School District makes the news - again

as a side line…really find out the issues when people are running for positions as school trustees…its not a fricken popularity contest or a I don’t like that person so they wont get my vote…

I think its time for some change. how in gods green earth is a life long child care provider/golf course cashier get to be the chair of the school board???..wtf kind of position have we put ourselves…

this is about educating children…not trying to protect them from unionists, socialists and or the dirty hippie protestors that occupied wall street

I have a hard time believing people are so gullible as to believe this is simply an attack on teachers. What other “professional” would organize and wear a black t-shirt to work, particularly one carrying a message that they are twisting to fit their gripe. They are not wearing them for co-workers to look at, they are wearing them to hear some kid say “hey, what’s up with the t-shirt?”

It is pathetic. We trust teachers to educate our children, not brainwash them with their selfish causes.

Teachers should make a positive impression in their students lives and leave their politics at home. Many teachers are very good, it’s too bad there are so many who are in the position for the wrong reasons.

Then kids won’t understand Canadian politics, which leads to voter apathy.

On the side note, I think kids have seen a lot of political ads on TV and the internet. No outrage?

Insulate them, don’t educate them!

[quote=“PLA”]Then kids won’t understand Canadian politics, which leads to voter apathy.

On the side note, I think kids have seen a lot of political ads on TV and the internet. No outrage?[/quote]

I don’t think it is the same at all. Unless the teachers are giving unbiased and equal content of all political sways, which they are clearly not in this case. As for political ads, it can be assumed they are going to be exposed to all parties.

This is a very touchy subject because we are entrusting the minds of our kids to these people and while the teaching of politics is essential, the personal slant simply has to be left out.

Sorry, I certainly didn’t phrase my point as carefully as I should have.

The shirts were worn in elementary schools where many of the kids would not be able to read the shirt, let alone understand it, let alone put it in context of a political protest. That’s the type of kid I was referring to when I said we were giving them too much credit. You will notice that I also said we don’t give students credit enough. Those that can understand the issue are clever enough to form their own opinions and would not be swayed by someone’s tshirt, including a teacher’s.

Hope that makes more sense.

As I stated previously, it would not be appropriate for teachers when explaining the words on the shirt to refer to the political protest behind it. I would expect that if any kid did ask why they were wearing that particular shirt (and I wonder how many did) that the teacher would have avoided pulling out the soapbox and suggested that they ask their parents instead.

However, while political discussion surrounding teacher bargaining should be avoided, it would not be appropriate for all political topics - eg gun control, pipelines, etc. - to be excluded from the classroom. And it’s not always possible for a teacher to remain completely neutral. Sometimes teachers get asked what THEY think. Depending on the topic, say gun control, I would have no problem with a teacher giving an opinion as long as it was countered fairly by the opposing view. “Who would you vote for?” would be a question that probably shouldn’t be answered, even though some kids, as apparently you were, are clever enough to figure it out.

[quote=“mcsash”]as a side line…really find out the issues when people are running for positions as school trustees…its not a fricken popularity contest or a I don’t like that person so they wont get my vote…

I think its time for some change. how in gods green earth is a life long child care provider/golf course cashier get to be the chair of the school board???..wtf kind of position have we put ourselves…

this is about educating children…not trying to protect them from unionists, socialists and or the dirty hippie protestors that occupied wall street[/quote]

I must say, this is quite an impressive attack. Your ignorance does come through quite clear though. A board chair is just a board member, they just have been appointed to speak on behalf of the board as a whole. Did you know that Mcsash? I learned that by paying attention and attending meetings.

As for relevance on the past and present employment situation for a specific board member - it makes sense that someone who has taken care of children and watched them grow and then progress through the education system might desire to be a part of change or help make the district a better place. You’ve forgotten to put long time PAC member, volunteer and mother of 4 children who have all gone through the Prince Rupert education system. But of course, you are merely looking for the negative points, right Mcsash?

We have had all walks of life be board members. Greenkeepers, Citywest employees, Recreation workers, retired teachers… what difference does their past work make, if they want to try help? Or, do you believe that the entire School District Board should be made up of teachers/retired teachers? Is that what you are getting at Mcsash? Are you mad that things didn’t work out the way you wanted them to? Sometimes having people that aren’t directly tied to the education system works better - you can avoid those biased opinions that come from when a board and a union don’t see eye-to-eye, but you being a board member and ex-teacher might be forced to choose. I’m sure this has happened all over the world, in all sorts of different unions - its tough to avoid.

