QUANTO COSTA FARE INDOTTRINARE I PROPRI FIGLI DA INSEGNANTI GRADITI AL WEF

this is a teacher teaching his class; October 5 is World Teachers Day
'This World Teachers’ Day, 5 October, UNESCO, UNICEF and the International Labour Organization have jointly called for greater investment in the teaching profession.'
Image: UNSPLASH/NeONBRAND
  • UN agencies have called for more investment in teachers on World Teachers’ Day, 5 October.
  • On average, teachers in OECD countries earn 81-96% of the salaries of tertiary-educated workers.
  • Teachers in Luxembourg with more than 15 years’ experience can expect to earn more than £109,000.
  • Fair compensation for teachers is essential to ensuring every child receives a quality education - and to prepare young people for the future of jobs.

It’s been a year and a half since the COVID-19 pandemic forced schools to close and teachers to start providing lessons online, almost overnight.

Throughout the height of lockdowns, many teachers also continued to provide in-person education to children of key workers. And as schools have reopened in countries where measures have eased, high levels of interaction with students continues to put teachers at risk of exposure to COVID-19.

All of this is taking a toll: A recent survey of teachers in Singapore found that 80% said the pandemic had impacted their mental health, due to the added workload and pressures.

This World Teachers’ Day, 5 October, UNESCO, UNICEF and the International Labour Organization have jointly called for greater investment in the teaching profession.

"We are calling on countries to invest in them and prioritize them in global education recovery efforts so that every learner has access to a qualified and supported teacher," said Audrey Azoulay, Director-General of UNESCO, Guy Ryder, Director-General of the International Labour Organization, Henrietta H. Fore, Executive Director of UNICEF, and David Edwards, General Secretary of Education International.

The highest-paid teachers in the world

Globally, teachers’ salaries vary hugely, according to the OECD’s Education At A Glance 2021 report. On average, teachers in OECD countries earn 81-96% of the salaries of tertiary-educated workers.

a graph showing lower secondary teachers' average income salaries compared to the statutory starting and top of the scale salaries (2020)
Teachers' salaries vary hugely across the world.
Image: How lower secondary teachers’ salaries compare

In general, teachers’ salaries increase with the level of education they teach, so teachers with more than 15 years’ experience can expect to earn an average of $48,025 at primary level, rising to $49,701 at lower secondary and $51,917 at upper secondary.

In Luxembourg, lower secondary teachers with more than 15 years’ experience, can expect to earn more than $109,000, with Germany and the Netherlands among other high-paying countries.

At the other end of the scale is the Slovak Republic, where teachers at the same level, with the same experience can expect to earn less than a quarter of this - at around $19,000.

Why teachers’ pay matters

Education providers need to recruit and retain the best-quality teachers to close learning gaps and ensure every child has access to a quality education, which is the UN’s fourth Sustainable Development Goal.

“Compensation and working conditions are important for attracting, developing and retaining skilled and high-quality teachers and school heads,” says the OECD report.

“It is important for policy makers to carefully consider the salaries and career prospects of teachers as they try to ensure both high-quality teaching and sustainable education budgets.”

What is the World Economic Forum doing to improve digital intelligence in children?

The latest figures show that 56% of 8-12-year-olds across 29 countries are involved in at least one of the world's major cyber-risks: cyberbullying, video-game addiction, online sexual behaviour or meeting with strangers encountered on the web.

Using the Forum's platform to accelerate its work globally, #DQEveryChild, an initiative to increase the digital intelligence quotient (DQ) of children aged 8-12, has reduced cyber-risk exposure by 15%.

In March 2019, the DQ Global Standards Report 2019 was launched – the first attempt to define a global standard for digital literacy, skills and readiness across the education and technology sectors.

The 8 Digital Citizenship Skills every child needs
The 8 Digital Citizenship Skills every child needs
Image: DQ Institute

Our System Initiative on Shaping the Future of Media, Information and Entertainment has brought together key stakeholders to ensure better digital intelligence for children worldwide. Find our more about DQ Citizenship in our Impact Story.

As countries look to accelerate the economic recovery from COVID-19, skilling and upskilling young people and workers will be hugely important for the future.

The World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report 2020 predicts that by 2025, 85 million jobs may be displaced by a shift in the division of labour between humans and machines.

