Saturday, August 27, 2016

Where Do I Stand?

In July, I attended the Clay Family Forum Pastor's Conference. I shared my faith and values statement at the invitation of Mary Lib Stevenson, President of the Clay Family Forum. Earlier, at the end of the school year, I was scheduled to have surgery to reattach two dislocated and detached toes on my right foot. While I was recovering from that surgery, I received a call from Ms. Stevenson, asking me if I was going to return the School Board Survey. I told her I was not able to do so at that time, but would happily write out a statement of faith and values at a later time and attend the Pastor's Conference. I was in a great deal of pain, and was unable to walk to place any weight on my foot for a period of 8 weeks and, in fact, attended the Pastor's Conference in a wheelchair. Since then, I have encountered visceral reaction because the survey was marked "Chose Not To Respond." I have had people write to me, angry that I did not respond until I explain to them that I missed the deadline to respond due to a major surgery. I have, in various places, expressed my views on educational matters. However, in an attempt to put fears and anxieties to rest about the issues that were raised in the survey, I will address those issues here--and in MUCH greater depth than an Oppose, Undecided, Support format.

Parental Rights: Parents have the ultimate decision and control over their child's education. They have the right to participate in the selection process of curriculum; they have the right to look at whatever manuals, ancillary materials, online programs, and testing questions that teachers have access to. Parents have the right to exempt their child from classes teaching material counter to their sincerely held ethical and/or religious beliefs. (However, in the case of science courses discussing evolution, it will be understood that the standardized test may refer to Darwin's Theory of Evolution). Students, of Middle School age and higher, may be asked to complete  anonymous climate surveys regarding their experience within the school system without obtaining parental consent. Surveys requiring personal information from the students will require parental review and consent. Parent consent will be required before physiologically testing, treating, evaluating, and counseling a student (with the exception of suspected abuse). This consent may be implicit: that is, if a parent wishes their student to be exempt from such, they are responsible for making said request in writing. 

Discipline: Students, unless mentally incapacitated, who cause bodily harm to another student or teacher will be reviewed for expulsion. A zero tolerance for bullying of any kind--will be maintained at all times--with students and parents given a clear and distinct definition of bullying. There will be no special interest groups allowed on campus as advocates for students. Any advocacy done on behalf of students will be performed by parents and guardians directly with administration. 

Educational Standards: A classical education (reading, literature, writing, math, science, history, geography, foreign language, art and music) should be the focus of our curriculum. 

Practices associated with Eastern and New Age religious practices should not be exampled or implemented in the classroom, just as other religious instruction is prohibited. 

While the affective domain is important to a child's learning process, it should only be addressed through positive educational interactions between student and administration/student and teacher/and parents and teacher. That is, students' self esteem will be positively affected as they are assisted through instruction, discipline and accomplishment. This is best accomplished through close communication between school and home. 

Explicit and separate character education should not be part of the curriculum. Teachers and administration will, of course, recognize and promote honesty and integrity, but explicit teaching of morals and character belongs within the parental purview. 

Evolution may be taught as a concept, but should be taught within its historic perimeters. That is, Charles Darwin theorized that all life forms developed from a common origin. Students should be able to answer any questions regarding the theory--both in its strengths and weaknesses. Personal beliefs about creation, whether a literal six day event, or an event set in motion and occurring over time, or any other personally held belief will NOT be mocked or ridiculed by an instructor. The student will only be responsible for answering questions regarding the evolutionary theory, not for espousing the belief thereof. 

When teaching Western Civilization, curriculum that presents historical fact without bias of revision will be used. The history of America, including all of its inhabitants: indigenous, exploratory, involuntary, and immigrant will be taught with a positive emphasis on the contributions of each that have made it a leader among nations. 

Florida Standards/Common Core: 

The US Federal Government does not have localized control over the states and district curriculum. Relinquishing local control of education in hopes of receiving ever decreasing amounts of Federal Monies is akin to selling our children's educational future. 

