The Republican War on Public Schools (vouchers, religion, graft, testing, etc.)

[Huckleberry]

That's fair.

I do believe a lot of the push back has been due to a few examples of teachers who probably shouldn't be teachers in the first place. I know quite a few teachers and literally all of them only want what is best for the kids, nothing else, and I believe you're the same.

That said, there have been examples, albeit few, of teachers who are why (I believe) there has been a push for this anti-alphabet movement.

Thank you for your kind words. I appreciate them.

While there have been a few teachers who have gone beyond the pale, I don't think they're the reason for the movement. Instead, politicians and bigots have seized upon and greatly amplified those exceptions so that they can smear an entire profession in an effort to advance their anti-public education agenda. DeSantis and his M4L cohorts are prime examples of this.

 

[Huckleberry]

I don't know anything about teaching as a profession. So I ask, is there an established ethics for teachers like there is for lawyers, accountants, doctors, etc?

I think a lot of the issues we are dealing with are ethical issues and could be handled if conservative or liberal bent teachers acted ethically toward the student and parent.

In Florida, a teacher can lose their license to teach for violation of the state Principles of Professional Conduct (individual districts can add additional standards as well):

Principles of Professional Conduct for the Education Profession in Florida
Rule 6A-10.081, Florida Administrative Code, Principles of Professional Conduct for the Education Profession in Florida.
(1) Florida educators shall be guided by the following ethical principles:
(a) The educator values the worth and dignity of every person, the pursuit of truth, devotion to excellence, acquisition of knowledge, and the nurture of democratic citizenship. Essential to the achievement of these standards are the freedom to learn and to teach and the guarantee of equal opportunity for all.
(b) The educator’s primary professional concern will always be for the student and for the development of the student’s potential. The educator will therefore strive for professional growth and will seek to exercise the best professional judgment and integrity.
(c) Aware of the importance of maintaining the respect and confidence of one’s colleagues, of students, of parents, and of other members of the community, the educator strives to achieve and sustain the highest degree of ethical conduct.
(2) Florida educators shall comply with the following disciplinary principles. Violation of any of these principles shall subject the individual to revocation or suspension of the individual educator’s certificate, or the other penalties as provided by law.
(a) Obligation to the student requires that the individual:
1. Shall make reasonable effort to protect the student from conditions harmful to learning and/or to the student’s mental and/or physical health and/or safety.
2. Shall not unreasonably restrain a student from independent action in pursuit of learning.
3. Shall not unreasonably deny a student access to diverse points of view.
4. Shall not intentionally suppress or distort subject matter relevant to a student’s academic program.
5. Shall not intentionally expose a student to unnecessary embarrassment or disparagement.
6. Shall not intentionally provide classroom instruction to students in prekindergarten through grade 8 on sexual orientation or gender identity, except when required by Sections 1003.42(2)3. and 1003.46, F.S..
7. Shall not intentionally provide classroom instruction to students in grades 9 through 12 on sexual orientation or gender identity unless such instruction is required by state academic standards as adopted in Rule 6A-1.09401, F.A.C., or is part of a reproductive health course or health lesson for which a student’s parent has the option to have his or her student not attend.
8. Shall not intentionally violate or deny a student’s legal rights.
9. Shall not discourage or prohibit parental notification of and involvement in critical decisions affecting a student’s mental, emotional, or physical health or well-being unless the individual reasonably believes that disclosure would result in abuse, abandonment, or neglect as defined in Section 39.01, F.S.
10. Shall not harass or discriminate against any student on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, national or ethnic origin, political beliefs, marital status, handicapping condition, sexual orientation, or social and family background and shall make reasonable effort to assure that each student is protected from harassment or discrimination. Discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, or sex includes subjecting any student to training or instruction that espouses, promotes, advances, inculcates, or compels such student to believe any of the concepts listed in Section 1000.05(4)(a), F.S.
11. Shall not exploit a relationship with a student for personal gain or advantage.
12. Shall keep in confidence personally identifiable information obtained in the course of professional service, unless disclosure serves professional purposes or is required by law.
