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.