The FSA (test given by the American Institute for Research) is an unacceptable test. It provides no feedback on specific student skills or knowledge. The cut off scores are arbitrarily decided. No college or post secondary institution is interested in a student's FSA score. These tests are designed to collect information regarding demographics, and to arbitrarily grade student and teacher performance through one measure. Parents should be allowed to opt out of the test, and be given an alternate assessment that accurately reflects curriculum material covered within the grade level and school year. Academic advancement should not be by one means only. It should be a consideration of student portfolio and assessment. Intensive data collection is not a guarantee of student success. The only data necessary is that relating to academic performance and in school discipline--as aggregate data--not connected with any personally identifiable information. 

NO COMMON CORE CURRICULUM SHOULD BE ADOPTED IN CLAY COUNTY. 

Life: As a Superintendent of Schools my explicit views on the issue of human life are not relevant to the position. However, I personally belief that life does begin at conception. I believe that there should be a ban on late term and partial birth abortion. I do NOT believe that any school personnel should counsel a pregnant student to seek an abortion. I do not believe any tax dollars should fund abortions. I believe in personal responsibility of both males and females and/or their respective parental/legal guardians. 

Religious Freedom: Biblical history, the Bible as Literature, may be offered as elective courses or taught within the context of other subjects. That is, discussing Biblical allusions within the context of literature, art and music is perfectly permissible and may be vital to understanding of the work. Religious displays on school property will follow the precedents set forth by the US Supreme Court. (Please see my previous blog entry for more elaborate explanation). Holidays will be celebrated within the American tradition; however, there will be alternate non related activities, and areas available for those who do not wish to participate in any holiday celebration. The Ten Commandments, as well as other ancient roots of our judicial system (Code of Hammurabi for example) may be displayed in its historical context. Regarding what is permissible with regard to prayer, I would again recommend reading my article on the Separation of Church and State (what it really means for your child). However, I will provide an excerpt from that blog here:  "Although the Constitution forbids public school officials from directing or favoring prayer, students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate," [ 9 ] and the Supreme Court has made clear that "private religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression." [ 10 ] Moreover, not all religious speech that takes place in the public schools or at school-sponsored events is governmental speech. [ 11 ] For example, "nothing in the Constitution ... prohibits any public school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the school day," [ 12 ] and students may pray with fellow students during the school day on the same terms and conditions that they may engage in other conversation or speech. "

Regarding after hours rental of property: Churches and other groups shall be allowed to use the property per the rental agreement. 

Regarding the personal religious beliefs of historical people: These may be individually researched by students for projects if they wish. No particular instruction on the religious beliefs of historical figures beyond that mentioned in historical context is necessary. 

Taxes
Public schools are primarily funded by "required local effort." That is, your local tax dollars. Some funding is provided by the State of Florida, a small portion is provided by the Federal Government. Therefore, if there is insufficient funding for local education, it is up to the community provide sufficient funding. This is usually done in the form of taxation; however, it should not be done without community hearing, involvement, participation and vote. Priority considerations should be given to the school system for funding: that is, a quality school system will attract new construction and provide improved county infrastructure and commerce. 