13. Shall not violate s. 553.865(9)(b), F.S., which relates to entering restrooms and changing facilities designated for the opposite sex on the premises of an educational institution.
14. Shall not violate s. 1000.071, F.S., which relates to the use of personal titles and pronouns in educational institutions.
(b) Obligation to the public requires that the individual:
1. Shall take reasonable precautions to distinguish between personal views and those of any educational institution or organization with which the individual is affiliated.
2. Shall not intentionally distort or misrepresent facts concerning an educational matter in direct or indirect public expression.
3. Shall not use institutional privileges for personal gain or advantage.
4. Shall accept no gratuity, gift, or favor that might influence professional judgment.
5. Shall offer no gratuity, gift, or favor to obtain special advantages.
(c) Obligation to the profession of education requires that the individual:
1. Shall maintain honesty in all professional dealings.
2. Shall not on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, age, national or ethnic origin, political beliefs, marital status, handicapping condition if otherwise qualified, or social and family background deny to a colleague professional benefits or advantages or participation in any professional organization.
3. Shall not interfere with a colleague’s exercise of political or civil rights and responsibilities.
4. Shall not engage in harassment or discriminatory conduct which unreasonably interferes with an individual’s performance of professional or work responsibilities or with the orderly processes of education or which creates a hostile, intimidating, abusive, offensive, or oppressive environment; and, further, shall make reasonable effort to assure that each individual is protected from such harassment or discrimination.
5. Shall not make malicious or intentionally false statements about a colleague.
6. Shall not use coercive means or promise special treatment to influence professional judgments of colleagues.
7. Shall not misrepresent one’s own professional qualifications.
8. Shall not submit fraudulent information on any document in connection with professional activities.
9. Shall not make any fraudulent statement or fail to disclose a material fact in one’s own or another’s application for a professional position.
10. Shall not withhold information regarding a position from an applicant or misrepresent an assignment or conditions of employment.
11. Shall provide upon the request of the certificated individual a written statement of specific reason for recommendations that lead to the denial of increments, significant changes in employment, or termination of employment.
12. Shall not assist entry into or continuance in the profession of any person known to be unqualified in accordance with these Principles of Professional Conduct for the Education Profession in Florida and other applicable Florida Statutes and State Board of Education Rules.
13. Shall self-report within forty-eight (48) hours to appropriate authorities (as determined by district) any arrests/charges involving the abuse of a child or the sale and/or possession of a controlled substance. Such notice shall not be considered an admission of guilt nor shall such notice be admissible for any purpose in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory. In addition, shall self-report any conviction, finding of guilt, withholding of adjudication, commitment to a pretrial diversion program, or entering of a plea of guilty or Nolo Contendere for any criminal offense other than a minor traffic violation within forty-eight (48) hours after the final judgment. When handling sealed and expunged records disclosed under this rule, school districts shall comply with the confidentiality provisions of Sections 943.0585(4)(c) and 943.059(4)(c), F.S.
14. Shall report to appropriate authorities any known allegation of a violation of the Florida School Code or State Board of Education Rules as defined in Section 1012.795(1), F.S.
15. Shall seek no reprisal against any individual who has reported any allegation of a violation of the Florida School Code or State Board of Education Rules as defined in Section 1012.795(1), F.S.
16. Shall comply with the conditions of an order of the Education Practices Commission imposing probation, imposing a fine, or restricting the authorized scope of practice.
17. Shall, as the supervising administrator, cooperate with the Education Practices Commission in monitoring the probation of a subordinate.
Rulemaking Authority 1001.02, 1012.795(1)(j) FS. Law Implemented 1012.795 FS. History–New 7-6-82, Amended 12-20-83, Formerly 6B-1.06, Amended 8-10-92, 12-29-98, Formerly 6B-1.006, Amended 3-23-16, 11-22-22, 2-21-23, 5-23-23, 8-22-23.

https://www.fldoe.org/teaching/professional-practices/code-of-ethics-principles-of-professio.stml

 

[JDCrimson]

So literally no one advancing their politically motivated attacks or responses in the Florida attack on educators is concerned or even aware of teachers professional ethics. And from the narrative we have witnessed, some agency in Florida is not doing its job enforcing these ethics against its teachers.

