Evolution classes optional under proposed Alberta law

[ettibebs]

I know I'm probably stretching it but it kind of remind me of the little girl in Manitoba not too long ago who firmly believe that black people should be killed because her parents where white supremacist and taught her so.  If such a law is pass when will racist group will start pulling there children from class teaching tolerance or from class teaching about the nazi concentration camp.  I think it's setting a dangerous precedent here. 

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

I know I'm probably stretching it but it kind of remind me of the little girl in Manitoba not too long ago who firmly believe that black people should be killed because her parents where white supremacist and taught her so.  If such a law is pass when will racist group will start pulling there children from class teaching tolerance or from class teaching about the nazi concentration camp.  I think it's setting a dangerous precedent here.

I think that you've just invoked Godwin's Law (or at least some form of it). I totally didn't see that coming this early in the thread.

Why shouldn't parents be able to pull their children from classes? I am not saying that it is a good idea to try to keep subject matter away from your kids just because it conflicts with your world view, but I am not comfortable with the government and school boards being in complete control. If some fringe group doesn't want their kids to learn the letter 'J', the number '7', conjugation or the difference between 'their' and 'there' I figure that letting them pull their kids is the cost of living in a free country.

As an aside, I get notes now from teachers on what is going to be taught to my kids. Not because I asked them to or that I am going to pull them from class, but because the teachers here want to keep us involved. It seems to work.

 

[ex-Sup]

As an aside, I get notes now from teachers on what is going to be taught to my kids. Not because I asked them to or that I am going to pull them from class, but because the teachers here want to keep us involved. It seems to work.

Most teachers (well, in high school anyway) do give out a course of study to the students. However, from what I'm reading into this, it is a much more formalized process. Having to notify the parents, in writing, exactly when things are happening would be a lot more complex.

Now that I'm thinking of this, and also reading some of the comments on CTV, I had an interesting thought.

If some fringe group doesn't want their kids to learn the letter 'J', the number '7', conjugation or the difference between 'their' and 'there' I figure that letting them pull their kids is the cost of living in a free country.

So here's the problem. Anyone is well within their rights to pull their kid out of school when these issues are being discussed. However, what happens when it comes to evaluation time? As I mentioned before, some of these things are in the curriculum ie. evolution. What then? Do we give them a different test with that material taken out? Do we make them write it anyway? The way I see it, you can have the right to opt out, but there is going to be a penalty. I know that I wouldn't make another test. If it were here in Ontario, we would have a law contradicting another law ie. the Education Act which requires me to evaluate and report on student achievement based on the curriculum expectations.
I'm curious to see how this all will play out.

 

[Bane]

Reference info in this thread http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/76543/post-845882;topicseen#new

 

[X-mo-1979]

I can't speak for the Alberta school system, however in Newfoundland Jehovah witness children left the room for O Canada in the morning (due to belief of not being under a flag/country) religion class, and health class.

I don't think this is something so weird really,it's been happening for many years.

Parents should retain the right to teach their children what they want.My children were not baptized,and go to a public school.That was me and my wife's decision.However some parents which to teach their children in different ways.It's ok by me.

 

[McG]

“Controversial” is probably in the eye of the beholder … but in the end, I would rather see a few kids leave the class room here & there before I see major curriculum changes to appease a noisy few.

 

[ex-Sup]

I don't think this is something so weird really,it's been happening for many years.

I've seen it happen.

Parents should retain the right to teach their children what they want.My children were not baptized,and go to a public school.That was me and my wife's decision.However some parents which to teach their children in different ways.It's ok by me.

Agreed. My wife and I are both Catholic teachers, our kids are baptized and are/will be going to a Catholic school. We plan on being very active in their education. However, every decision that we make will have consequences. Like I mentioned before, pulling your kids out is well within one's right, but those rights come with consequences...potentially academic ones in this case.

 

[X-mo-1979]

I've seen it happen.
Agreed. My wife and I are both Catholic teachers, our kids are baptized and are/will be going to a Catholic school. We plan on being very active in their education. However, every decision that we make will have consequences. Like I mentioned before, pulling your kids out is well within one's right, but those rights come with consequences...potentially academic ones in this case.