Fiscal Responsibility

School districts are required to maintain a 3% reserve fund. There are consequences and penalties for failure to maintain this fund. These consequences were experienced recently when our reserve fund fell below 3%. Gambling of any kind should not be implemented to fund public education; past lottery funding has been limited to specific kinds of educational funding by county and in Clay has been limited to Bright Futures Scholarships and Capital Outlay (Building of New Schools). These dollars have no impact on existing classrooms, and retrofit needs. Below is a table of what monies have been provided to Clay County from the Florida Lottery. Bright Futures Scholarships provide a varying discount per credit hour depending on the type of post secondary institution. 
CLAY
YearPreschoolK-12 GradeCommunity CollegeUniversityTotal
1987-88$0.00$680,818.00$0.00$0.00$680,818.00
1988-89$0.00$2,517,552.00$0.00$0.00$2,517,552.00
1989-90$385,836.00$6,142,593.00$0.00$0.00$6,528,429.00
1990-91$310,907.00$6,110,172.00$0.00$0.00$6,421,079.00
1991-92$450,980.00$5,018,416.00$0.00$0.00$5,469,396.00
1992-93$446,085.00$5,059,814.00$0.00$0.00$5,505,899.00
1993-94$421,991.00$5,236,098.00$0.00$0.00$5,658,089.00
1994-95$616,468.00$5,582,553.00$0.00$0.00$6,199,021.00
1995-96$608,222.00$4,760,898.00$0.00$0.00$5,369,120.00
1996-97$602,749.00$4,826,620.00$0.00$0.00$5,429,369.00
1997-98$603,082.00$4,652,322.00$0.00$0.00$5,255,404.00
1998-99$612,722.00$2,052,880.00$0.00$0.00$2,665,602.00
1999-00$627,519.00$2,170,029.00$0.00$0.00$2,797,548.00
2000-01$633,837.00$3,073,666.00$0.00$0.00$3,707,503.00
2001-02$0.00$4,489,044.00$0.00$0.00$4,489,044.00
2002-03$0.00$3,704,036.00$0.00$0.00$3,704,036.00
2003-04$0.00$4,212,892.00$0.00$0.00$4,212,892.00
2004-05$0.00$4,593,907.00$0.00$0.00$4,593,907.00
2005-06$0.00$4,481,412.00$0.00$0.00$4,481,412.00
2006-07$0.00$5,091,017.00$0.00$0.00$5,091,017.00
2007-08$0.00$5,388,740.00$0.00$0.00$5,388,740.00
2008-09$0.00$4,926,732.00$0.00$0.00$4,926,732.00
2009-10$0.00$4,545,376.00$0.00$0.00$4,545,376.00
2010-11$0.00$3,640,675.00$0.00$0.00$3,640,675.00
2011-12$0.00$3,524,768.00$0.00$0.00$3,524,768.00
2012-13$0.00$3,924,727.00$0.00$0.00$3,924,727.00
2013-14$0.00$3,776,987.00$0.00$0.00$3,776,987.00
2014-15$0.00$3,285,024.00$0.00$0.00$3,285,024.00
Total$6,320,398.00$117,469,768.00$0.00$0.00$123,790,166.00
Bright Futures College Scholarships$65,311,539.00
Funding for School Construction$92,662,438.00
Total Education Funding$281,764,143.00
Rather than depend on gambling, our Clay County Community should come together to elicit ideas on how to increase our funding for education, and how we can become better stewards of the funds to which we have already been entrusted. 

Current Events

As Superintendent of Schools in Clay County, I have no positional authority to address issues of same sex marriage. Those issues are decided by the courts of the United States. My positional authority is limited to serving ALL of the families of Clay County, and their children, regardless of their gender and sexual orientation. My personal viewpoints on the subject should not and will not hinder the quality of education received by any student, nor will it or should it lessen the quality of service received by any family unit. 

The pledge of allegiance to the United States is currently recited every day in Clay County classrooms. While respectful behavior is mandatory, participation is not. This should not change. 

Issues of foreign policy are not within the purview of the Superintendent of Schools. 

The Department of Homeland Security exists to prevent acts of terrorism from any threat, foreign or domestic. Clearly, there is a perceived threat to the United States since the events of 9/11. 

There should be no law in force within the boundaries of the United States other than that which has been Constitutionally enacted of the people, by the people and for the people: this applies to any type of additional codes, customs, or religious beliefs. 

The current policy of allowing transgender students to use a private, single occupancy bathroom on campus will be upheld. Provision of said private, single occupancy restroom facilities will be reviewed to ensure they are convenient, comfortable, and safe. 

The legalization and regulation of any drugs (tobacco, liquor, prescription narcotics, medical marijuana) for sale in the State of Florida is not within the purview of the Superintendent of Schools. These are decided by legislation. 

Regarding who may address the school board: Clay County residents, CCSB employees, Parents/Guardians of CCSB students, and non-Clay County business partners should be allowed to address the board. It is not the responsibility of the board, nor should it be, to investigate the personal background of each person eligible to address the board. 

