Bay schools phase out gay-friendly curriculum
By LISA LEFF (AP) – 22 hours ago
ALAMEDA, Calif. —
The school board blinked.
Under the duress of a lawsuit and threats of recall, the Alameda Board of Education has voted to phase out an elementary school curriculum it adopted in May to prevent anti-gay bullying.
The so-called Lesson 9, which had become an opposition centerpiece in a national anti-gay marriage campaign, will be replaced by a more generic anti-bullying message.
But the board’s action Tuesday night did little to ease the tension between gay parents, who want their children protected, and parents who who think elementary school is too early to talk to students about gay people.
The new anti-bullying lessons approved by the board, at the recommendation of School Superintendent Kirsten Vital, will be supplemented by children’s books that explicitly address six specific forms of bias, including against gays.
“This has torn apart our community,” said school trustee Trish Herrera Spencer, the board member most opposed to the gay curriculum and who opposed adding the supplemental books. She said the board’s latest action did not take into consideration “the strong beliefs” of all in the community. The 45-minute Lesson 9, which was to be taught once a year in each grade starting with kindergarten, sparked a lawsuit, accusations that religious families were being discriminated against and threats of a recall election against the three board members who approved it.
Vital said her recommendation was meant to counter complaints from parents opposed to the original lesson because it highlighted only one type of bullying.
“There is not an off-the-shelf, perfect curriculum that is going to work for our community,” Vital said, explaining that she wants to solicit book recommendations, bring them back to the school board for approval in a few months and then work with teachers to develop accompanying lesson plans in time for the 2010-11 academic year.
Several parents said they did not trust a teachers’ committee to pick books that would both satisfy gay and lesbian parents and parents with religious views that do not condone homosexuality.
“Freedom of religion is protected from harassment and discrimination from anyone. It may be of no consequence to some, but it is a very integral part of many traditional families and should be honored,” said Kellie Wood, who has three children in Alameda schools and is part of a group circulating recall election petitions. “If we’re all honest, the friction between two protected classes, in particular, will not go away.”
Kathy Passmore, a lesbian mother of two, said she hears students using anti-gay language in her job as a sixth grade teacher in Alameda. She urged the school board to retain the spirit of Lesson 9.
“The children of gay families exist and are attending ASUD schools every single day,” she said. “They are here.”
Alameda, an island city that foots Oakland and is home to a Coast Guard installation and a former Naval base that is being eyed for housing, is the latest community to be divided by its school district’s desire to curb anti-gay bullying and the concerns of parents who do not want their children to hear about gay and lesbian issues in school.
During last year’s campaign to pass a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriages in California, the measure’s sponsors ran commercials featuring a Massachusetts couple who unsuccessfully sued their local district for the right to pull their child out of anti-bullying lessons that included references to gay households.
A year later, the same public relations firm that developed that ad developed a new one for the campaign to outlaw gay marriage in Maine focusing on a second-grade picture book that was part of Alameda’s Lesson 9. The book, “Who’s In A Family,” contains pictures of families headed by grandparents, single parents and gay parents, among others.
A dozen Alameda families sued the school district earlier this year over its contention that parents did not have to be notified in advance when teachers planned to give the lessons so they could keep their children from receiving them. Last week, an Alameda Superior Court judge sided with the school district, ruling that a state law allowing parents to have their “opt-out” of discussions about human sexuality did not apply to Lesson 9.
Kevin Snider, a lawyer with the conservative Pacific Justice Institute who represented the Alameda families, said before the school board’s vote that his clients would not appeal the judge’s ruling if the school board eliminated Lesson 9. He did not immediately return a call Wednesday for clarification on whether the board’s action satisfied that condition.
Related posts:
yes Gay should be given some space, after all they are also a part of society, there is no point in neglecting them, every one in this world has a right to choose their own path and way to follow, so we have no right to criticize anyone.
The words are irrelevant – words follow sentiment. What needs to be addressed is the sentiment at the root. Instead of focusing on slurs, focus instead on portraying good role models and positive images, and the slurs will die off. The N word is ludicrously passe with a black man in the Whitehouse. Disparaging words toward homosexuals will become antiquated when enough prominent gays are part of the cultural fabric.
Well… to be fair, putting a stop to the N word has only been… moderately? effective, at best…
I’d say it’s more like the K word, but we’re not trying to completely eliminate the word ‘gay’ from the language, just make it less of a curse, you know?
It’s not as simple as just getting rid of gay, since that’s (probably) the last thing any of us want to do. It is for me, anyway.
yes Gay should be given some space, after all they are also a part of society, there is no point in neglecting them, every one in this world has a right to choose their own path and way to follow, so we have no right to criticize anyone.
There’s certainly room for a great deal of debate around EQAO testing. While the testing is costly and time consuming for students and teachers, it does provide a standard measurement of how students are faring across the province. This can be reassuring to parents and also provide schools themselves with a snapshot on student achievement in math, reading and writing.
But does every school need to be tested each year? Are there more cost effective ways of accomplishing similar results? Could students be tested every other year? Could a random sample of students across the province be tested each year? And could the money that is saved be put into school programs and resources?
One of my concerns is that EQAO testing is becoming the most important measure of a school. Personally I find this wrong. There are many more things to consider (but they are not as simple to measure). Things like: are there art and music programs for all students, is there a fully functioning school library with a qualified teacher-librarian, are there after school programs, are parents included in school activities, is there a daycare in the school, are students engaged in learning, does the school have good administrative leadership, is there a positive relationship between the school and the community? All these things matter too.
HI,
Gay relationship is not a crime in the society but i think it is not a good sign because it is totally against the natures rules. But i think it is legal thing so those who are interested in this relationship they can do it but don’t try to promote it.
To say I disagree with you would be a gross understatement. But to each their own.
I think children have the right to learn both sides of the argument and let them make their decision from there.
I was very pleased to find this site.I wanted to thank you for this great read!! I definitely enjoying every little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you post.
I enjoy reading a post that will make one think.really thankful to you for providing us this information.
keep it up.
i think Gay is not the as big people made it since if any same sex people likes each other than i don’t find any problem in that, its there choice and no one has a right to make argue for that. keep it up
thats difficult to know when is best, but we need to consider that childhood is when most kids begin to form ideas
I do think its an issue that should be addressed in schools, but for younger children it should be just a focus on anti bullying and no mention of gay marriage or relationships as children need to be old enough to understand what they are being told.
Its easy to make excuses about not informing kids, but the problem is that there are many kids who have same sex parents, and they have to deal with the reality, so im sure other children will be able to understand the information just as well and will hopefully help eliminate prejudice from an early age.
I find a lot of kids and people in general say ‘ oh thats so gay’ ….. and its really quite insulting, I think is this can be mended in kids when they are young then that is a good thing!
Thanks,
Laura