But some 97 million new roles may emerge that are more adapted to the new division of labour between humans, machines and algorithms - and this is where key ‘human’ soft skills like problem-solving will be key.

License and Republishing

Subscribe for updates

A weekly update of what’s on the Global Agenda

About

Media

Members & Partners

Follow the World Economic Forum

CHIGAGO MEAT AUTHORITY TO PAY $1.1 MILLION TO SETTLE EEOC RACIAL DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION SUIT

PIAZZALE LORETO VI ASPETTA

 Due miliardi per Grillo: Perchè Beppe Grillo sostiene che la popolazione mondiale debba ridursi di 5 miliardi, e perché le sue visioni e proposte sono davvero in grado di riuscirci. (Italian Edition) by [Claudio Giudici]

Due miliardi per Grillo: Perchè Beppe Grillo sostiene che la popolazione mondiale debba ridursi di 5 miliardi, e perché le sue visioni e proposte sono davvero in grado di riuscirci. (Italian Edition) Kindle Edition


Amazon Business: Make the most of your Amazon Business account with exclusive tools and savings. Login now

Product details

  • ASIN ‏ : ‎ B00NN93APW
  • Publication date ‏ : ‎ September 16, 2014
  • Language ‏ : ‎ Italian
  • File size ‏ : ‎ 412 KB
  • Simultaneous device usage ‏ : ‎ Unlimited
  • Text-to-Speech ‏ : ‎ Enabled
  • Screen Reader ‏ : ‎ Supported
  • Enhanced typesetting ‏ : ‎ Enabled
  • Word Wise ‏ : ‎ Not Enabled
  • Print length ‏ : ‎ 79 pages
  • Lending ‏ : ‎ Enabled

PIAZZALE LORETO VI ASPETTA

 

Coronavirus e Governo, Giorgia Meloni durissima contro Giuseppe Conte: "È un criminale"

L'attacco di Giorgia Meloni al premier Giuseppe Conte dopo le misure del governo per l'emergenza Coronavirus: "Ho trovato scandaloso il suo comportamento"

  • a
  • a
  • a

Giorgia Meloni senza freni contro il Governo. La leader di Fratelli d'Italia in piena emergenza Coronavirus parla a "L'Aria Che Tira" e non nasconde il suo dissenso nei confronti delle misure adottate dall'esecutivo di Giuseppe Conte. Sotto accusa le modalità della squadra di governo rossogialla. "Questo è un momento in cui la classe dirigente deve essere classe dirigente - denuncia la Meloni - La responsabilità che io per prima ho cercato di dimostrare, magari rinunciando a cercare un consenso facile sulla paura della gente, mi aspetto di avere un presidente del Consiglio che faccia la stessa cosa. Mi aspetto un presidente del Consiglio che metta la Patria prima di se stesso".

PIAZZALE LORETO VI ASPETTA

 

Conte su Facebook: «Hanno denunciato me e 6 ministri per comportamenti criminali»

Il presidente del consiglio, Giuseppe Conte (Foto ANSA)

ROMA – Dal banco degli avvocati a quello degli imputati. E Giuseppe Conte commenta quasi con sarcasmo, attraverso Facebook, i capi d’imputazione a carico suo e di sei ministri: «Nei mesi scorsi alcuni cittadini, avvocati, finanche un’associazione dei consumatori hanno dichiarato pubblicamente di avere presentato denunce nei miei confronti e del Governo per la gestione della pandemia. Le accuse sono state le più varie. Alcuni ci hanno accusato di avere adottato misure restrittive, altri ci hanno accusato di non aver adottato misure sufficienti o di averle adottate troppo tardi».

Il presidente del consiglio, con tono notarile ma non preoccupato, aggiunge: «Ci hanno addebitato i più variegati comportamenti criminali: il reato di epidemia, di omicidio colposo, di attentato alla incolumità pubblica, di attentato contro la Costituzione e contro i diritti politici dei cittadini, e altri ancora».