There is no reliable means for determining who is a "terrorist" or indeed what constitutes being labeled a "terrorist." Arbitrary decisions about who may use public facilities or address a public meeting of the Clay County School Board are not constitutional, and as such, should not be considered. 

My campaign has had no endorsement of any kind of the teachers union, nor have I accepted funds from the teachers union. I have no issue with teachers belonging to the union. The union provides legal representation for teachers to ensure they receive due process under the law in case of suit.I understand the historical bases for unions. I am not a member of the CCEA, nor have I been since 2008.  I would gratefully receive the support of any teacher regardless of their affiliation.   

I left the teachers union at that time due to ideological conflicts with partisan politics and the dogged determination to support those partisan politics with sample ballots, and political endorsements. To me, partisanship has no place when it comes to deciding the future of our children's education. That is why I have chosen to run as a "No Party Affiliation" candidate. 

I believe that the people should have a right to vote for their Superintendent of Schools. 

If you have further questions, or would like clarification on an issue, I encourage you message me through my Facebook page: www.facebook.com/ShivelyforSuperintendent this will give you the quickest response. I thank you for your consideration and would very much appreciate your vote in November. 

Dr. Rebekah Shively

Sunday, June 26, 2016

With Kindness and Courtesy For All

I was recently asked if I had attended the June meeting of the Clay County School Board, and to opine on the exchange between the Superintendent of Schools and a parent. I responded to the individual asking that I had not been in attendance due to surgery on my foot--(which will soon be done mending!). After the video of the meeting was posted, I watched the exchange. 

There is a well-known saying, “They may not remember what you said, but they won’t forget how you made them feel.” I watched the exchange during the last school board meeting. While I find “ad hominem” attacks on Mr. Van Zant to have little real value, I think his response could have been more kind. As to the real subject matter: Presidential mandates on school boards, and providing safe, comfortable restroom access for all of our students.

School Policy is set at the local level. That is why the majority of the funding MUST come from what is called “the required local effort.” States maintain their sovereignty over their particular government entities. When it comes to matters of policy, the public tends to look to the federal government to lead the way, but the local governments actually determine educational policy. Each school district is administered and financed by the community along with that district's state government.

The federal government has historically played a minor role in education, and in fact that federal government did not issue any educational policy until the 1960's. The National Science Foundation published a report studying which educational techniques were effective that the Johnson administration used in its "Great Society" program. The federal laws with the most impact on education concern equal access to education and safeguarding students' and teachers' constitutional rights. Education is not exactly a constitutional right, like free speech and assembly, but it is an important enough interest to warrant constitutional protection. Students are therefore protected against discrimination based on race, gender, religion, or disability, or ethnicity. The discrimination they are being protected from is not receiving the same quality education as that of their peers. This was demonstrated in Brown V. Board of Education. It was argued that black students were not receiving an equal education under the law. The previous decision of Plessy V. Ferguson stated that they were being constitutionally protected if they were given “separate but equal” quality of education under the law. Brown v. Board proved conclusively that the facilities or quality of education were not equal under the law. Hence, to be separate was not to be equal in terms of educational access. However, as just and as right as this verdict was, it was arrived at through a due process of constitutional law. It was argued before the on Supreme Court of the United States December 9, 1952, re-argued December 8, 1953 and decided on May 17, 1954. This, after being brought through lower local district and circuit courts. It was NOT a Presidential mandate; which is a VERY good thing. Why? Because, if it were, then subsequent presidents who do not agree with the previous mandate might rescind it.

In our current society, we tend to be more reactive to certain things on the basis of emotion rather than logic. This is true on both sides of any argument. There is a trend to feel threatened by that with which we do not agree. Yet, if all were in agreement about everything, there would be no new thoughts, no new discoveries, and no new breakthroughs. When we are insecure about ourselves we are and what we believe, we lash out at others in an effort to subdue and “prove” we are right; we have ALL been guilty at some time or other in our lives. It is part of the human experience. Let us look at the situation in question in a logical way.