Yep.
Here is two examples of children being raised and taught different.None being wrong in my view,and both with the goal of producing healthy well versed young adults.
There are some extreme's I would disagree with such as home schooling a child with hate literature,terrorist etc.
I believe I can send my child to public school and he can ask the questions to us about what he was taught.That offers a input from us the parents into our moral guidelines while they are being taught a hopefully unbias general view of the world.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Anyone is well within their rights to pull their kid out of school when these issues are being discussed. However, what happens when it comes to evaluation time? As I mentioned before, some of these things are in the curriculum ie. evolution. What then? Do we give them a different test with that material taken out? Do we make them write it anyway? The way I see it, you can have the right to opt out, but there is going to be a penalty.

As I see it, people have to live with the consequences of their choices. The children of these parents should not get the marks for the material that they opt out of.

 

[ex-Sup]

As I see it, people have to live with the consequences of their choices. The children of these parents should not get the marks for the material that they opt out of.

Sounds good to me...less marking  ;D

 

[X-mo-1979]

As I see it, people have to live with the consequences of their choices. The children of these parents should not get the marks for the material that they opt out of.

Although I am not one of these parents I have to disagree.The bill that was passed was dealing with sex, sexual orientation, religion.If a parent wish's to explain that to them that's fine in my books.They are not disagreeing with physics or math.

I don't think a 40 minute period on sex or Allah should determine if a child pass's a grade IMHO.

Please keep in mind my children will attend religion and health.I just think parents should have the choice as passed in bill 44.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/06/02/alberta-human-rights-school-gay-education-law.html

Children at my school growing up did just this and graduated with us.And most of them are normal human beings.Most realized there was a different view and changed to reflect that when they grew older.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Although I am not one of these parents I have to disagree.The bill that was passed was dealing with sex, sexual orientation, religion.If a parent wish's to explain that to them that's fine in my books.They are not disagreeing with physics or math.

I don't think a 40 minute period on sex or Allah should determine if a child pass's a grade IMHO.

Please keep in mind my children will attend religion and health.I just think parents should have the choice as passed in bill 44.
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/06/02/alberta-human-rights-school-gay-education-law.html

Children at my school growing up did just this and graduated with us.And most of them are normal human beings.Most realized there was a different view and changed to reflect that when they grew older.

I am not an expert on current curriculum and the weighting of marks. That being said I doubt very much that a 40 minute period on sex education or Allah is going to make a huge difference on overall grades. It has been twenty years (OMG!!) since high school, but I seem to recall that evolution was only in my Biology classes and someone could pass High School back then without necessarily passing an exam on evolution.

Leaving the exact topics aside, since they can change, my argument is that parents should have the right to pull their kids from class but that they need to be prepared to live with the consequences of that action. Those consequences could include lower marks due to missed subject matter. How much lower will depend on how much the parents shield their children from curriculum. I am not taking about the punitive removal of marks, but rather the missed opportunity to get them. If content that the kids miss does not have marks assigned to it then I suppose there will be no marks missed.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Opponents of the bill complain that it should have been a matter for the applicable school act, not a human rights act.  Here is 26(3) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

"Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children."

While I don't have much respect for the wishful content of the UDHR, the usual suspects who have tied their flag to the UN, the UDHR, and the whole transnational ball of wax are pretty much out of arguments.

It has been clarified that the legislation does not cover matters which simply come up in discussion.  The teachers who are going to run afoul of the legislation are those who use the classroom to push an agenda.  If the issue of homosexuality comes up during a Western Civ unit on ancient Greece, so be it.  If the teacher decides to make homosexuality the focus of a unit on Greek history, there might be a problem.

 

[Fusaki]

Leaving the exact topics aside, since they can change, my argument is that parents should have the right to pull their kids from class but that they need to be prepared to live with the consequences of that action. Those consequences could include lower marks due to missed subject matter. How much lower will depend on how much the parents shield their children from curriculum. I am not taking about the punitive removal of marks, but rather the missed opportunity to get them. If content that the kids miss does not have marks assigned to it then I suppose there will be no marks missed.

If I follow what you're saying, then I agree.

While parents should have the right to pull their kids out of class, they should not have the right to change the standard of education for everyone. Therefore, the tests should reflect the entire curriculum - not just those areas all the parents agree on.