National Geographic’s ‘Fauci’ documentary is self-serving agitprop made to feed the Fauci fetish of establishment liberals Michael McCaffrey

 

          National Geographic’s ‘Fauci’ documentary is self-serving agitprop made to feed the Fauci fetish of establishment liberals

Michael McCaffrey
Michael McCaffrey

Michael McCaffrey is a writer and cultural critic who lives in Los Angeles. His work can be read at RT, Counterpunch and at his website mpmacting.com/blog. He is also the host of the popular cinema podcast Looking California and Feeling Minnesota. Follow him on Twitter @MPMActingCo

National Geographic’s ‘Fauci’ documentary is self-serving agitprop made to feed the Fauci fetish of establishment liberals
The film is an unabashed ode to the blessed Anthony Fauci, patron saint of ‘The Science’, and narcissist-in-chief at the National Institute of Health.

‘Fauci’, the creatively titled new National Geographic documentary airing on Disney+, sets out under a decidedly deceptive guise of impartiality to tell the truth about America’s favorite foremost scientist, Dr. Anthony Fauci. 

Over the last year and a half, as the coronavirus has ravaged the US and marched across the globe, Dr. Fauci, whom the film describes as “a world-renowned infectious disease specialist and longest-serving public health leader in Washington, DC,” has become a beatified cultural icon to some and a lightning rod of controversy to others.

Also on rt.com Disney+ debuts cringey trailer for Fauci documentary as doctor accuses media of ‘misinterpreting’ his Christmas-gathering comments

I consider myself agnostic on Dr. Fauci, but admit that I’ve never understood the media and public veneration of him. I don’t loathe the guy, but he just always struck me as a blowhard bureaucrat with an ego inversely proportional to his intellect. But what the hell do I know? 

Now, if you worship at the altar of St. Fauci – Patron Saint of ‘The Science’ – then Fauci will certainly satiate your Fauci fetish. But if you even mildly question the actions or intentions of the Brooklyn-born scientist/sage, then this documentary is definitely not for you. 

The film seems like a slick, one-hour-forty-five-minute campaign commercial meant to solidify the base rather than reach the indecisive. It boasts a plethora of personal interest anecdotes, as well as montages of family time and even shots of a sexy Fauci in the family pool in a Speedo (no, I’m not kidding). Then there’s the requisite conjured tears to indicate Fauci’s heartfelt humanity, and moments of him cursing to reveal how down-to-earth he is, plus a healthy serving of pious-filled Fauci faux humility. Oh, and there’s also the cavalcade of establishment endorsements from the likes of Bill Gates, George W. Bush, and Bono. 

But if you were hoping for an actual investigation into Dr. Fauci, you’ve come to the wrong documentary, as filmmakers John Hoffman and Janet Tobias seem deathly allergic to actual journalism.

Looking for questions regarding gain of function research, or a feet-to-the-fire moment over the venerated Fauci’s falsities and flip-flops regarding Covid and masks? Or answers to questions like… if the disease is so deadly, why is the southern border still so porous, potentially allowing in infected illegal immigrants? Or if the lockdown was instituted in order to avoid overwhelming ICU units and hospitals, why weren’t more ICU units built and hospital capabilities expanded over the last year and a half? Or if the vaccine doesn’t stop transmission of the disease but only reduces the severity of the illness, then why should anyone care about the unvaccinated, since they are only putting themselves at risk? 

You’ll have to look elsewhere, because ‘Fauci’ doesn’t just not have answers to those questions, it never even considers asking them. 

The whole documentary feels like a bad job interview, where the interviewer asks, “What are your biggest weaknesses?” and the candidate replies, “I work too hard, care too much, and am too dedicated to helping people.”

Of course, this is a sentimental, softball cinematic venture, so there’s no pushback amongst the prodigious amount of pattycake. 

Even when the film does go through the motions of pretending to be impartial, it lets its bias overwhelm it. 

For instance, Fauci’s arrogant bungling of the AIDS crisis in the 80s is transformed into the narrative of a noble public health worker bridging divides, bringing people together, and bravely standing up against homophobia. 

Fauci’s mishandling of the AIDS epidemic in Africa is also shown in a similar light, but instead of Fauci fighting homophobia, he’s fighting racism. 

The filmmakers’ use of Fauci’s alleged fight against homophobia and racism in these cases is meant to suffocate any liberal questions over Fauci’s record and solidify support among the movie’s ideological base.