Transgender students are not a new phenomenon. We have had transgender students in the Clay County School system for years—not many, but some. Until the current news on the President’s mandate, we had NO issues with restroom use because there was an established policy. The established policy was a single occupant restroom for the transgender student. This was usually found in the clinic, but newer structures have varying facilities. This was done for the comfort and safety of all students—but primarily that of the transgender student. In recent years, there has been some confusion as to what constitutes “Bullying.” Bullying is more than an offhand remark, or being unkind to someone. The government definition of bullying is as follows: “Bullying is unwanted, aggressive behavior among school aged children that involves a real or perceived power imbalance. The behavior is repeated, or has the potential to be repeated, over time. Bullying includes actions such as making threats, spreading rumors, attacking someone physically or verbally, and excluding someone from a group on purpose.” https://www.stopbullying.gov/what-is-bullying/ By providing a private, safe, facility that is used by persons individually, the school board is giving an equal facility for the transgender student to use.

Bullying is not confined to school age children. There are a lot of adults who are good at it too. When a student walks through my classroom door, they are there because they need a quality education. I am there to be their teacher and their guide. Do I click with every student I meet? Of course not, but I am obligated to treat them with kindness; not because it is the “fair” thing to do—nothing in life is fair. I am obligated to do this because without kindness and compassion demonstrated, children will not learn it. Thankfully, this is demonstrated in many homes by parents—but for some students, their teacher is the only positive role model they will see.


Do I have to accept and condone all behaviors? No. I am mandated by my professional ethics, and my own personal moral and religious code to be kind. If a student’s name on my roster is John Robert, and they request to be called “J. R.” it is a simple kindness to do so. If the name on the roster is Carl, and they request to be called Karen, it is a simple kindness to do so. Pointedly referring to them by the name they do not wish to use or making it a point to use the gender pronoun that does not agree with their name choice is unkind. There are tactful ways to be kind.  Being unkind requires no skill; being disrespectful of other people requires no skill. I choose to be kind. I choose to be respectful to all. I choose to try to bring people together in the greater cause of bettering education in Clay County, which is why I would ask you to choose me as your next Superintendent of Schools. 

