A Call for Acceptance is Intolerable

Since I am afraid my last post digressed into a rant, I am going to try to play devil’s advocate to the article “What? Some kids are gay? Woodlan principal evidently lost perspective on sophomore’s column.”

“If only to protect the integrity and financial interests of a school district, a principal has good cause to review student publications before they are distributed.”

I completly agree. A school newspaper should be equally responsible for libel and plagarism as other newspapers. Students learn about integrity and proper research.

“the East Allen County Schools board has a policy giving administrators strong authority over publications, saying the district ‘will not tolerate text or commentary in school-sponsored publications or productions that … is socially inappropriate due to the maturity of students …’”

This also sounds completly reasonable. Huh. This devil’s advocate thing isn’t so hard so far. As a paper representing the school and school district, it is understandable that the newspaper be reviewed to make sure it is truthful and appropriate. As with any good journalism, curse words or explicit subject matter should be censored, or at least studied to judge whether it is necessary.

These quotes are both statements I would have no trouble supporting in my classroom. In the case of Woodlan High School, it seems that normally the journalism adviser, Amy Sorrell provides most of the review. She only runs topics she feels are sensitive by the principal. When this unacceptable opinion piece was published,

“Yoder [the principal] gave Sorrell a written warning that said any other incidents could lead to disciplinary action, including being fired.”

Again, this is very just. A warning before action is a good idea; maybe this piece flew under Sorrell’s radar, right? Maybe she had a sudden lapse in judgment? In any case, the principal will now be reviewing all articles before the paper is printed. It’s a shame, but I don’t think the principal is being unreasonable.

What was this offensive, inappropriate opinion piece the students should not have been exposed to, the school should not have been responsible for? Megan Chase, a sophomore, wrote

“asking students to be understanding and tolerant of their peers who are gays or lesbians”.

Tolerance? This is unacceptable. Even without reading the article, I can tell that it must have been very inappropriate for a high school audience. Understanding is highly overrated. I think that gay and lesbian topics should not be discussed in high school. They should institute a don’t ask, don’t tell policy. Students should be made uncomfortable about their sexual orientiation; they should have to hide who they are. Duh.

Okay, so the whole devil’s advocacy isn’t really working. If you couldn’t tell, the previous paragraph is completely facetious. To be fair though, I could understand the principal’s worry if the article used explicit language or discussed explicit material. However,

“It doesn’t get any more explicit than acknowledging that some people feel desire for members of their own gender.”

The school recieved no complaints from parents about the article. It called for peace and love. It called for harmony and acceptance. It did not ask readers to agree with homosexuality; it only asked them to admit that some people identify themselves as homosexual and to treat these people with respect.

In the end, I would have to agree that the principal went a bit overboard in this case. Though  I agree with his rights, I think that he did not make good use of them here. He is either overly scared of repercussions, or has his own intolerances to work through.

“What? Some kids are gay?” by Bob Caylor. Fort Wayne. read full article.

Should Teachers Have Freedom of Speech?

Teachers’ rights within the classroom are not something I usually think about. But, when you are afraid to give a distraught student a hug, or even a shoulder pat, what is a teacher allowed or not allowed to say within the walls of a classroom? Normally I would strongly advocate freedom of speech – when combined with a heaping dose of common sense. That is the key to freedome of speech in school – common sense and a sensitivity to others.

I was shocked at an article from The New York Times, “Student, 16, Finds Allies in His Fight Over Religion”. The American Civil Liberties Union, the People for the American Way Foundation, and a partner from a large Manhattan law firm have lent their support to Matthew LaClair. What does he need support for? Well, for starters his history teacher has said – in class-

“that if they [students] do not believe that Jesus died for their sins, they ‘belong in hell.’”

“that there were dinosaurs aboard Noah’s ark and that there is no scientific basis for evolution or the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe.”

Is this a Christian school? Is this a private school? No. So, when he secretly taped his teacher saying  such outrageous things, LaClair was supported by his school, right? No. It would seem that LaClair was the one in the wrong. He has been verbally attacked by schoolmates and the teacher is still teaching, though in a different classroom.

“Bernadette McDonald, president of the school board, said in a statement: ‘We took his concerns very seriously. The result was that we have recieved no further complaints about such religious proselytization in our schools.’”