They also use Trump as a convenient foil, once again to signal their and Fauci’s liberal bona fides. A red-faced Trump comes in for some very heavy criticism in the documentary – for example, when asked what his first impressions of Trump were, Fauci derisively responds, “Yikes!”

Fauci paints himself as a paragon of truth and Trump as an arrogant buffoon, but the good doctor’s own, sometimes fatal flaws never make a blip on the radar screen of ‘Fauci’

For example, from the very beginning of his career all those decades ago, Fauci’s narcissism is readily apparent. He clearly adores being in front of cameras and at the center of attention. This narcissism directly feeds his blind spot – arrogance, most notably in regards to the AIDS crisis and his failure to tell the truth regarding Covid to the American people. This arrogance has cost countless lives. 

It’s Fauci’s lack of humility and inability to admit mistakes that has done so much damage to the credibility of the medical establishment in the US. 

Also on rt.com ‘Not driven by immigrants’: ‘Grinch’ Fauci mulls canceling Christmas due to Covid, rejects accusations of migrants spreading virus

If Fauci were consistent and truthful about what he’s done and hasn’t done, and where he’s been wrong, it would go a long way towards healing what ails the medical establishment, but self-reflection isn’t Dr. Fauci’s strong suit – self-promotion is, and ‘Fauci’ is proof of that. 

Ultimately, ‘Fauci’ is a painfully pandering paean to its subject, and an unintentional ode to the relentless narcissism that drives him. If, like Fauci, you love Fauci, then you’ll love ‘Fauci’. If you loathe him or are ambivalent, this piece of shameless and brazen agitprop isn’t going to convince you otherwise.

The gold standard of espionage is human intelligence, yet the CIA has never come close to perfecting the art and likely never will

 

          The gold standard of espionage is human intelligence, yet the CIA has never come close to perfecting the art and likely never will

Scott Ritter
Scott Ritter

is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer and author of 'SCORPION KING: America's Suicidal Embrace of Nuclear Weapons from FDR to Trump.' He served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter

The gold standard of espionage is human intelligence, yet the CIA has never come close to perfecting the art and likely never will
The CIA is America’s premier intelligence service. And yet, its history is rife with examples of failure linked to institutional failings that appear beyond reform. Sometimes it's best to hit the ‘delete’ button and start over.

The New York Times has run a front page story highlighting the dismal state of human intelligence collection on the part of America’s premier intelligence service, the CIA. It points out that the agency has, in the past few years, lost “dozens” of agents – captured, killed, or turned – around the world. The article cites former CIA officers who blame an overemphasis on paramilitary and counterterrorism operations in the two decades since the 9/11 attacks, noting that the imperatives of intelligence gathering under combat-like conditions are anathema to the patience and planning necessary for classic human intelligence operations. But the reality is that the CIA has never done human intelligence well, and its record of failure predates 9/11, running right the way back to the agency’s founding.

The CIA exists for one reason: to provide intelligence products to policy makers inside the US government, which means to support the principal policy maker in the US government, the president. This is done by preparing various assessments, estimates, and briefings derived from secret information gathered through a carefully managed collection process, and subjected to informed, disciplined analysis by experts. These products come in different forms, with the most notable being the crown jewel – the President’s Daily Brief.

Intelligence comes from a variety of sources – imagery analysts examine photography obtained through satellites and reconnaissance aircraft, while signals analysts comb through immense databases of intercepted communications and emissions. A photograph, however, is but a snapshot of events that transpire over time, and communications often contain only a snippet of the entire conversation, or else lack overall context. The crème de la crème of intelligence over the ages has been the well-placed human source. Someone privy to the intimate nature of decision-making, who can bring a photograph or partial dialogue to life with first-hand accounts of what was happening at the time. Unlike a photograph or intercepted conversation, a human source can be accessed repeatedly over time for the purpose of answering questions or gathering new information.

Also on rt.com CIA airlifted thousands of Afghan commandos accused of war crimes and serious abuses out of country during withdrawal – reports

Human intelligence is deemed so vital to the national security of the United States that the CIA has dedicated an entire directorate in the pursuit of those who would spy on their own countries. The officers assigned the delicate task of human intelligence collection are known as ‘case officers’. Case officers are considered the elite of the CIA, trained in a variety of dark arts, and skilled in spotting potential talent, recruiting them as a controlled asset, and then ‘running’ them – getting them to gain access to information deemed critical to the national security of the United States. Case officers recruit agents, and agents, by extension, become the gold coin of the CIA realm – the more agents one recruits, the better Case Officer they must be, and as such the possibilities of promotion increase.