 

[Blackadder1916]

I am neither a teacher nor do I have any children attending school, so my view of this new legislation is that of an interested observer - I will probably never avail myself of the "additional protection" (my sarcasm is showing) that this amendment to the Alberta Human Rights legislation provides nor be subjected to possible legal (. . . Human Rights Commission investigation/tribuanal) action because of a complaint from a parent about the way their child is taught.  And that last thought is probably the essence of this debate, particularly if one is a teacher.  It is the stick to hold over teachers and other school officials if 'Johnny is told about something that he should have learned at home or on the street corner (behind the barn?) like the rest of us.

Much of the impetus for the more contentious part of this legislation probably came from the very socially conservative part of Alberta's electorate that the current (leadership of the) Alberta PC Party leans toward.  However, regardless of the origin of this legislation it seems poorly thought out, when it has to be immediately amended in order to clarify (or at least protray in a better light) the actual intent.

http://culture.alberta.ca/humanrights/bill44.aspx

Amendments to Bill 44 clarify intent of parental rights section
Government has heard the questions raised about the parental rights section of Bill 44, and are making amendments to ensure its intent is very clear.

Bill 44 is being amended to clarify that:

- Parental rights do not include withdrawing children from spontaneous discussions of religion, human sexuality or sexual orientation that may arise during every day classroom teaching.

- Existing school processes will be followed if there is a complaint. Information about this process is available through Alberta Education. A complaint wouldn't automatically go to a human rights hearing.

- The Commission may refuse to accept any complaint, if the matters are being dealt with through another forum or under another Act.

Click here to see the amendments.

Primary Proposed Amendments

Proposed Amendment
Include sexual orientation as a prohibited ground of discrimination Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation has been against the law in Alberta since a 1998 Supreme Court Decision.

Detailed Description
As a result of the Supreme Court decision sexual orientation has been "read into" Alberta's Human Rights legislation since 1998.

Formally updating Alberta's legislation will reflect actual practice and law and provide clarity for Albertans.

This is not an actual addition to Alberta law as such discrimination is already illegal.

Proposed Amendment
Include a "parental rights" section that confirms parents' right to exempt their children from course or subject matter that explicitly deals with religion, human sexuality or sexual orientation. Parents have always had the fundamental right to direct the education of their children.

Detailed Description
In the School Act, parents currently have the legislated right to opt their children out of religious instruction or exercises. The ability to opt their children out of human sexuality education is currently a matter of policy in the Guide to Education.

These amendments confirm in law rights that parents or guardians already have concerning the education of their children.

School boards would be required to inform parents of instruction about religion or sexuality.

This does not provide the right to exemption from instruction on any additional curriculum areas. Alberta teachers are required to teach the approved Alberta school curriculum. All subject matter currently taught will continue to be taught.

Parents with concerns will follow the current process of mediation through the usual process first contact with their child's teacher or if need be with the school principal or the school board superintendent. Parental concerns should continue to be addressed locally, as they have in the past.

Proposed Amendment
Put in place new processes to enable appeal matters to be referred to a single member of a Tribunal. In the past there have been concerns that Human Rights processes have taken too long to resolve.

Detailed Description
This amendment will speed up the appeals process and bring more timely resolution to complaints brought before the Commission.

With this piece of legislation now passed it will be interesting to see how it will be implemented.  What will be the nuts and bolts of "explicitly deals with" (could be a very vague or very encompassing or very narrow meaning depending on the individual), the how, what and when of parental notification and the affect it will have on teachers' style (what is spontaneous and what is not?).

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/06/02/alberta-human-rights-school-gay-education-law.html

Attention must now shift to making sure the legislation is implemented in the best possible way for teachers and schools, said Alberta School Boards Association President Heather Welwood.

"We want to nail down exactly what's required for notification — when it's required, exactly on what topics it's required, how often, and we'll be seeking our own legal advice … on that," Welwood said.

Frank Bruseker, president of the Alberta Teachers' Association, said he's advised the group's lawyers to prepare to defend any teachers who are brought before the human rights tribunal.

"We'll need to review curricula right across all subjects and all grades to see where there might be a minefield, if you will, that a teacher might step in and suddenly find themselves in deep trouble," Bruseker said.

