[GA - Passed] Educational Equality Act

Status
Not open for further replies.
Magecastle

Magecastle

Wolf of the North
Pronouns
He/Him
TNP Nation
Magecastle_Embassy_Building_A5
Discord
red_canine
ga.jpg

Educational Equality Act
Category: Education and Creativity | Area of Effect: Educational
Proposed by: The Ice States, Co-authored by: Evinea | Onsite Topic​

Discrimination and harassment against protected classes in schools, such as targeting of minority students and discriminatory hate speech, is a widespread problem in some member nations, denying such students a safe and healthy education experience. Such discrimination and harassment can also create undue pressure on minority students to conceal their identity or minority status. However, some schools still take little to no action against discrimination within their schools, or merely engage in "lip service" against discrimination in the absence of strong legislation protecting minority groups in education. The World Assembly thus enacts as follows,
  1. For the purposes of this resolution, these terms are defined as follows,
    1. A "school" is defined as an institution designed for the organised education of students by providing learning spaces and environments.

    2. A "protected class" is any social categorisation implicitly or explicitly defined by World Assembly law as arbitrary or reductive, or which is protected as such under national or subnational law.

    3. "Hate speech" is defined as public speech which expresses or promotes, whether explicitly or implicitly, hate or discrimination towards a protected class; this includes, but is not limited to, the use of slurs against said class.
  2. Every school must actively and continuously work to prevent, and take action against, any instances within the scope of said school's authority of (a) hate speech, or (b) harassment of individuals based on their real or perceived membership of a protected class. Every school must also encourage its students to report and try to stop such acts should they occur. However, this provision shall not be interpreted as prohibiting the use of examples of hate speech for educational purposes, so long as this occurs in a manner which does not construe such hate speech as correct or legitimate.

  3. Every school must offer resources to its students to
    1. assist them in coming to terms with their belonging to a protected class;

    2. help them overcome harassment or discrimination for their real or perceived membership of a protected class; and

    3. otherwise support its students' mental health from issues involving said students' real or perceived membership in a protected class, including discrimination motivated thereby.

  4. Every member nation must prescribe, as part of a mandatory curriculum for all its students under the age of majority, regardless of whether relevant schools are publicly owned, and in a manner appropriate to said students' age, an understanding of discrimination against protected classes in said member nation, including
    1. the subjects, forms, and prevalence of discrimination in the present day, including recognising such discrimination, how and why it is unjust, and the impacts of various types of discrimination;

    2. any history in that member nation of discrimination against protected classes, regardless of state-enforced nature or lack thereof in such discrimination; and

    3. how such students can personally act to prevent or otherwise halt observed acts of discrimination or harassment against individuals based on their protected class status.

  5. All member nations must prohibit schools under their jurisdiction from discriminating against their students on the basis of their real or perceived membership of a protected class.
Click to expand...
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

ForAgainstAbstainPresent
10701
 
Last edited:
Overview
This resolution seeks to replace the now-repealed GA #603 "LGBTIQA Inclusiveness in Schools Act", while establishing a broader scope for all discrimination in education. It begins by defining such terms as "school", "protected class" and "hate speech", before requiring schools to take action against instances of hate speech and discrimination which take place under their authority. The resolution then obligates schools to supply various resources to help students cope with discrimination and belonging to a protected class, including general education on the topic of discrimination and protected classes. Schools are then prohibited from themselves engaging in discrimination based on protected classes.

Recommendation
Overall we find this to be an effective replacement of #603. It resolves the flaws which led to its repeal, while introducing stronger protections for all discrimination, as opposed to that merely against LGBTIQA+ groups. We agree with the resolution that discrimination in education is a problem member nations need to address, and this resolution adequately ensures that they do so.

For the above reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends a vote For the at-vote GA resolution, "Educational Equality Act".
 
Last edited:
I absolutely should start writing to our core audience of high school students by banning homework for starters. Any else that our target audience likes?

Edit: This submission took place while I was travelling (as MoWAA knows) so I didn't read it as I wasnt online. It is quite problematic as Kenmoria pointed out gameside with regards to clause 5 over whether Catholic schools can enrol Catholic or non Catholic students. Present for now but I need to consider the wording carefully.
 
Last edited:
Simone:
Edit: This submission took place while I was travelling (as MoWAA knows) so I didn't read it as I wasnt online. It is quite problematic as Kenmoria pointed out gameside with regards to clause 5 over whether Catholic schools can enrol Catholic or non Catholic students. Present for now but I need to consider the wording carefully.
Click to expand...
It's quite subtle but I think it's worded so as to not ban Catholic schools only enrolling Catholic students -- Section 5, by using "their students" implies that they are already students, not merely prospective ones. Discrimination in enrolment is obviously also an issue, and one that is already addressed by GA #514.
 
Against. As per a long discussion with Magecastle, clause 5 might or might not be in conflict with Clause 4 of GAR#561, depending on what definition you apply to "places of worship" or "participation in their religious & church-organised social activities", and whether the state has a state religion, such as England* or New Zealand#.

*Headed by Charles the third, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

#Headed by Charles the Third, By the Grace of God King of New Zealand and of His Other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.
 
Last edited:
Simone:
Against. As per a long discussion with Magecastle, clause 5 might or might not be in conflict with Clause 4 of GAR#561, depending on what definition you apply to "places of worship" or "participation in their religious & church-organised social activities", and whether the state has a state religion, such as England* or New Zealand#.

*Headed by Charles the third, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

#Headed by Charles the Third, By the Grace of God King of New Zealand and of His Other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.
Click to expand...
Obviously we already discussed this by DM, more so for onlookers -- I don't think it is in conflict even if the relevant provision in #561 were interpreted as applying to schools. If it is, Section 5 of this resolution still only applies to current students, not former or prospective ones -- if a nation is religious, and it wants religious schools to be able to remove non-Catholic students, then it would interpret EEA as not applying (ie neither legalising nor prohibiting the practice). If doesn't want that, for any religious or non-religious reason, it makes no effect whether they interpret WA law as forcing them to institute such measures. Of course (although this is not related to the resolution itself) both religious schools and state religions are bad and should be banned.
 
Last edited:
Magecastle:
Obviously we already discussed this by DM, more so for onlookers -- I don't think it is in conflict even if the relevant provision in #561 were interpreted as applying to schools. If it is, Section 5 of this resolution still only applies to current students, not former or prospective ones -- if a nation is religious, and it wants religious schools to be able to remove non-Catholic students, then it would interpret EEA as not applying (ie neither legalising nor prohibiting the practice). If doesn't want that, for any religious or non-religious reason, it makes no effect whether they interpret WA law as forcing them to institute such measures. Of course (although this is not related to the resolution itself) both religious schools and state religions are bad and should be banned.
Click to expand...

There's a long and rather boring discussion about state religions as well and whether students that switch religions half-way through school would be in violation of the resolution and how that would work.
 
Last edited:
Simone:
There's a long and rather boring discussion about state religions as well and whether students that switch religions half-way through school would be in violation of the resolution and how that would work.
Click to expand...
I don't see how this is even colourably an interpretation. The resolution does not force any discrimination against current, former or prospective students to occur. You can argue that some particular example of discrimination does not fall under the resolution, but then that is all -- it does not fall under the resolution. That does not mean it is required. I'd strongly encourage voters not to vote based on an interpretation of the resolution which is not even plausible.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top