My school district is completely insane

[anthroguy101]

Once again we were given the chance to "opt-out" of the speech. Though those who haven't opted out are required to view it (which is different from last year), they shouldn't be allowed to opt-out. Period.

What's worse is that our technology department couldn't get the feed and we have to watch a recording in history class, which will inevitably lead to more kids opting out.

I hate Warren. That's why I'm donating $50 to the Allegheny Defense Project before I leave.

[Dappleganger]

1. They broadcast the speech in the middle school today.

Both the younger kids watched. I was a little surprised to not hear anything but they didn't even announce it (which is good IMO, as it was part of their regular class).

[LibDemAlways]

2. There should be no "opting out" of an apolitical speech by the

legitimately elected President of the United States to schoolchildren. It's important to teach kids that even though we may not agree with all of his policies, it's important to respect the office. I despise Ronald Reagan and everything he stood for, but I did not allow my daughter to "opt out" of a field trip to the Reagan Library with her class when she was in elementary school. She learned more about what a President - any President - does and came away with a little better sense of history.

Your school district is, indeed, nuts.

[wtmusic]

3. It might be illegal.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9130782&mesg_id=9130862

[anthroguy101]

8. This is backwoods Pennsylvania, not California.

Of course it's legal.

[wtmusic]

9. Actually it's not.

"22 Pa. Code § 4.4(d)(3) of the Pennsylvania State Board of Education regulations requires school entities to adopt policies that permit parents to have their children excused from specific instruction only in the limited circumstance described below:

(3) The right to have their children excused from specific instruction that conflicts with their religious beliefs, upon receipt by the school entity of a written request from the parents or guardians."

http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/022/chapter4/s4.4.html

Whether it made a difference when I complained to my kid's principal last year I don't know, but there were no opt-outs this time around.

[nessa]

13. That's about the parent's rights not the school obligation to require something..

The parents only have the right to demand their child be excused in those limited circumstances. If those circumstances are met the school must comply.

If the circumstances are not met the school can require every child participate but they don't have to require it.

There are all kinds of 'specific instruction' that is optional or elective, the school has a right within pretty broad guidelines to offer whatever instruction their board deems appropriate.

There is no law that says the school has to show the speech at all, much less require everyone to view it.

[wtmusic]

14. Yours is a semantic difference, not one of substance.

There is no law that says the school has to show it. But if the school does show it and it's part of instruction, there is no substantive difference between the school "not requiring students to view it" vs. the school "allowing students to excuse themselves".

There aren't all kinds of 'specific instruction' from which students can excuse themselves. I know in PA one recent addition has been the ability for parents to remove their kids from instruction regarding HIV. But parents and students are not allowed to decide what parts of their education they can attend, or skip, based on a their political preferences or any other reason except religion.

[nessa]

15. Parents can't but schools can..

Schools have the right to make any individual piece of instruction optional. They just have to make sure they meet the overall guidelines. They can offer choices. They can say 'you can view Obama's speech or you can go to the library and read one of Clinton's speeches'.

Schools do not have to make every piece of instruction mandatory for every kid, that wouldn't make any sense at all.

[wtmusic]

21. If slips are required from parents it's illegal.

22 Pa. Code § 4.4(d)(3) requires schools to not allow parents to excuse their kids from specific instruction except in very limited circumstances. Conflicting political views is not one of them.

It's not only an "overall guideline", it's the law.

Allowing kids themselves to opt out of watching a speech because of politics might technically get them off the hook, but IMO it's a violation of the spirit of the law, not to mention a lousy approach to education.

[Orsino]

11. It ought to be, when it contains Sekrit Coded Muslin Messages.

http://plainblogaboutpolitics.blogspot.com/2010/09/secret-decoder-ring-obama-edition.html

[Obamanaut]

4. Why should people NOT be allowed to opt out, to not listen, to a speech.

Sort of a freedom 'not to listen'.

[starroute]

6. Because it's part of the regular school curriculum

What they used to call Civ. Ed. -- Civics Education -- when I was a kid in New York. You studied the nation's history, you learned about the Constitution and the functions of the different branches of government, and if there was a speech by the president you damn well listened to it.

I remember one of John Kennedy's speeches being piped in over the PA system to all the classes -- not his inaugural address, because I watched that on television, but maybe his first state of the union -- and everyone stopped what they were doing to listen to it. It would never have occurred to anyone to ask for permission to opt out because their family were Republicans.