Recruiting an agent is hard work – that is, if the goal is to recruit an agent of real value. Rare is the opportunity to gain access to the inner circle of decision-making taking place in a nation or organization targeted for collection. A case officer must gain access to a potential target, determine his or her access to information of value, and then ascertain the potential of success in bringing that person over to the side of the US. There are different means of motivating a person. While the ideologically motivated recruit is the most highly sought after, in terms of reliability, they are also the hardest to find, since hostile security forces are usually adept at weeding them out long before they grow into someone of genuine intelligence value.

The CIA, therefore, tends to exploit human frailty – alcohol, drugs, lust, greed, etc. – when recruiting an agent. The motivations of the recruited asset are, logically, suspect from the start. But as long as the information they provide is of value to the CIA, such things are overlooked.

Most CIA case officers work in so-called ‘covered’ positions, working with less nefarious job titles at US embassies around the world, so long as the role provides diplomatic immunity. The length of these tours is, therefore, defined by the ‘cover’ position – usually two or three years. The time it takes to spot, assess, recruit, and develop a human asset with proven access at the highest levels of decision-making is much longer than that. But case officers are judged by the number of agents they recruit, not their quality.

This reality is drilled into them during their first tour overseas, usually by an alcoholic ‘old hand’ who doesn’t want to be shown up by the newer generation. Taxi drivers, prostitutes, pimps, drunks, wife-beaters, liars, cheaters, and other assorted petty criminals – these get recruited by the CIA in droves. Case officers will often embellish the value of an agent, to the point of fabricating information. And if they play this game well enough, they get a promotion, and another plum assignment, where they get to repeat the same sordid behavior all over again.

Also on rt.com CIA informants overseas get killed, captured or compromised by dozens, according to media citing TOP SECRET cable

The best human intelligence produced by the CIA comes from so-called ‘walk-ins’. GRU Colonel Oleg Penkovsky, who famously helped avert nuclear war during the Cuban missile crisis, was a walk-in. So, too, was Adolf Tolkachev, the so-called ‘billion-dollar spy’ who helped the US win the Cold War. What motivates a walk-in depends on the individual in question. Usually it’s ideology. The one thing most walk-ins have in common, however, is how they die – usually arrested and executed by those they betrayed, their identities revealed by the incompetence of the services they sold themselves to.

The CIA has a long history of failing those whom it recruited. Russia, China, Iraq, Iran – all of these nations have recent experience in rolling up agent ‘networks’ run by the CIA. In almost every instance, the demise of these agents can be traced back to one thing: incompetence by the CIA case officers responsible for running the operation. Incompetence, it seems, is a common virtue among America’s spies.

There is a tendency today to try and cloak the CIA’s failures by attributing them to the corrosive influence of counterterrorism and paramilitary operations. But the fact is, the CIA has been uniformly bad at the human intelligence game since day one. There will be a host of CIA defenders who will take umbrage at such a sweeping declaration. Most of these will be former case officers. While they will seek to shield their career-defining moments in a cloak of secrecy, the fact is they are defined by their failures, not successes. If you worked the Russia desk in the past 20 to 30 years, you have failed. If you worked China, you have failed. Iraq – failure. Iran – failure. North Korea – failure. Afghanistan? Yes, failure. Venezuela? Failure? You can literally throw a dart at a map of the world, and almost anywhere it strikes, you will find a failed CIA operation.

The CIA, in releasing the data about the number of agents that it has lost, is hoping that the disinfectant of sunlight can cure the institutional rot that has beset its human intelligence operations. Nothing can. The United States is left with a choice – to continue to allow the institutionalization of incompetence that characterizes the CIA’s Directorate of Operations to exist, knowing all too well that spies cannot self-reform, or to disband the CIA as it is currently organized, and start from scratch, where there exists an institutional ethos built on the notion of quality over quantity when it comes to the recruitment of human agents.

If I were a betting man, I’d go all-in on the continued embrace of incompetence. But that’s just me – I never worked for the CIA.

Lettori fissi