 

[81usaf92]

The LGBT question in the classroom has never extended beyond tolerance and acceptance. If someone is against that, they should spend some time examining and correcting their bigotry. Furthermore, there is no "constant push for gender identity" in the classroom. That's a right-wing boogeyman that has never existed.

And teaching age-appropriate sex education is something that should be part of the curriculum. I've taught it. If parents don't like it, they can always opt out.

I think CA more articulated the point better than me.

 

[81usaf92]

I don't know anything about teaching as a profession. So I ask, is there an established ethics for teachers like there is for lawyers, accountants, doctors, etc?

I think a lot of the issues we are dealing with are ethical issues and could be handled if conservative or liberal bent teachers acted ethically toward the student and parent.

Yes there are ethics in the teaching profession.

 

[81usaf92]

Since Trump I have noticed a dramatic shift in who I agree with. My priorities have changed some, and I am willing to compromise on some things I may have once been more idealistic about, while at the same time I hold more firmly to things I truly regard as critical when others seem to have lost their way

Between the Trump and Milroe threads these past 3 years I’ve gotten worn out on many arguments to the point I’m hitting the ignore button a lot quicker. Yeah I will partake on them but usually you find the same old argument with the same people just on a different day. With my career it’s kinda made me kinda just give up on an argument that I see going nowhere or just not even bother responding to begin with.

I think this board has gotten better with its new direction though.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

That's fair.

I do believe a lot of the push back has been due to a few examples of teachers who probably shouldn't be teachers in the first place. I know quite a few teachers and literally all of them only want what is best for the kids, nothing else, and I believe you're the same.

That said, there have been examples, albeit few, of teachers who are why (I believe) there has been a push for this anti-alphabet movement.

The problem with the issue is teachers routinely cross the line in the classroom with issues like religion, sex, gender, race, etc. For example, a lot of teachers who claim to teach "acceptance and tolerance" include in that term the idea of "if you don't agree that it is morally right then you aren't accepting or tolerating". Which is not true. My wife and I went through this at a local middle school where we ultimately pulled our kids out because there were teachers under the guise of "acceptance and tolerance" showing bias against kids who they knew their parents didn't agree with them on the moral level.

Even though these kids were being taught to accept and tolerate, their opinion on the morality of it wasn't the same, so they (the teachers) tried to punish and fail the kids through how tests and assignments were worded. This is a very common thing. It is the same when teachers start talking religion in the classroom. They go too far and do not know when they've crossed a line and gone from educating to pushing their personal beliefs on kids.

 

[Huckleberry]

The problem with the issue is teachers routinely cross the line in the classroom with issues like religion, sex, gender, race, etc. For example, a lot of teachers who claim to teach "acceptance and tolerance" include in that term the idea of "if you don't agree that it is morally right then you aren't accepting or tolerating". Which is not true. My wife and I went through this at a local middle school where we ultimately pulled our kids out because there were teachers under the guise of "acceptance and tolerance" showing bias against kids who they knew their parents didn't agree with them on the moral level.

Even though these kids were being taught to accept and tolerate, their opinion on the morality of it wasn't the same, so they (the teachers) tried to punish and fail the kids through how tests and assignments were worded. This is a very common thing. It is the same when teachers start talking religion in the classroom. They go too far and do not know when they've crossed a line and gone from educating to pushing their personal beliefs on kids.

While your experience is truly unfortunate and the involved teachers should have been disciplined, the notion that such behavior is "routine" or "very common" is not correct. If we're comparing personal experiences, I can attest that mine is very different from yours. Even when parents are racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted, the involved teachers have gone out of their way to treat the children with kindness and understanding. I've known and worked with hundreds of teachers and the behavior you describe would not be tolerated by their peers.

As for religion in the classroom, my experience has been that the only teachers who routinely express their views are Christians - and even then it's limited to things like wearing a cross.

 

[81usaf92]

Looking back probably the better example would be how many social studies groups, left wing activists, and politicians treated Project 1619. A lot of the CRT boogeyman references stem from how the NYT and many school activists started to champion the ideas brought up in the narrative being presented.

