B.C. school trustee vows to stay

[Urban Cowboy]

How about bring back something actually useful, like Drivers Ed !

Or better yet math class.

[Verum]

How about scrap the gender identity classes.. it's
pretty easy.

There are male and female bodies, all else about it is in the mind of how
one wants to use it.

How about bring back something actually useful, like Drivers Ed !

I support most of his view, and truly believe he has the students, all students,
best welfare in mind.

Actually, and this is one area I'm not entirely certain on, I believe that there won't be special gender identity classes, but rather it will be part of other classes, integrated and just a natural component to discussing identity in social studies and such. Since identity is an important part of who we are, it's a reasonable way to handle it.

[Verum]

How about bring back something actually useful, like Drivers Ed !

Or better yet math class.

Getting way off topic, yes I agree we need to have better mathematics classes and higher standards for our students. That said, even the highest level of math taught in school is kind of weak and always has been. We really need to be bringing in what is taught in 1st year University. IIRC, they don't even teach multivariate calculus in high school.

ETA: Getting qualified, capable math teachers is hard, especially at the rates of pay public school teachers make

[TreeGuy]

How about bring back something actually useful, like Drivers Ed !

better yet math class.

How about budgeting courses so that learn to manage their finances. Non mortgage household debt is skyrocketing.

[rustled]

When I see comments equating a trustee's stance on this curriculum to antisemitism and segregation policy, I wonder how many people with an opinion on this actually know what this curriculum involves. Exactly what is to be taught, at what ages, and by whom.

I wasn't actually equating the two, just pointing out that antiquated ideas are a handicap for our children in their future lives.

Also, I actually have a fairly good idea as to what is taught, by whom and when since I have some professional involvement in schooling. I believe that SOGI is being targeted at all of K-12. Gender identity is taught at Grades 2 and 3, IIRC.

Hm. Well, it seems to me you are equating the two. You also seem to be asserting that because this trustee's antiquated ideas will handicap our children in their future lives, he should be relieved of his position, because he will somehow have a direct impact on them:

Those kids who are influenced by his opinions now will be handicapped the same way that those who espouse racist sentiment today find themselves somewhat ostracised from society. Even if you agree with him, it is not in the interests of the children for their values to be shaped by someone who is out of touch with modern attitudes.

This seems quite a stretch.

Gender identity is taught to our children when they are 7 and 8 years old. What, precisely, does "teaching gender identity" entail? And who teaches it? Does this become yet another responsibility our Grade 2 and 3 classroom teachers?

ETA: in a subsequent post:

Actually, and this is one area I'm not entirely certain on, I believe that there won't be special gender identity classes, but rather it will be part of other classes, integrated and just a natural component to discussing identity in social studies and such. Since identity is an important part of who we are, it's a reasonable way to handle it.

How can any of us be sure it's reasonable, when we don't actually know what "it" actually is?

IMO, voicing his concerns about the curriculum and its consequences is his responsibility, and he shouldn't be removed for that.

[Verum]

I wasn't actually equating the two, just pointing out that antiquated ideas are a handicap for our children in their future lives.

Also, I actually have a fairly good idea as to what is taught, by whom and when since I have some professional involvement in schooling. I believe that SOGI is being targeted at all of K-12. Gender identity is taught at Grades 2 and 3, IIRC.

Hm. Well, it seems to me you are equating the two. You also seem to be asserting that because this trustee's antiquated ideas will handicap our children in their future lives, he should be relieved of his position, because he will somehow have a direct impact on them:

Those kids who are influenced by his opinions now will be handicapped the same way that those who espouse racist sentiment today find themselves somewhat ostracised from society. Even if you agree with him, it is not in the interests of the children for their values to be shaped by someone who is out of touch with modern attitudes.

This seems quite a stretch. It might seem so, but we are influenced by people in power. If the schools in his district adopt a less modern policy and teach their students out dated ideas and concepts, especially such core value ones, we can only expect to have a resulting student body ill prepared for a future where gender identity has changed from what is the norm today. This change is going to happen, and it is important to make sure kids are able to function smoothly in such a society.

Gender identity is taught to our children when they are 7 and 8 years old. What, precisely, does "teaching gender identity" entail? And who teaches it? Does this become yet another responsibility our Grade 2 and 3 classroom teachers? Look at the SOGI website, I believe it has some useful information, though it has been a while since I last looked myself.

ETA: in a subsequent post:

Actually, and this is one area I'm not entirely certain on, I believe that there won't be special gender identity classes, but rather it will be part of other classes, integrated and just a natural component to discussing identity in social studies and such. Since identity is an important part of who we are, it's a reasonable way to handle it.

How can any of us be sure it's reasonable, when we don't actually know what "it" actually is?

IMO, voicing his concerns about the curriculum and its consequences is his responsibility, and he shouldn't be removed for that.Actually, no it's not, school trustees are not the ones who have the responsibility to design or vet provincial curriculum. Their job is focused on the running of local schools and that such schools are adhering to such curriculum within budgets.

[rustled]

Found SOGI 123 online. https://teachbcdb.bctf.ca/permalink/resource837
Here's a snippet:

Rationale
Fairy Tales are a wonderful genre to explore how gender has been portrayed historically and in current times. Traditional fairy tales and fractured ones (modern day ones with a twist) allow primary students to think critically about how men and women are portrayed and compare these portrayals to their own families and communities. This instructional sample allows students to explore relationship dynamics, and factors that influence self-identity, through a gender-based lens.

Good heavens! This is earth shattering, ground breaking stuff!