Wednesday, April 6, 2016

Separation of Church and State--Viewpoints and Convictions Under the Law

       Recently, I was asked to explain clearly my position on religion in public schools, as it pertains to the separation of church and state. First, it is important to know that certain issues are not, by law, open to personal interpretation The following information is taken from the U.S. Department of Education, found at: http://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/religionandschools/prayer_guidance.html 
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment requires public school officials to be neutral in their treatment of religion, showing neither favoritism toward nor hostility against religious expression such as prayer. [ 2 ] Accordingly, the First Amendment forbids religious activity that is sponsored by the government but protects religious activity that is initiated by private individuals, and the line between government-sponsored and privately initiated religious expression is vital to a proper understanding of the First Amendment's scope. As the Court has explained in several cases, "there is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect." [ 3 ]
         The Supreme Court's decisions over the past forty years set forth principles that distinguish impermissible governmental religious speech from the constitutionally protected private religious speech of students. For example, teachers and other public school officials may not lead their classes in prayer, devotional readings from the Bible, or other religious activities. [ 4 ] Nor may school officials attempt to persuade or compel students to participate in prayer or other religious activities. [ 5 ] Such conduct is "attributable to the State" and thus violates the Establishment Clause. [ 6 ]
        Similarly, public school officials may not themselves decide that prayer should be included in school-sponsored events. In Lee v. Weisman [ 7 ], for example, the Supreme Court held that public school officials violated the Constitution in inviting a member of the clergy to deliver a prayer at a graduation ceremony. Nor may school officials grant religious speakers preferential access to public audiences, or otherwise select public speakers on a basis that favors religious speech. In Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe [ 8 ], for example, the Court invalidated a school's football game speaker policy on the ground that it was designed by school officials to result in pregame prayer, thus favoring religious expression over secular expression.
       Although the Constitution forbids public school officials from directing or favoring prayer, students do not "shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate," [ 9 ] and the Supreme Court has made clear that "private religious speech, far from being a First Amendment orphan, is as fully protected under the Free Speech Clause as secular private expression." [ 10 ] Moreover, not all religious speech that takes place in the public schools or at school-sponsored events is governmental speech. [ 11 ] For example, "nothing in the Constitution ... prohibits any public school student from voluntarily praying at any time before, during, or after the school day," [ 12 ] and students may pray with fellow students during the school day on the same terms and conditions that they may engage in other conversation or speech. Likewise, local school authorities possess substantial discretion to impose rules of order and pedagogical restrictions on student activities, [ 13 ] but they may not structure or administer such rules to discriminate against student prayer or religious speech. For instance, where schools permit student expression on the basis of genuinely neutral criteria and students retain primary control over the content of their expression, the speech of students who choose to express themselves through religious means such as prayer is not attributable to the state and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious content. [ 14 ] Student remarks are not attributable to the state simply because they are delivered in a public setting or to a public audience. [ 15 ] As the Supreme Court has explained: "The proposition that schools do not endorse everything they fail to censor is not complicated," [ 16 ] and the Constitution mandates neutrality rather than hostility toward privately initiated religious expression. [ 17 ]
Applying the Governing Principles in Particular Contexts
Prayer During Noninstructional Time
        Students may pray when not engaged in school activities or instruction, subject to the same rules designed to prevent material disruption of the educational program that are applied to other privately initiated expressive activities. Among other things, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray or study religious materials with fellow students during recess, the lunch hour, or other noninstructional time to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious activities. While school authorities may impose rules of order and pedagogical restrictions on student activities, they may not discriminate against student prayer or religious speech in applying such rules and restrictions.
 Organized Prayer Groups and Activities
       Students may organize prayer groups, religious clubs, and "see you at the pole" gatherings before school to the same extent that students are permitted to organize other non-curricular student activities groups. Such groups must be given the same access to school facilities for assembling as is given to other non-curricular groups, without discrimination because of the religious content of their expression. School authorities possess substantial discretion concerning whether to permit the use of school media for student advertising or announcements regarding non-curricular activities. However, where student groups that meet for nonreligious activities are permitted to advertise or announce their meetings—for example, by advertising in a student newspaper, making announcements on a student activities bulletin board or public address system, or handing out leaflets—school authorities may not discriminate against groups who meet to pray. School authorities may disclaim sponsorship of non-curricular groups and events, provided they administer such disclaimers in a manner that neither favors nor disfavors groups that meet to engage in prayer or religious speech.
 Teachers, Administrators, and other School Employees
       When acting in their official capacities as representatives of the state, teachers, school administrators, and other school employees are prohibited by the Establishment Clause from encouraging or discouraging prayer, and from actively participating in such activity with students. Teachers may, however, take part in religious activities where the overall context makes clear that they are not participating in their official capacities. Before school or during lunch, for example, teachers may meet with other teachers for prayer or Bible study to the same extent that they may engage in other conversation or nonreligious activities. Similarly, teachers may participate in their personal capacities in privately sponsored baccalaureate ceremonies.
 Moments of Silence
        If a school has a "minute of silence" or other quiet periods during the school day, students are free to pray silently, or not to pray, during these periods of time. Teachers and other school employees may neither encourage nor discourage students from praying during such time periods.
 Religious Expression and Prayer in Class Assignments
        Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Such home and classroom work should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school. Thus, if a teacher's assignment involves writing a poem, the work of a student who submits a poem in the form of a prayer (for example, a psalm) should be judged on the basis of academic standards (such as literary quality) and neither penalized nor rewarded on account of its religious content.
 Student Assemblies and Extracurricular Events
       Student speakers at student assemblies and extracurricular activities such as sporting events may not be selected on a basis that either favors or disfavors religious speech. Where student speakers are selected on the basis of genuinely neutral, evenhanded criteria and retain primary control over the content of their expression, that expression is not attributable to the school and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious (or anti-religious) content. By contrast, where school officials determine or substantially control the content of what is expressed, such speech is attributable to the school and may not include prayer or other specifically religious (or anti-religious) content. To avoid any mistaken perception that a school endorses student speech that is not in fact attributable to the school, school officials may make appropriate, neutral disclaimers to clarify that such speech (whether religious or nonreligious) is the speaker's and not the school's.
 Prayer at Graduation
          School officials may not mandate or organize prayer at graduation or select speakers for such events in a manner that favors religious speech such as prayer. Where students or other private graduation speakers are selected on the basis of genuinely neutral, evenhanded criteria and retain primary control over the content of their expression, however, that expression is not attributable to the school and therefore may not be restricted because of its religious (or anti-religious) content. To avoid any mistaken perception that a school endorses student or other private speech that is not in fact attributable to the school, school officials may make appropriate, neutral disclaimers to clarify that such speech (whether religious or nonreligious) is the speaker's and not the school's.
 Baccalaureate Ceremonies
       School officials may not mandate or organize religious ceremonies. However, if a school makes its facilities and related services available to other private groups, it must make its facilities and services available on the same terms to organizers of privately sponsored religious baccalaureate ceremonies. In addition, a school may disclaim official endorsement of events sponsored by private groups, provided it does so in a manner that neither favors nor disfavors groups that meet to engage in prayer or religious speech.
*********************************************************************************