Yes the MAIN point of the project being presented in that “the concept of slavery is not taught enough in high school history” is a great point, but the lunacy that goes with it such as “the American Revolution was over the institution of slavery” and totally ignoring that the first slaves in North America were not African born but we need to focus solely on 1619 as the start of US history. Basically 1619 created alot of the craziness from the right in legislation today even though it brought up a valid overall point.

Something needed to be done to change the Wilson era curriculum that still haunts the curriculum to this day, but pushing something too far the other way is when you start to get an immediate and equally stupid reaction from the other side.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

While your experience is truly unfortunate and the involved teachers should have been disciplined, the notion that such behavior is "routine" or "very common" is not correct. If we're comparing personal experiences, I can attest that mine is very different from yours. Even when parents are racist, homophobic, or otherwise bigoted, the involved teachers have gone out of their way to treat the children with kindness and understanding. I've known and worked with hundreds of teachers and the behavior you describe would not be tolerated by their peers.

As for religion in the classroom, my experience has been that the only teachers who routinely express their views are Christians - and even then it's limited to things like wearing a cross.

I don't think either one of us is in a position to accurately assess what's common or not. We both have our personal experiences and if we're both honest those personal experiences shape our view of the world. I do work in the educational system but am not in the classroom (my wife is in the classroom).

On things like this, I lean more toward what human nature normally does and human nature's biases start leaking out before they ever become intentional. It's easy to be objective on subjects like math and grammar. But when we start getting into subjects about morality, fair, and unfair, points of view subjects, that's where things normally don't stay objective and people's personal views begin to leak in.

 

[81usaf92]

I don't think either one of us is in a position to accurately assess what's common or not. We both have our personal experiences and if we're both honest those personal experiences shape our view of the world. I do work in the educational system but am not in the classroom (my wife is in the classroom).

On things like this, I lean more toward what human nature normally does and human nature's biases start leaking out before they ever become intentional. It's easy to be objective on subjects like math and grammar. But when we start getting into subjects about morality, fair, and unfair, points of view subjects, that's where things normally don't stay objective and people's personal views begin to leak in.

There is a difference between “challenging a point through teaching ” and “indoctrination”. Most get it but some either actively refuse to get or just don’t care to get it. Thats where you get the ones who make the news or get the crazy school board meetings.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

There is a difference between “challenging a point through teaching ” and “indoctrination”. Most get it but some either actively refuse to get or just don’t care to get it. Thats where you get the ones who make the news or get the crazy school board meetings.

When it comes to grade school, there's not much "challenging a point through teaching" being done. I'm sure you have exceptions, but most of that type of teaching is done at the college level. Adults have authority and influence over grade school kids and most kids, especially middle school kids, aren't having "discussions" with their teachers about opposing views. The teacher teaches what he/she believes and the kid just sits there and listens.

 

[Huckleberry]

I don't think either one of us is in a position to accurately assess what's common or not. We both have our personal experiences and if we're both honest those personal experiences shape our view of the world. I do work in the educational system but am not in the classroom (my wife is in the classroom).

On things like this, I lean more toward what human nature normally does and human nature's biases start leaking out before they ever become intentional. It's easy to be objective on subjects like math and grammar. But when we start getting into subjects about morality, fair, and unfair, points of view subjects, that's where things normally don't stay objective and people's personal views begin to leak in.

If one's personal views include being accepting of and/or kind to those whose skin color, religion, or sexual orientation might be different than their own, then yes, that perspective might leak through in the way a teacher treats (or allows students to treat) others. And this belief system has an antipode as well. If a teacher is racist or otherwise intolerant, I can certainly see situations where their abhorrent beliefs might become apparent through their classroom interactions.

If teacher indoctrination of controversial moral views were widespread, we'd be reading about it all the time. Instead, we hear of isolated incidents used to smear an entire profession. Are there teachers who exert undue influence over their students when it comes to personal morality? Certainly, but that is not the norm, at least in public schools. In private schools, particularly those of a religious nature, I'm sure the indoctrination is common and deliberate.