Honestly, what century are we living in? Way back in the 80s and 90s, our kids heard a lot less of the traditional fairy tales and a lot more of the alternates. Both at home, and at school. Seriously, what teacher since maybe the 50s read traditional fairy tales to their classrooms? But now, they are to read these tales so they can get their students to examine them for sexism, in order to protect these same students from the sexism in the traditional fairy tales. Good grief.

It's obviously never too soon to get kids thinking about the sexism lurking everywhere.

But wait, there's more:

Possible Extensions
Introduce students to the concept of sexism - the belief that male gender identities and masculine gender expressions are superior to female and/or feminine ones. Then read stories together and use any of the following strategies:
• Pick a traditional fairy tale and read it aloud. Ask students to stop you when they see or hear a sexist incident in the story. Students call out “Stop!” when they want you to cease reading. They must then identify the sexist incident before you can proceed with the story.

Yes, let's make absolutely certain these kids can point out any incident that anyone might consider sexist. Because that's a terrific activity for ensuring the well-being of an 8-year-old. And elementary school teachers are just the ones to force them to do it.

Gotta say, Neufeld's right to be concerned.

[fluffy]

Actually, no it's not, school trustees are not the ones who have the responsibility to design or vet provincial curriculum.

Who does that exactly, and what is the strength of research behind the benefits of a program such as the one under scrutiny here? Going back to my post on the College of Pediatricians it sounds like Mr. Neufeld has a solid case against the program. Do the property’s have anything in their arsenal besides character asassination?

[Osoyoos_Familyof4]

The issue of "identity" is discussed in the curriculum I think from grade three, but it doesn't address "sexual identity" until grade 4.

The "conversation" when discussing identity before grade 4 and after considers various aspects of identity, and not just sexual, but the factors in general which form your self-identity. It may be that student wishes to discuss and share gender identity ideas, and they are free to do so as is their desire. The conversation is encouraged and supposed to be respectful and framed as a "some people believe this" and "some people believe that" and it's not up for debate, it's simply pointing out what the beliefs are, and not everyone shares the same belief.

There is no "indoctrination" of a single theory, and it's about children having information, full stop! It's not a discussion about right or wrong, or pro-gay, or anti-gay, or a 2 gender system, or a 5 gender system etc. It isn't moralistic, it is about what exists within our communities and the issues that come along with it.

ALos, it's not about "picking a side" and having to "choose" your gender or sexual identity as a child, it's about the acknowledgement that there are many different types of folks out there, and we should all do our best to respect them as they figure out their path on the journey. Nobody has to declare anything ever in elementary school or beyond. And even if they do, that is their right to do so, as is the right to keep changing their own definition as they grow up.

[rustled]

...
...How can any of us be sure it's reasonable, when we don't actually know what "it" actually is?

IMO, voicing his concerns about the curriculum and its consequences is his responsibility, and he shouldn't be removed for that.Actually, no it's not, school trustees are not the ones who have the responsibility to design or vet provincial curriculum. Their job is focused on the running of local schools and that such schools are adhering to such curriculum within budgets.

No, they don't design or vet the curriculum, but they sure as heck have the right to voice their opinion of it. I'd suggest anyone who isn't at all concerned with the potential effects of controversial curriculum on the students' well-being would have a tough time insisting they represent the best interests of those who elect them: the public.

[rustled]

The issue of "identity" is discussed in the curriculum I think from grade three, but it doesn't address "sexual identity" until grade 4.

The "conversation" when discussing identity before grade 4 and after considers various aspects of identity, and not just sexual, but the factors in general which form your self-identity. It may be that student wishes to discuss and share gender identity ideas, and they are free to do so as is their desire. The conversation is encouraged and supposed to be respectful and framed as a "some people believe this" and "some people believe that" and it's not up for debate, it's simply pointing out what the beliefs are, and not everyone shares the same belief.

There is no "indoctrination" of a single theory, and it's about children having information, full stop! It's not a discussion about right or wrong, or pro-gay, or anti-gay, or a 2 gender system, or a 5 gender system etc. It isn't moralistic, it is about what exists within our communities and the issues that come along with it.

ALos, it's not about "picking a side" and having to "choose" your gender or sexual identity as a child, it's about the acknowledgement that there are many different types of folks out there, and we should all do our best to respect them as they figure out their path on the journey. Nobody has to declare anything ever in elementary school or beyond. And even if they do, that is their right to do so, as is the right to keep changing their own definition as they grow up.

I'd believe you if I hadn't already looked at the Grade 2-3 curriculum.

[Osoyoos_Familyof4]

Honestly, if you ever look at the curriculum itself, it's a very broad guideline with very "big picture" ideas in many areas of the social - sciences, including health classes which offer a variety of subject under that umbrella. Some areas of the curriculum are tighter than others about competency versus just discussion and having information.

[Osoyoos_Familyof4]

@RUST, I am looking at the curriculum, what specifically is putting the bee in your bonnet?

[Osoyoos_Familyof4]

Also, parents can choose to opt it if any of the health classes if they feel information isn't appropriate for their children

[rustled]

@RUST, I am looking at the curriculum, what specifically is putting the bee in your bonnet?

No bee in my bonnet, O. Simply contributing to the conversation and sharing my questions and concerns.

You're married to a teacher, and perhaps that makes you quite comfortable with having teachers take the role of making sure every 7-year-old in BC can now be introduced to the concept of sexism. Not every teacher is going to do a good job of this. Not every child needs to be thinking about sexism at the ripe old age of 7.

I can see why a lot of people (that is, the public who support public education for the benefit of all) aren't comfortable with this, and I think it is reasonable for Neufeld to represent their concerns.