Notes: 

[ 1 ] The relevant portions of the First Amendment provide: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech . . . ." U.S. Const. amend. I. The Supreme Court has held that the Fourteenth Amendment makes these provisions applicable to all levels of government—federal, state, and local—and to all types of governmental policies and activities. See Everson v. Board of Educ., 330 U.S. 1 (1947); Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940). 
[ 2 ] See, e.g., Everson, 330 U.S. at 18 (the First Amendment "requires the state to be a neutral in its relations with groups of religious believers and non-believers; it does not require the state to be their adversary. State power is no more to be used so as to handicap religions than it is to favor them"); Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch., 533 U.S. 98 (2001). 
[ 3 ] Santa Fe Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290, 302 (2000) (quoting Board of Educ. v. Mergens, 496 U.S. 226, 250 (1990) (plurality opinion)); accord Rosenberger v. Rector of Univ. of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819, 841 (1995). 
[ 4 ] Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421 (1962) (invalidating state laws directing the use of prayer in public schools); School Dist. of Abington Twp. v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963) (invalidating state laws and policies requiring public schools to begin the school day with Bible readings and prayer); Mergens, 496 U.S. at 252 (plurality opinion) (explaining that "a school may not itself lead or direct a religious club"). The Supreme Court has also held, however, that the study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education (e.g., in history or literature classes), is consistent with the First Amendment. See Schempp, 374 U.S. at 225. 
[ 5 ] See Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577, 599 (1992); see also Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985). 
[ 6 ] See Weisman, 505 U.S. at 587. 
[ 7 ] 505 U.S. 577 (1992).
[ 8 ] 530 U.S. 290 (2000). 
[ 9 ] Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Community Sch. Dist., 393 U.S. 503, 506 (1969). 
[ 10 ] Capitol Square Review & Advisory Bd. v. Pinette, 515 U.S. 753, 760 (1995). 
[ 11 ] Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 302 (explaining that "not every message" that is "authorized by a government policy and take[s] place on government property at government-sponsored school-related events" is "the government's own"). 
[ 12 ] Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 313. 
[ 13 ] For example, the First Amendment permits public school officials to review student speeches for vulgarity, lewdness, or sexually explicit language. Bethel Sch. Dist. v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675, 683-86 (1986). Without more, however, such review does not make student speech attributable to the state.
[ 14 ] Rosenberger v. Rector of Univ. of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819 (1995); Board of Educ. v. Mergens, 496 U.S. 226 (1990); Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch., 533 U.S. 98 (2001); Lamb's Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free Sch. Dist., 508 U.S. 384 (1993); Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263 (1981); Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 304 n.15. In addition, in circumstances where students are entitled to pray, public schools may not restrict or censor their prayers on the ground that they might be deemed "too religious" to others. The Establishment Clause prohibits state officials from making judgments about what constitutes an appropriate prayer, and from favoring or disfavoring certain types of prayers—be they "nonsectarian" and "nonproselytizing" or the opposite—over others. See Engel v. Vitale, 370 U.S. 421, 429-30 (1962) (explaining that "one of the greatest dangers to the freedom of the individual to worship in his own way lay in the Government's placing its official stamp of approval upon one particular kind of prayer or one particular form of religious services," that "neither the power nor the prestige" of state officials may "be used to control, support or influence the kinds of prayer the American people can say," and that the state is "without power to prescribe by law any particular form of prayer")Weisman, 505 U.S. at 594.
[ 15 ] Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 302; Mergens, 496 U.S. at 248-50. 
[ 16 ] Mergens, 496 U.S. at 250 (plurality opinion); id. at 260-61 (Kennedy, J., concurring in part and in judgment). 
[ 17 ] Rosenberger, 515 U.S. at 845-46; Mergens, 496 U.S. at 248 (plurality opinion); id. at 260-61 (Kennedy, J., concurring in part and in judgment).
********************************************************************************