It is entirely possible that there is a shred of educational value in a protest within the school. Wearing a black t-shirt in mourning for a bill from years ago, but then having a group also having another message tied to those shirts seems kind of like the old subliminal messaging from the past - to an extent. A meaning within a meaning. I am sure there is a deeper meaning behind it, not simply to educate students on the charter of rights and freedoms. I remember socials and law class were good at doing that.

I hear Black Ops 2 just released a new downloadable content patch. I am pretty sure 85% of the students could tell you what is in that patch, the new guns, trinkets, prestige, and even how many pixels it took to make that frag grenade explode before they could tell you one of the rights and freedoms that Canadians have. What a rush!

Democracy. She was elected a trustee, and then the other trustees elected her as their chair.

You don’t like it? How about you run next time? You can open your campaign by belittling the jobs of of others. That will definitely get you elected.

Seriously, take the challenge. You won’t, of course, because whatever you think of the sitting trustees, in the end, they have more guts than you do. So much so that they’ll take your public belittling of them as the price they pay for wanting to make a difference.

So how about it, Mcsash, you running for trustee?

Edit: Sorry about that, not really fair to use your real name. Wouldn’t want anybody belittling your profession, eh?

Anyway, how about attacking the issues instead of the people?

[quote=“MiG”]
Anyway, how about attacking the issues instead of the people?[/quote]

Agreed. Attacking a person does nothing to diminish their position. Let us keep it civil folks!

For the record, as much as I may disagree with Tina on this issue and a few others (we had a long talk a few weeks ago), there is no questioning her dedication and years of service. Not taking sides here, as there are two sides, but I have been just as concerned about the animosity the past couple of years as I have been about the issues. There are good people on the school board doing a difficult job and I hope discussion on the issues can remain civil.

Every day my children went to school it was all political messaging. The Canadian Armed Forces came in to show them how fabulous the military is. Nobody asked parents about that propaganda machine. That upsets me way more than a black shirt with fine print. But hey, we can handle a discussion about what we disagree with at home.
Did it cost the School District $800.00 for a consultant to tell the teachers to ditch the shirts?
Unions, love them and hate them, don’t you want your kid to have a union job? Face it, this is a union town. Good union jobs mean a thriving economy. And in the past, it wasn’t all out war between teachers and The District. Ease up, there school board. You don’t represent us on this gripe. Kids don’t read shirts. I would have been pleased if anyone of my kids came home and said Joy Thorkleson had been in their personal planning class explaining organized labour.

Excuse me, but how does Joy Thorkleson explaining kids about unions are any different than the Canadian Armed Forces talking about serving the military in class?

Messages on t-shirts, military, Pepsi ads on a drink machine. Public school is full of “political messaging”. The superintendent is just choosing what she prefers right now. I don’t like it because it doesn’t reflect the values of this community, I maintain.
If you disagree with unions and if the kids ever did hear a pro-union talk in school, then you can talk to your kids like we gave ours the anti-military talk. I’m saying sometimes we look for balance and it isn’t there. That is the compromise of public education. I disagree with the superintendent on this issue. You can’t make education politics- free, just like there isn’t such a thing as objective journalism. This shouldn’t have even been a story.

There’s a big difference: the armed forces are offering training and steady work.

[quote=“windchime”]Messages on t-shirts, military, Pepsi ads on a drink machine. Public school is full of “political messaging”. The superintendent is just choosing what she prefers right now. I don’t like it because it doesn’t reflect the values of this community, I maintain.
If you disagree with unions and if the kids ever did hear a pro-union talk in school, then you can talk to your kids like we gave ours the anti-military talk. I’m saying sometimes we look for balance and it isn’t there. That is the compromise of public education. I disagree with the superintendent on this issue. You can’t make education politics- free, just like there isn’t such a thing as objective journalism. This shouldn’t have even been a story.[/quote]

You still don’t get it. Pepsi ads are not political ads. A visit from the Canadian Forces is not a political message.

Here is a parallel situation;

Let’s say the schools were run by the Fraser Institute and their approved teachers. The school board is left leaning. During the build up to the war in Iraq the board has an issue with a teacher wearing a George Bush t-shirt, so they ban the wearing of attire with political messages. In organized defiance, the teachers all wear black t-shirts with the slogan “UN Resolution 1441.”

