Teacher Dismissed Over Sex Ed
Somebody emailed me the strangest story. This comes from a newsletter sent out by Liberty Counsel, the lawyers who rocketed in last year from Jerry Falwell's galaxy to sue the Montgomery County public school system over its sex-ed curriculum.
Here's the whole thing:
Now, we have seen enough of this sort of literature to be sure that these are not the facts of the case. The teacher tried to get the kid to change her answers on a test? C'mon, who does that? His personal views of dating? I'd love to hear what that was, really -- and I'll betcha money it had nothing to do with ... his personal views of dating. His own views on dating and sexual practices? I'm doubting that.
The kid completed the test with her mother? Where I come from that's called "cheating."
I am also curious about the concept of an interest protected by the Constitution to direct the education of their children. I mean, it sounds all heart-warming and everything, but ... is there really something in the Constitution about this? (I know that several lawyers read this blog, maybe one of you guys can point us to the part of the Constitution that empowers parents to "direct the education of their children.")
This story isn't to be found anywhere else on the web that I can discover. I did find a bio of this teacher -- born in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, grew up in Evanston, Wyoming (pop. 11,507), went to Black Hills State University in Spearfish, South Dakota. He has a Bachelor of Science degree in Wellness and Management and a Bachelor of Science in Education in P.E. and Health, and coaches football, basketball, track, and softball.
This guy is Pure Country, he's not out to convert children to worship at the altars of Libido. Small-town boy that he is, I'll bet he never ran into anybody like these Liberty Counsel characters. Now he's out of work, and they're all proud of themselves.
Here's the whole thing:
School Board Fires Teacher Over Inappropriate Sex-Ed Class
Milliken, CO - The board of a charter school has now voted to dismiss a teacher after receiving a letter from Liberty Counsel pointing out that the teacher violated Steve and Deanne Aochi's parental rights by ignoring a request to excuse their daughter from a graphic discussion about sex.
The Aochi's daughter, Haley, attends Knowledge Quest Academy. Mrs. Aochi requested that her daughter be excused from sex education instruction. However, based on a conversation with physical education teacher Joel Chase, Mrs. Aochi believed that the school required her daughter to complete a sex education test. Mrs. Aochi completed the test with her daughter, but they did not answer several questions that Mrs. Aochi believed inappropriate for a 13-year-old seventh grader. Mrs. Aochi also requested that Haley be excused from any discussion of the test. Mr. Chase expressly ignored the request and led the class in a discussion of sexual practices, reproduction, and his personal views on dating. He even tried to convince Haley to change answers on the test she completed with her mother to reflect his own viewpoint.
In a letter to the school on behalf of the Aochi family, Liberty Counsel requested the Board take appropriate and immediate action to ensure no further violations of parental rights. The Board promptly responded by dismissing the teacher.
Parents have an interest protected by the Constitution to direct the education of their children. In addition, when certain educational requirements directly collide with the sincerely-held religious beliefs of parents, schools must demonstrate a compelling justification for refusing to accommodate the parents' desire for an opt-out from sex education classes.
Anita Staver, President of Liberty Counsel, commented: "The right of parents to educate their own children according to their religious and moral objectives is of paramount importance. The Aochis are pleased that the school board took swift and appropriate action by dismissing the teacher who tried to indoctrinate their daughter with his own views on dating and sexual practices. Teachers must understand that they are not de facto parents."
Now, we have seen enough of this sort of literature to be sure that these are not the facts of the case. The teacher tried to get the kid to change her answers on a test? C'mon, who does that? His personal views of dating? I'd love to hear what that was, really -- and I'll betcha money it had nothing to do with ... his personal views of dating. His own views on dating and sexual practices? I'm doubting that.
The kid completed the test with her mother? Where I come from that's called "cheating."
I am also curious about the concept of an interest protected by the Constitution to direct the education of their children. I mean, it sounds all heart-warming and everything, but ... is there really something in the Constitution about this? (I know that several lawyers read this blog, maybe one of you guys can point us to the part of the Constitution that empowers parents to "direct the education of their children.")
This story isn't to be found anywhere else on the web that I can discover. I did find a bio of this teacher -- born in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, grew up in Evanston, Wyoming (pop. 11,507), went to Black Hills State University in Spearfish, South Dakota. He has a Bachelor of Science degree in Wellness and Management and a Bachelor of Science in Education in P.E. and Health, and coaches football, basketball, track, and softball.
This guy is Pure Country, he's not out to convert children to worship at the altars of Libido. Small-town boy that he is, I'll bet he never ran into anybody like these Liberty Counsel characters. Now he's out of work, and they're all proud of themselves.
posted by JimK at 7:01 PM
34 Comments:
Thanks for demonstrating why my kids are now in private schools - where the school doesn't try to indoctrinate children into the states liberal religon and completely ignores the wishes of the parents.
"Oh, they are going to learn it anyway, from someone", says JK and the liberal manta.
Just like, gee, "I can take a bribe to import a bomb because someone else would take the money if I didn't.... does your reasoning flow like that as well Jim ?