Now, I am personally appalled by this apparent lack of concern. Even further, LaClair has been reprimanded for taping his teacher without permission. I know that this is standard policy, but doesn’t this situation prove that sometimes there is need for a secret taping? Otherwise LaClair would have no proof, as presumably, his teacher would have refused permission to tape him. Have you ever read the young adult novel, Speak? A similar situation arises.

This teacher made a very poor choice. In a public school, a teacher should be able to express opinions, but these opinions need to be firmly prefaced with the statement that they are not fact. A student needs to be able to disagree without consequences. Religion should not enter history discussions, unless the discussions are about the religion of the past.

Besides freedom of speech, we are also guaranteed freedom from persecution and freedom of relgion. So, even if this teacher was technically allowed to say such things in class, it was a very poor decision on his part. The school should advise its teachers to use tact. It should protect students from repercussions whenever possible, when the students express dissatisfaction or outrage in a responsible way, as LaClair has evidently done.

In this case, I would definitely side with the student. Separation of Church and State is made for a specific reason. If only one student is made to feel uncomfortable, and it can be proved that the teacher is preaching instead of teaching – stating instead of hypothesizing, and not allowing opposing viewpoints or discussion, then the school has a problem. School should be a place of exploration and friendly discussion. There should be acceptance, not damnation.

“Student, 16, Finds Allies in His Fight Over Religion” by Patrick McGeehan. The New York Times. read full article

bye, bye mickey-dee fries…

Critical pedagogy – using writing as a political statement can encourage students to become fired up about writing – targeting a specific audience about a subject they feel passionate about. What on earth does McDonald’s have to do with a discussion about teaching writing? Well, watching “Super Size Me” provides some food for thought.

Would using “Super Size Me” encourage students to write, using critical pedagogy? In my English class, we watched part of the documentary with this question in mind. Again  I was struck by the message of the film and felt my stomach turn at the idea of deep-fried, greasy foods – especially at the idea of eating nothing but these deep-fried, greasy foods for a whole thirty days! It seems like anyone must feel the same. (Of course, the feeling of repulsion did not extend to this weekend, when I thoroughly enjoyed a McDonald’s hamburger and fries.)

I would think students, upon viewing “Super Size Me” would have some clear opinions. School districts, and even Prince Charles apparently have. In an article from The Buffalo News, named “Goodbye Junk Food” a school districts attempts at providing a more balanced diet for their students is assessed. Interestingly, the article was written by a high school junior, so obviously some students do feel strongly about the subject of obesisty and junk food.

The high school, Clarence, has exchanged pop machines for water and juice and traded candy in for healthy snacks. Even the pizza and tacos still offered at lunch are healthier, using whole grains. There are also many more vegetable or salad options. Students would be happy about this, right? Thinking back to my high school days, I highly doubt it. The article affirmed my doubts.

“‘People should feel free to buy what they want. It’s not wrong to have healthy choices but it’s not giving them options,’ said Amherst senior Tracey Miltner.”

These students, who have directly seen the after affects of the growing concern about obesity in the U.S. and “Super Size Me”, would respond strongly to an assignment to assess the validity of such school actions. Knowing the rebellious nature of high school students, any change implemented would have its detractors, especially if this was a top-down movement.

“‘It’s funny because now that we’re banned from it, it’s like our school has formed a black market of it, and we’re putting more effort into getting the bad stuff. Kids are selling pop out of their lockers and Skittles out of their backpacks,’ said Shannon Smith.”

Hmm. I remember buying fries for lunch in high school. It felt so good to be able to make a meal out of whatever I wanted – and fries were cheap too. It was a rare treat for me. Most of the time I brought my lunch – a sandwich, fruit cup, and cookies or chips. I would imagine I was a pretty typical eater. If I were a teacher at  one of these effected schools, I think that this controversy over food changes would be a perfect opportunity to use critical pedagogy in the classroom.

How does everyone feel about the changes? What are injust about them? What is good about them? Can you think of a better route the school district could have taken? Is it possible to make everyone happy?

“Super Size Me” provides ample food for thought.

“Goodbye, Junk Food” by Allison Eck. The Buffalo News. read full article