I do not expect a sudden and massive rush by parents wanting to exclude their children from certain classes, but this legislation does generate the possibility that it could be used as a weapon against educators.  Not all learning is rote, in fact most of the best lessons are learned when one is challenged to think for themselves.  Though it's rapidly approaching four decades since I left high school, I can still remember the best teachers that I had.  They weren't usually the ones who assiduously followed lesson plans or required answers only from assigned textbooks.  They were the ones who challenged me to think for myself,  encouraged me to question authority when it needed to be questioned and  taught me, of the 5Ws (&H), it was the answer to ‘why’ that was the most important.

I keep six honest serving-men
(They taught me all I knew);
Their names are What and Why and When
And How and Where and Who.

Rudyard Kipling 1902

Though the explanation from the government indicates that spontaneous discussions of the verboten subjects would not be precluded, the legislation could have the effect of stifling the initiation of discussion by certain teachers (those who are hesitant to face legal/employment action) who may stray into content that would require prior notification.

 

[ex-Sup]

As an educator for 11 years, the impact of this legislation is not the fact that parents should have a say I what their children are taught, but the impacts that it has on the school and on educators. If people want to pull their kids from school because they do not agree with the material being taught, fine by me. I tell the kids all the time, “I get paid to teach 30 or 1, doesn’t make a difference.”

I hope everyone here can understand the nightmare it can cause for schools and boards who now have to notify parents in WRITING when these topics are going to be taught. So a synervoice to home won’t cut it here. The question becomes is how is that to be done? Email…what about those who don’t have access? Regular mail…at $.54 a letter for who knows how many times a year? Who pays for that…the school? Also, one has to consider that teaching isn’t a precise science all the time. For example I’ve been teaching Gr.10 Canadian History for 8 years; I have the course down pretty pat. However I couldn’t tell you exactly what I would be teaching in November or December at the start of the year. I have a rough idea within a week or so, but I couldn’t nail it down to a particular date. Would that suffice, or does it have to be exact? So how much notice is enough notice? A week, a month? You might have a new teacher who has absolutely no clue precisely when they will get to a topic because they’ve never taught the class before. I know that this seems over dramatized, but these are all potential issues here. If you’re not in the business, you don’t understand all the implications here.

As I and other posters have already mentioned, the other big problem arises is when it isn’t just discussion, but curriculum. How are the students treated? As far as I’m concerned, and certainly the Education Act here in Ontario is concerned, I am responsible to follow the directions outlined by my principal, which is to teach, evaluate and report according to the established curriculum. So if a student has been withdrawn from my class and fails to meet a curriculum expectation on an evaluation (ie. a test) then there is going to be an academic penalty. I’m no constitutional law expert, but I think you can argue that the Charter gives you the right to opt out, but it’s reasonable to assume that there is going to be a consequence. I would think that the SCC is not going to rule that rights have been violated because Johnny got a D on his science test. Is a student going to fail because they missed some content on evolution, most likely not. Is their evaluation going to suffer, of course; to what extent that really depends.

If the issue of homosexuality comes up during a Western Civ unit on ancient Greece, so be it.  If the teacher decides to make homosexuality the focus of a unit on Greek history, there might be a problem.

Well, there is a problem because that is not in the curriculum. However, the first several days of Gr.11 World History specifically deal with the origins of humanity ie evolution. When then? Opt out I guess (and in my class, flunk those questions on the test).

The teachers who are going to run afoul of the legislation are those who use the classroom to push an agenda. 

Brad,
Despite your stated OPINION, most teachers do not have an agenda. Yes, you will find those who do, but they are few and far between. I (and my colleagues around me) teach, coach, etc. because we love the job and we want to make a difference in kids lives. I could care less about politics and agendas. Do I have an opinion? Yes I do, just like everyone else in the world (including you). Do I share my opinion with my students? Sometimes, if it has some significant bearing on what we are talking about, and with the caveat that it is MY opinion. As I've already stated, this legislation has the potential to cause a whole pile of issues for teachers, administrators and schools, not just ones with an "agenda."

Okay, I've said enough today. Thankfully this teacher works in Ontario, and he also has a pile of essays that need to be marked!