Teresa. Its time for your medicine.
PB
Theresa, this is a charter school. Looking around their web site, it appears to be a kind of "exclusive" school, small, with small classes. A school with a waiting list. How conservative it is, I can't tell. What the guy told his class, we can't tell from this narrative. But I'll just bet there're two sides to the story.
JimK
Theresa while your children are in private school still let us worry about what we want our children in public school to be taught in sex ed.
Gracie
Not while I am paying for it, Gracie.
You want to refund my 8K property tax bill, we can have a different dicusssion.
Gives you more right than others who have kids IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEM ..eh Theresa?
Not...
Gracie
CRC Theresa needs to go play more with her CRC friends oh but wait didn't we hear NO ONE posts on CRC meesage boards (well except CRC Precious Retta)
CRC Theresa is still trying to tell eveyone else how to raise their children and what parents want for their children in sex ed and what she thinks others should do even though her children are tucked away in private school.
CRC Theresa is a CRC HYPOCRITE.
Anne
I am sorry, because I didn't want to have to constantly monitor the "liberal religon" the state school system was trying to drum in my kids heads that makes me a hypocrite ?
I have a good friend who still has kids in that school.
They had a "hat making" day at school. His kid wanted to make a hat of George W Bush. HIS TEACHER SAID "EWWH, WHY WOULD YOU PICK HIM ?"
Ok, most of the people at TTF probably feel that way. But, do you think that is appropriate for a public state funded school to encourage a kid to form a particular opinion about the President ? This is OK ?
This is what I get to fund with my property taxes.
It's complete and utter BS.
CRC Theresa is still a CRC HYPOCRITE.
Anne
Theresa said But, do you think that is appropriate for a public state funded school to encourage a kid to form a particular opinion about the President ? This is OK ?
Now Theresa should we go back over all the mass misrepresentations CRC spewed about sex ed curriculum and video in wanting MC schools to host yours and CRC's opinions?
But now how could a state run school system drum anything in your children's head while they are in PRIVATE?
Gracie
PasserBy said...
Teresa. Its time for your medicine
Anne
Gracie
As for the sex-ed program I think Weast made the point when he said that his office did not do there job. That’s why they are taking so long now. The mass misrepresentation was Fishback and the old CAC. The fact of the matter is mcps is not safe. The old sex-ed program and the one through out be the Judge was full of out dated and dangerous material if in your perverted little world you might not be capable of comprehending that but that is not my problem.
Poor poor Anne I know she wants to make some kind of point but does not seem to know how.
Gracie we pay the taxes we live in Montgomery county and are kids play at the park and we don’t want you using the children of Montgomery county for some kind of Greek love social experimentation. That’s why we passed Jessica’s law.
anin saidm The mass misrepresentation was Fishback and the old CAC. The fact of the matter is mcps is not safe. The old sex-ed program and the one through out be the Judge was full of out dated and dangerous material if in your perverted little world you might not be capable of comprehending that but that is not my problem.
Laughing at this.... we all are.
Gracie
anon said,
we pay the taxes we live in Montgomery county and are kids play at the park and we don’t want you using the children of Montgomery county for some kind of Greek love social experimentation. That’s why we passed Jessica’s law.
Anon you really seem to need some professional help with the way your mind works.
Sex ed and Jessica's law are the same according to you. To burst your bubble they are not.
Gracie
Gracie I would love to respond to you but JimK will not let me I gess he figured out a way to block posts he does not want you to see without comments. its to bad but it is your free speach way. one way.
thought you seem to have left out any rational or well thought out argument for you statment.
are you gay or something?
Anon, here's a clue. My friend here, the doctor, is named Dana.
Intentionally misspelled comments just ... disappear.
JimK
anon said, are you gay or something?
Does that have anything to do with Jessica's Law or Sex Ed?
Gracie
The Dr. OK Dr.
Gracie
I thought so. It explains a lot.
Well Gracie we had to fight the dem to get Jessica’s law passed and we had to fight the dems to get a fact based and medically accurate sex-ed curriculum past. And gosh I don’t know why any one would not what to protect are children but the dems came out to stop us from accomplishing both and well I think I now know why.
anon said, Well Gracie we had to fight the dem to get Jessica’s law passed and we had to fight the dems to get a fact based and medically accurate sex-ed curriculum past. And gosh I don’t know why any one would not what to protect are children but the dems came out to stop us from accomplishing both and well I think I now know why.
Anon you are making NO sense at all. Never mind trying to explain as it will just be more of the same nonsense coming from you.
Gracie
to the thing that calls itself Gracie take a class in english. It might help.
to the thing that calls itself Gracie take a class in english. It might help.
I already know Jim will bounce that one. but it needed to be said.
pardon dubble post.
anon said, "dubble"
as in "dubble" nonsense from this anon day after day
traveler
Please let me comment here. I have two children at this school and YES, Mr. Chase had the kids (there were actually six) change their answers if they wanted their F's changed. YES, he sent the test home with the kids and told them it was a mandatory requirement. The parents, believing their kids, sat down with them and together they answered "some" of the questions reflecting their family values. Yes, he handed the tests back (after the F's were issued) and reviewed the class materials with ALL the kids. Yes, the questions were inappropriate. I have a test right in front of me and YES he had the kids change their answers. The Liberty counsel newsletter is kind to Mr. Chase. They did not include every detail. Mr. Chase was definately wrong here. YES the curriculum was not from a science/biology/health book. He wrote it himself.