 Discussion: 

My personal stance is that one’s faith is a deeply personal thing. Religion, however, is a public expression of personal faith. To dictate that all must practice a faith, a particular faith, or follow a specific denominational dogma, is in direct conflict with the intent and purpose of the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights.
To favor, or promote individuals within a system on the bases of their profession of faith, membership at a particular place of worship, or by any other criteria other than education, experience, skill, disposition, and merit is a disservice to our students and infringes on the principles of freedom upon which our founding documents were drafted.
Although some people do not understand how or why religious practice in a public school system could be detrimental, one must only extend the idea to a practice of being instructed or indoctrinated in a belief contrary to one’s own—Southern Baptists required to pray the rosary; Catholics forced to deny the papal succession or the Eucharist; any Christian being forced to deny Christ and worship in the Islamic or Jewish manner—these thoughts bring about feelings of anger, angst, fear and even hatred. 
Christianity is the mainstream belief in the United States and here in Clay County; it is both respectful and kind—two values of the Christian faith—to allow those who hold different beliefs the right to do so in a non-threatening environment. It is right and respectful to allow and facilitate the observance the major holy days of other faiths by not scheduling mandatory testing on those days and allowing personnel to take leave, either with pay or without if necessary, to observe their religious practice. It is also right and respectful to serve food options that meet dietary restrictions—without impeding the rights of those without such convictions.
It would be grossly inappropriate for a teacher or an administrator at any level to require a certain political persuasion as criteria of employment or assessment. The same can be said for religion. There should be no restriction on casual conversation about one’s preferences, beliefs, philosophy, or practice regarding faith. It is through meaningful conversations that we learn and grow; but these should be restricted to non-instructional time. 
If a student asks about a personal belief or tenet of faith, it is the adult’s prerogative whether or not to answer—keeping in mind that the statement of one’s own belief or disbelief is as personal as one’s political affiliation, or marital status. A person can state that they’re married; they shouldn’t be allowed to force or intimidate another person to make that choice. 
           Regarding Religious Clubs and Organizations:
Students should be allowed to belong to any religious club or organization they wish. However, these should not be subsidized by school dollars. School dollars (tax-payer monies) should be reserved specifically for academic, artistic, and athletic activities to educate, enrich, and engage the students with whom we are entrusted. Funding for religious clubs and organizations should be done privately by the organization itself. All clubs, organizations, and affiliations should meet only after the contact hours of the academic day are over.
Regarding Christian Holiday Celebrations: 
The United States Supreme Court has determined that school may celebrate the holidays and create displays as long as they do so "within the context of the Christmas season" and the religious component of the display does NOT DOMINATE but simply represent one element of a holiday that has obtained secular statues in our society. Lynch v. Donnely, 465.U.S.668,679, and 691(1984). Students may not be obligated or forced to participate in any event that offends his or her beliefs, and school officials should make every effort to make alternate accommodations for students who choose not to participate in holiday activities due to religious conviction. 
Quite simply, the PUBLIC school system is a component of state government. As a government entity, it must function without preference to serve all of the state citizens equally, and to ensure their rights regarding religious practice and preference are protected. Ronald Reagan on the Separation of Church and State