuse within the organization.

The head of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, has begun holding hearings to stop funding the U.N. because the U.N. undermines U.S. interests.

Mark Olsen, a Minnesota congressman on the floor of the Minnesota House, referred to IB as indoctrinating against America rather than educating for America. He refers directly to an IB document that supports the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights (www.ibo.org/diploma/documents/continuum.pdf). A document that states rights and freedoms cannot conflict with the United Nations (Article 29). This contradicts our individual rights as stated in the United States founding documents.

The government is not the guarantor of human rights in the United States. What IB promotes is similar to supporting the constitution in Cuba.

IB has caused so much concern by residents that IB has a document at their website informing school districts on how to address the criticism. I’m not aware of AP having the need to offer schools a step by step procedure to silence the critics.

IB refers to organizations and individuals pushing Marxism as good ethical guide on global poverty. An example is Dr. Peter Singer who has publicly stated his support for killing newborn disabled infants (globalengage.ibo.org/files/Global_lesson_ToK_E.doc).

There is strong criticism against this program in a number of communities, however, this has been dismissed as conjecture, opinion and internet clippings. These criticisms were drawn from what IB publicly states in their program and materials.

Unfortunately, the committee also failed to get a cost analysis of IB vs. AP. We’ve been told the costs of IB are “reasonable.” How can we be assured of this when there has been no cost analysis on both programs?

Other schools have dropped IB in favor of the AP Scholars Program to save taxpayer money (www.islandpacket.com/2011/02/04/1536239/international-baccalaureate-program.html).

While I appreciate the committee attempting to dig a little deeper into the IB program, it is unfortunate we still have no real transparency on how IB is implemented in Bedford.

Will IB in Bedford promote the UNDHR in the program? If not, will Bedford notify IB that we will not be incorporating that agenda in the program, and then make that public?

How does the partnership with the United Nations work with IB? Are Bedford taxpayers funding the U.N. through the IBO?

Can IB identify what part of the U.N. agenda is in their program and how much we will see in Bedford?

Is the Earth Charter, a pro-Marxist document part of the IB program in Bedford? The IBO once publicly endorsed the Earth Charter and has maintained their support for the Earth Charter through the IBO program. What part, if any of the Earth Charter, is part of the IB program in Bedford?

It is unfortunate the Curriculum Committee did not take the initiative to conduct a serious analysis on the criticisms and costs to taxpayers. It would be beneficial if our School Board Members, took this initiative at some point and truly make this program transparent to the community.