 

[81usaf92]

When it comes to grade school, there's not much "challenging a point through teaching" being done. I'm sure you have exceptions, but most of that type of teaching is done at the college level. Adults have authority and influence over grade school kids and most kids, especially middle school kids, aren't having "discussions" with their teachers about opposing views. The teacher teaches what he/she believes and the kid just sits there and listens.

Im not talking about arguing politics and beliefs, I’m more talking about introducing students to more complex material.

Arguing politics with a middle to high schooler is a fruitless venture because ultimately you are just arguing with their parents.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

If one's personal views include being accepting of and/or kind to those whose skin color, religion, or sexual orientation might be different than their own, then yes, that perspective might leak through in the way a teacher treats (or allows students to treat) others. And this belief system has an antipode as well. If a teacher is racist or otherwise intolerant, I can certainly see situations where their abhorrent beliefs might become apparent through their classroom interactions.

If teacher indoctrination of controversial moral views were widespread, we'd be reading about it all the time. Instead, we hear of isolated incidents used to smear an entire profession. Are there teachers who exert undue influence over their students when it comes to personal morality? Certainly, but that is not the norm, at least in public schools. In private schools, particularly those of a religious nature, I'm sure the indoctrination is common and deliberate.

We hear about the overt and extreme cases which reach a level of mass reaction. But those aren't the only types of examples that fall into the category I'm talking about. There are teachers on hot topic subjects who convey their personal beliefs subtle enough to not gain mass attention but obvious enough to where the kids are hearing. Just like my example, did you read about it on the news or even know that it happened? You didn't. It didn't even make the local news and nothing was done by the school to the teacher. But it doesn't mean it wasn't happening. If it weren't for several parents reading some questions on a homework assignment and one test, no one would have ever known. The teacher could have continued her biased dialogue in the classroom and not one adult would have ever known. Kids don't always run home and tell their parents everything. Many times they are silent because they don't want their parents to get involved to not get the teacher "angry" at them.

Again, we don't actually know how much of it is going on and to what level. Just because you don't hear about it doesn't mean it isn't happening. But common sense and human nature do tell you that if a human being is discussing a topic that falls into religion, race, sex, and history. The more they talk about it, the more likely their personal views make an appearance.

 

[81usaf92]

We hear about the overt and extreme cases which reach a level of mass reaction. But those aren't the only types of examples that fall into the category I'm talking about. There are teachers on hot topic subjects who convey their personal beliefs subtle enough to not gain mass attention but obvious enough to where the kids are hearing. Just like my example, did you read about it on the news or even know that it happened? You didn't. It didn't even make the local news and nothing was done by the school to the teacher. But it doesn't mean it wasn't happening. If it weren't for several parents reading some questions on a homework assignment and one test, no one would have ever known. The teacher could have continued her biased dialogue in the classroom and not one adult would have ever known. Kids don't always run home and tell their parents everything. Many times they are silent because they don't want their parents to get involved to not get the teacher "angry" at them.

Again, we don't actually know how much of it is going on and to what level. Just because you don't hear about it doesn't mean it isn't happening. But common sense and human nature do tell you that if a human being is discussing a topic that falls into religion, race, sex, and history. The more they talk about it, the more likely their personal views make an appearance.

But here is the thing, we have English teachers being required by the State to teach books like “Night” and it totally goes over 90% of the kids heads because everyone is afraid of actually explaining the concept of “race” and “racism”. To most kids they have a hard time grappling with the idea that the Holocaust was a racial genocide because no one has the guts to explain racism doesn’t necessarily mean “color”.

There comes a point in which upper grade educators must be able to touch on controversial issues that do delve into race, sex, and religion. That doesn’t mean give political and religious opinions.

If education is just memorizing facts then what do we need teachers for when we have ChatGPT and Google? At some point students must be able to explore the concepts being presented within reason.

 

[Bamabuzzard]

But here is the thing, we have English teachers being required by the State to teach books like “Night” and it totally goes over 90% of the kids heads because everyone is afraid of actually explaining the concept of “race” and “racism”. To most kids they have a hard time grappling with the idea that the Holocaust was a racial genocide because no one has the guts to explain racism doesn’t necessarily mean “color”.