 

[a_majoor]

And another view:

http://searchingforliberty.blogspot.com/2009/06/bill-44-done-deal-one-small-step.html

Bill 44 a done deal.. One Small Step Against the Thought Police.

Everyone has heard of George Orwell's "1984". If you haven't read it, or haven't read it recently, I recommend reading it or reading it again.
It is difficult to read "1984" without raising the hairs on the back of your neck when you see the fat hand of the state on your shoulder.

In "1984", the state has the "Ministry of Truth" - which, is anything but. Ultimately, the government has decided that what is "truth" is really a matter of what the people need to know, in the best interests of the State, of the collective, even when that "truth" is clearly untrue.. after all, it's for their own good.

If people seek to question or criticize the "Truth", well, they will be corrected by the Ministry of Love.. in reality, they will be imprisoned or tortured, to show them the error of their ways.

Such is life in "1984".

So then.. today, in Alberta, we have a few loud advocates of the Ministry of Truth and the Ministry of Love. People who feel that parents shouldn't be able to prevent the "Truth" being given to their children. And, today, these advocates of the Thought Police are very upset that, in Alberta, we still have the freedom to have our own opinion and our own ideas - that we have the freedom to say, "No Thank-you" to certain limited areas of instruction in our Public School system.

Yes - those same people who have complained, loud and long, that a "Civil Union", would have been no answer to gay persons wishing to marry, are now saying, "If you don't like what we are going to tell your children about your religious faith in school, well, school them at home, or pay for a private school - because in our brand of "education", we will teach them the "Truth" whether you like it or not.

Well - today, our government said, "no". It said, we respect a parent's right to raise their child under their own moral code - whether we disagree with that moral code or not. Such is the price of freedom and liberty.

This is not Oceana. This is not "1984".

Today - the Thought Police lost. And all of us, whether gay or straight, Christian, Muslim or athiest.. we are all better of for it.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Despite your stated OPINION, most teachers do not have an agenda.

I didn't claim that "most" have an agenda, so there isn't any "despite" (contradiction).  The legislation basically places the rights of parents over those of any budding social activists.  There's no consequence-free preaching platform.  That's what sticks in some craws.

 

[ex-Sup]

The legislation basically places the rights of parents over those of any budding social activists.  There's no consequence-free preaching platform.

Brad,
This isn't an issue over what teachers "decide" to teach in the classroom. As I've mentioned in several of my posts, most of this material is in the curriculum, so we're required to teach it by law ie. evolution. And as for my interpretation of your remarks, comments such as the one above can lead one to misconstrue your intentions. It comes off sounding like this is a common occurrence in the classroom, which it is not.

I certainly don't disagree with you about a parent's right to choose. I am a parent as well and I have, and will continue to make choices that are in the best interest of my children. I am also conscious of the fact that every decision I make for them has consequences, both positive and negative. For example, if I send my kids to swimming lessons and they learn to swim, that would be a positive thing. However, if I decide that I don't feel comfortable with aspects of the school curriculum and decide to withdraw my kid and they miss material they will be evaluated on, that's a negative thing. As a teacher I have no problem if parents want to withdraw their kids (it happens all the time, not usually for religious reasons ie. vacations). If they are also willing to accept the fact that their kids are going to suffer some academic consequences, we're all good. Where I have a problem is if they decide to bellyache about the lost grades or want some sort of exemption. Once again this is not casual conversation material, but perscribed as part of the curriculum, then they need to be prepared to pay the piper. An as I mentioned in my previous post, I am pretty certain this would not survive a charter or human rights challenge as it goes beyond what is "reasonable."

Alright, back to the essays!

 

[Dennis Ruhl]

The bar for science is called "peer review". Any paper or opinion published is just ink on paper until it goes through the peer review process regardless of the letters after the author's name. Please find and post peer reviewed science that supports a young earth model.

How did Galileo and Copernicus do on peer review?

My take is to wonder how an extension of human rights can be criticized by those normally clamoring for such things.  Evolution is normally taught as a theory rather than a fact so anyone ignores it at their own peril, if their is such a thing as peril in high school.

Human rights don't just allow judges to set foreign policy as it relates to murderers and suspected terrorists.  What really ticks off liberal types is that the Alberta government gave enforcement to the kangaroo court human rights commission  Guilty untill proven innocent.