One of the questions asked what the definition of sex is. The child wrote: Human reproduction (parent guided answer that was marked incorrect)
Mr. Chase had the child change the answer to "Genetial contact including oral sex"
The parent of this child was pretty upset. He had no right to even mention those tems with their child. Some of these kids were only 12 years old and don't even know what some of that means. It is not up to mr. Chase to decide the path of sex education for anyones child. My hat goes off to the parents. They had the guts to stand up.
Replying to:
The teacher tried to get the kid to change her answers on a test? C'mon, who does that? His personal views of dating? I'd love to hear what that was, really -- and I'll betcha money it had nothing to do with ... his personal views of dating. His own views on dating and sexual practices? I'm doubting that.
The kid completed the test with her mother? Where I come from that's called "cheating."
If a kid takes some questions home and fills them out with their parents, I don't think that is called a "test."
Now, let me ask you, how did Liberty Counsel get involved? I take it some parents complained to the school administration and they did nothing about it? What was their explanation for supporting the teacher in this situation?
So far we're only hearing one side of this.
JimK
This guy is a freek and should not be aloud near children and once again JimK gets an F
??????
So far we're only hearing one side of this.
???
its your blog.
We heard what Liberty Counsel said and what a parent said who is obviously of a ... conservative ... persuasion. That's one side.
Why didn't the parents go to the school administrators? If they did go to them, what did they tell them? why did it take a letter from these nutty lawyers to move them into action? I am sure there is another side to this.
Teachers can make mistakes. My daughter once had an algebra teacher who tried to tell the class that f(x)=sqrt(x) was a function! Obviously there are two solutions for each value of the argument x, violating the definition of a function. But this math teacher stood right there in front of the class and told them that.
I don't recall that he was fired for that.
If the school had no sex-ed curriculum, and just told the guy to go into the classroom and wing it, well, this is what you'd get. Is that the story? Like a small-town guy like this is going to be able to hit that kind of a big-league curveball?
I'm just saying, I know there's more to this.
JimK
than go find it. call the teacher. I just don't think the parents are making this up.
guaranteed not made up by parents!!! This teacher is more than just this story. He has been accused of innapropriate comments to some of the mothers at the school. He has had to be talked to by the director of the school because of an affair he was having with the second grade teacher (even the kids knew it and they were both married) The kids would walk around singing Mr. Chase loves Mrs. Miller. The director had to tell him to stay out of her classroom. This guy has exhibited numerous innappropriate sexual behaviors. He needed to go. He would better serve a health club not a school with kids.
guaranteed not made up!!!!
He's is the definition of a "Red Flag"
OK, this is more like it.
A guy:
* makes innapropriate comments to some of the mothers at the school
* has an affair with another teacher, both married, that everyone knows about
* exhibits numerous innappropriate sexual behaviors
and the school fires him.
It is clear he was not fired just for giving inappropriate lessons in a health class. I think the crazy thing here is Liberty Counsel taking credit for it.
So, parent who comments here and saw what happened -- what was Liberty Counsel's role in all this? And why did the administration let this outrageous behavior continue?
This is just an interesting story, partly for the way we hear about it, and partly to try to figure out what the other side of the story is. I think I am starting to get an idea how this went down.
Please, though, do you know how Liberty Counsel got involved, and why the school let this go on so long? What did they say when people complained?
JimK
Another parent from this school says:
Because this is a charter school, there is a governing board which pretty much makes the policy for the school. when there is a complaint, the complainer has to go through a series of steps. Sometimes the steps are numerous. First one goes to the Principle. The principle brings it to the attention of the board and then the board makes a recommendation as to the next step. In this case the board sent the complaint to a grievence commitee who first meets with the teacher and then, in this case, the parents. In this case the grievence commitee interpreted the complaint to be about the opt-in/opt-out policy of the school and refused to address the teachers defiance towards the parents (6) whom opted their children out. They recommended the teacher be retained and the opt-in/opt-out policy be changed. When the parents tried to explain that they are misinterpreting the complaint to be about the opt-in/opt-out policy and are neglecting to address the teachers actions, the commitee told the parents to get a lawyer. So, that's what they did. And the rest is history.
This is very interesting, and I thank you parents from the school for writing. Were the teacher's affair and other sexual inproprieties mentioned in the complaint to the grievance committee? Were those things mentioned in the lawyers' letter to the school?
Did the school actually have a sex-ed curriculum, or was this teacher supposed to just make something up? And ... was there an opt-in or opt-out policy, and why was it impossible for parents to use it? If the grievance wasn't about getting your kids out of the class, why did the grievance committee interpret it that way -- didn't they hear the complaints about the teachers' behavior?
JimK
Post a Comment
<< Home