This notion that the president is a controversial figure whose speech to schoolchildren should be resisted as some sort of socialist indoctrination is nothing but tea party nonsense, of course -- but even the school administrators seem to be falling for the idea that Obama is a partisan figure and not the nation's leader.

Unfortunately, our democratic system is being dismantled about our ears and there doesn't seem to be much to be done about it. But I can't help wondering what my old Civ. Ed. teachers would have though of the matter.

[LWolf]

12. How many of those unhappy about yesterday's opting out

would have opted their kids out of a Bush speech?

Just wondering.

The reason it's different today? The nation is politically polarized and politically corrupt. Everything about the government is about your team, or about the "enemy."

[wtmusic]

25. Not me

My kids saw W speak many times on TV. I watched with them, while I could still stomach it.

[LWolf]

32. I never could stomach it.

From the moment the supreme court announced the selection.

[woo me with science]

16. I think parents will always have the informal option of keeping their kids out if they want to,

but for the school to PRESENT an opt-out as a matter of course is outrageous. The President of the United States is President for all Americans.

This is just fostering division.

[Winterblues]

17. Right or opt out of any text book that doesn't teach creationism or Republicanism?

Any speech by a US President is History and if a history class demands you read it or listen to it then you have to or fail the lesson. There is not a political opt out....

[Obamanaut]

19. From the tone of some of the replies in this thread, and other statements

in other threads this "...Any speech by a US President is History..." is not necessarily true.

Consider the remarks/comments re the Bush speeches. History? No, not really, unless one considers that anything and everything that has transpired prior current events is 'history'.

[HockeyMom]

5. They did here in Florida too

Really moot since it seems every time Obama has a speech addressing school kids, it always coincides with early release days. The kids weren't in school to even watch it.

I wrote a piece into the local paper asking if we ever have a REPUBLICAN President, will they still have this opt out for a Presidential address???

It is a very RED area where I live, and work.

[anthroguy101]

7. That's just sad.

At least kids here got a chance to see it. I'd be outraged if my school district did what yours did. It's sad that our own democracy is trying to prevent our schoolchildren from seeing ITS OWN LEADER.

[1955doubledie]

10. Last year, my daughter's school required "opt-in" slips

in order for the student to see the speech. Only about 1/3 of the school watched it.

This year, there's been nary a peep about it from the school. I have the feeling they're going to just skip it entirely this time around.

Charter middle school in Oklahoma City.

[Art_from_Ark]

33. At various schools I attended in Arkansas

I got to hear speeches by Johnson, Nixon and Ford. No permission slip needed, and no permission slip was needed to watch the Senate Watergate hearings.

By the way, I like your user name. If I have the chance, I'm thinking of changing my own user name to 1933doubleeagle :hi:

[earth mom]

18. Wrong. NO ONE should be forced to listen to anyone.

Do you also think every person in this country should be forced to listen to every one of Obama's speeches too?

C'mon now. :eyes:

[wtmusic]

20. Students are forced to listen to their teachers all day long.

The speech is part of instruction, and it's a big part of the value of public education - a well-informed electorate.

[Fire1]

22. That's one of the problems in public education. It's

teacher centered instead of student centered.

[wtmusic]

23. Not sure what you mean.

It's teacher-centered in the sense that teachers are supposed to know something the student doesn't. Then teach it to them.

[Fire1]

26. Not what I mean. Rote memorization and regurgitation is

not learning. Students learn more from interaction not from an entity standing in front of the class spewing information from a "catch me if you can," "one size fits all" format.

[wtmusic]

27. In my experience very little rote memorization/regurgitation

goes on anymore, although when I was a kid I had a few teachers who taught like that.

IMO "having to listen" to a teacher doesn't preclude interaction, or independent thinking.

[Fire1]

28. Sorry to have to tell you but the empirical paradigm of so

called learning still exists in the vast majority of educational systems throughout the united states.

[wtmusic]

29. Don't be sorry, I love to learn.

I just don't understand wtf your point is, or how you feel qualified to make it.

An "empirical" (based on observation) "paradigm" (pattern or archetype) of so-called learning...sounds more like a mumbo-jumbo paradigm.

You're familiar with the "vast majority of educational systems throughout the united states"...how? :silly:

[Fire1]

30. Ok. We're done here. You win.

:crazy:

[KansasVoter]

24. Are you serious? Wow, EVERY kid is required to attend school rallys, etc. Stupid!!!

[Lilyeye]

31. If the President was giving a political speech...the parents should have an opt out option.

Just a "do your best" school speech should not be given an opt out option. This sends a bad message to children that their President isn't worth listening to even when he is just telling you to do good in school.