There comes a point in which upper grade educators must be able to touch on controversial issues that do delve into race, sex, and religion. That doesn’t mean give political and religious opinions.

If education is just memorizing facts then what do we need teachers for when we have ChatGPT and Google? At some point students must be able to explore the concepts being presented within reason.

I agree, I'm not advocating this shouldn't be done. But again, we have to be able to trust our teachers to not use their platform to inject their personal agendas. So it comes down to either you trust the teachers in your school system to properly do this and the school board they work under to properly monitor it, or you don't. Not everyone's school board or school district operates the same. I have found I don't trust mine and for good reason...

 

[Huckleberry]

Revised OSDE social studies standards tell students to 'identify discrepancies in 2020 election results'

Significant changes to OSDE social studies standards about the first Trump administration went unnoticed prior to a Feb. 27, 2025, approval.

nondoc.com

Revised OSDE social studies standards tell students to ‘identify discrepancies in 2020 election results’
Changes to the standards following public review were not presented to the State Board of Education.


As Oklahoma legislators mull what action to take — if any — on revised academic standards for social studies approved by the State Board of Education in February, a quiet change from the initial version of the standards put forward for public comment now directs teachers and students toward widely debunked theories of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

Specifically, the new version of USH.9.3 says high school students should:

Identify discrepancies in 2020 elections results by looking at graphs and other information, including the sudden halting of ballot-counting in select cities in key battleground states, the security risks of mail-in balloting, sudden batch dumps, an unforeseen record number of voters, and the unprecedented contradiction of “bellwether county” trends.

Revised following a December and January public comment period, the changes to the new social studies standards received no acknowledgement or discussion at the Feb. 27 State Board of Education meeting where they were approved for submission to the Legislature. The revisions do not appear to have been posted online for public review, and a packet of documents shared with State Board of Education members ahead of the meeting also contained no reference to the new changes.

 

[Redwood Forrest]

This is the gas lighting response.

Ask anyone not a gold member of this echo chamber if that wasn’t the case. I had a screenshot a few months ago, but knew this would be the answer. It’s always “projection” with you guys.

The fact that there are zero consistent Conservative/Republican posters on this side should tell you all you need to know.

I have been off this board for three years until last week. i got tired of being schooled and talked down to because i am conservative. 1. illegal is not illegal. 2. a baby in the womb has no constitutional rights, unless the mother allows him to live -- It is up to the mother to give or deny constitutional rights to the unborn. 3. LGBQT+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++. I shake my head and roll my eyes. I don't think it has changed very much.

 

[81usaf92]

I have been off this board for three years until last week. i got tired of being schooled and talked down to because i am conservative. 1. illegal is not illegal. 2. a baby in the womb has no constitutional rights, unless the mother allows him to live -- It is up to the mother to give or deny constitutional rights to the unborn. 3. LGBQT+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++. I shake my head and roll my eyes. I don't think it has changed very much.

Well once all the Trumpers and Hillary hating posters were kicked off or got hurt feelings in 16 it basically shifted the political leaning towards the center left on this board, and then COVID kinda destroyed what was left of the right. It basically became an echo chamber of a few posters who kept bulldogging any conversation that wasn’t entirely in line with their world view because there was not an equal response to it and the few of us that stayed really just saw them for what they really were… Blue MAGA. So most of us just saw it as pointless to continue to argue with them as it was like arguing with many hard core Trumpers and we started to post less and less because it wasn’t worth the time and mental health stress.

I guess the mods either got tired of the constant locker room decorum on this board or saw a low number of contributors on the board and decided a change was needed. The changes are for the better and I think there are far more civil conversations being had. I mean I still stay away from certain topics but there was a long time in which I wasn’t posting much at all on here because the few would gang up on you and basically call you everything just above the line in which they could get away with doing. I think mods being more of a presence on the board and contributing has made it better.

Long story short… unless you have a very hard opinion or a very obvious controversial one then you aren’t likely to get your head bitten off anymore. Yeah i think most major contributors have a more left leaning perspective but they weren’t the ones constantly trying to dunk on someone and most a very open to conversation and debate. Granted you aren’t going to change their minds 9/10 but it’s night and day a better dialogue than it has been for the past 5 years.