Is this acceptable?

[quote=“crazy Horse”]

[quote=“windchime”]Messages on t-shirts, military, Pepsi ads on a drink machine. Public school is full of “political messaging”. The superintendent is just choosing what she prefers right now. I don’t like it because it doesn’t reflect the values of this community, I maintain.
If you disagree with unions and if the kids ever did hear a pro-union talk in school, then you can talk to your kids like we gave ours the anti-military talk. I’m saying sometimes we look for balance and it isn’t there. That is the compromise of public education. I disagree with the superintendent on this issue. You can’t make education politics- free, just like there isn’t such a thing as objective journalism. This shouldn’t have even been a story.[/quote]

You still don’t get it. Pepsi ads are not political ads. A visit from the Canadian Forces is not a political message.

Here is a parallel situation;

Let’s say the schools were run by the Fraser Institute and their approved teachers. The school board is left leaning. During the build up to the war in Iraq the board has an issue with a teacher wearing a George Bush t-shirt, so they ban the wearing of attire with political messages. In organized defiance, the teachers all wear black t-shirts with the slogan “UN Resolution 1441.”

Is this acceptable?[/quote]

So it is politics that concerns you not the messaging. And I guess we have to draw a line somewhere that would define politics. Personally, I would rather a tshirt in the school that advertised the charter of rights on the back than an ad for a soft drink. But that’s just me. And I have no problem with the Armed Forces or union reps or small business people or most any other organization coming into the school to explain issues.

But to answer your question. I would say that the wearing of a shirt with Resolution 1441 on it would be OK. I would expect discussion of the Resolution would take place in certain classes like Social Studies.

If the wearing of those shirts over a long period of time became a distraction, if it began to interfere with the learning situation, then that’s different and that’s where civil discussion would have to take place between the board and its teachers to find a solution. A one day protest is not a big deal.

What happened here is slightly different from your example. The Charter of Rights does not bring on highly emotional responses as would say Resolution 1441 or a button in the US that said “I support the 2nd Amendment”.

I will agree with you that individual teachers should not be using the classroom as a soapbox or bringing into the classroom material that promotes a personal agenda. But a union on a single day using a very subtle (here is a list of section 2 of the charter of rights and freedoms) protest is not a big deal. As well, the protest that may be considered a teacher thing is actually dealing with the gutting of the contract that has made it more difficult to help kids especially needy kids in the classroom. It is a protest that may not be universally supported but it would be supported by many parents and board members.

That’s why I believe it would have been better to have let the day pass without incident instead of escalating it. The response to the wearing of the shirts is a larger story than the actual wearing of them

If I was on the School Board and all the teachers showed up in black t-shirts praising the UN (and I hadn’t looked up res. 1441) I’d like to think I’d do nothing. If they were effectively teaching the students by following provincial guidelines I’d like to think it wouldn’t matter. If the wearing of the shirts came from hostility on the part of the staff I’d be wondering what on earth got us there. And I’d try to work with my S.B. mates to remedy a bad situation.
“Political” has to do with power or control.The military offers jobs but the personal price can be very high. They say they offer training and employment saving Canadians or protecting Democracy but when they get back from troubled places we don’t protect them or support them as vets. Someone makes the decision to allow that organization marketing time in front of our youth. So why not unions too?
Pepsi machines in the school limit the choices of students and staff; the contract (I suspect) defines who else can make money off the kids. Good advertising is effective in influencing behavior. That is power, and therefore, political to me.

But it isn’t the words on the t-shirts that are at issue. It is the organized political agenda that is using the words in an inappropriate setting. What other “professionals” do this? When was the last time you saw your banker and staff wear black t-shirts to work in demonstration against their employer? Or your doctor? Or the receptionist? It doesn’t happen.

I am not saying they don’t have valid concerns, I just think this is a juvenile way of addressing them.

[quote=“windchime”]
“Political” has to do with power or control…
Pepsi machines in the school limit the choices of students and staff; the contract (I suspect) defines who else can make money off the kids. Good advertising is effective in influencing behavior. That is power, and therefore, political to me.[/quote]

No it isn’t. The Pepsi example is marketing, not politics. Look up the definitions and you will see they are completely different.

If it were me, I’d be wearing a shirt advertising “Dave Stigant Consulting.”

Afterall, it’s marketing, not politics. Looks it up.