|
|
Comments Received From May 10, May 11 and May 12May 2009 Due to number of comments received, comments received regarding the LGBT curriculum for K-5 is on multiple pages. The more recent comments made after May 12 and the background information can be found on the LGBT curriculum page. Comments prior to March 1st are here and comments from March 1 to May 9 are here. Alameda Resident 5/12 I support your proposal to expand the existing safe schools curriculum to include the LGBT community. I believe your effort to make public schools safe and reflective of LGBT youth and families is critical to the well-being of every member of Alameda’s community. Thank you for providing teachers and staff the training and tools they need to combat all forms of bias. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am so grateful for your service to the community as I saw you tonight staying later to finish the agenda items. I have a question. We have been talking about this curriculum being the "answer" to create safe school at the later years in the students' lives. But is there any study that was done to measure the outcomes of early age curriculum on the other protected characteristics, such as race and disability? What is the basis of teaching our children at such a young age? I still don't get that. Teaching them not to bully is one thing, but teaching about what LGBT is like, is another thing. I really don't have any problem teaching them to tolerate and stop bullying, no matter who the people are.... including LGBT. But theurriculum does not address bullying directly. It seems that it provides education on who these people are in hopes that knowledge and familiarity will lead to tolerance and therefore safety. Is there a concrete study or case that support this? I am not in the education field, so I am turning to you get this information. I am truly puzzled at why we need to inform the children at such a young age. If it proves that early education leads to safer school, then perhaps I would be inclined to support, with some compromise, of course. So, your guidance on this will be very helpful. Alameda Resident 5/12 i'm opposed to the propsed LGBT curriculum that is being proposed. i'm an alameda resident that is strongly opposed to this. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am writing to make my beliefs known. I have been a resident for Alameda for 8 years now and plan to settle here for the long haul. However, if this curriculum gets implemented, I will make sure that none of my children attend Alameda schools. I cannot understand how such a subject is touted as something other than sex education. This is a topic that is not suitable for children of this age. In our deplorable budget cuts and state of Californian education I am surprised that such a topic is even being considered. We are behind in reading, writing, arithmetic, the basics and we are now contemplating the luxury of a topic that is only suitable for people who are able to understand such a serious topic. I OPPOSE the curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 i'm an alameda resident. I am opposed to the LGBT curriculum being proposed. i feel that children will not be able to process such information in a healthy manner. please do not implement it. Alameda Resident 5/12 Please add my name to the list of supporters. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am a heterosexual parent of two in AUSD. I have also worked with high school students for many years (OUSD). I hear kids call each other gay slurs almost daily and I am certain that most kids that are LGBT do not feel safe at all in school. I have also seen first -hand that having a safe and accepting environment is entirely possible and is extremeley comforting. I am in support of educating kids about the responsibility of contributing to a safe environment for all. Alameda Resident 5/12 As a parent and teacher in Alameda, I'd like to let you know that I am strongly in favor of the proposed curriculum. I know there is a lot of controversy surrounding it but the content is so mild compared with what is really needed. Please give our children the support they need. Alameda Resident 5/12 I have had a child in the Alameda school district since 2003. She goes to xxx Elem currently and will go to Lincoln Middle next year. I write simply to give my strongest support to the teaching of family diversity and tolerance, including LGBT families, in the district. If we mean what we say about making our schools safe for all of our children, then we should be willing to include children with LGBT family members or children who are questioning their own sexuality in our teachings of tolerance. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am a Kindergarten teacher at Otis School , a parent of two 3rd graders at Bay Farm School and a member of the Safe Schools Curriculum Committee. I am writing you today in support of the LGBT curriculum. As a teacher my job is to make all students and families feel safe and welcome at my school and in my classroom. I feel the curriculum offers guidance and structure to teachers by establishing a common vocabulary. At the K level, the lesson consists of reading a story about a new girl to school; it does not mention anything about LGBT individuals or families. The content is about being inclusive and welcoming to a new person that may be different from you. As you know the lessons gradually add more to them as the children get older. I strongly believe that this curriculum is a right step in the direction of cultivating a warm, friendly, and accepting community. I believe that these lessons give teachers a toolbox to use as needed. Finally, I believe that these resources expand each child’s world and paints a more accurate picture of what the global and Alameda communities look like in modern times. Alameda Resident 5/12 I just wanted to communicate my disapproval of the Safe Schools Curriculum (LGBT Curriculum), as I do not believe that it should be taught to our children at that age. I have a son whom the decision over this issue will directly effect. Please take note of my opposition to the LGBT Curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 I SUPPORT the LGBT curriculum for the schools. Please do not let FEAR keep our children from learning this important information. Alameda Resident 5/12 I have continued to read and follow the progress of this discussion. I have reviewed the revised curiculum and feel that it still does not take into account my concerns. I am very disappointed that the book noted below is still in the curriculum. I guess the AUSD staff feels that it is appropriate to compare our children and their faimies to animals. I am offended that my children could be taught that they are the equivalent to a dog. I am also very concerned about the amount of time and expense to develop this one addition to the caring schools curriculum when the other protected classes are not equally represented with a lesson. Is that not discrmination? Shouldn't one lesson be added for each of them as well to equally protect our children from bullying? Isn't it also true that the top areas that our Alameda students and nationwide students said were the highest level of discrimination was race not LGBT? Shouldn't we be addressing the biggest area of bullying? Additionally, I continue to be concerned about the make up of the committee that developed this curriculum. Shouldn't it be developed by a group representative of Alameda? How many African-Americans, Asian, Hispanic and other races made up the committee? Where those with religious views contrary to the committee also represented? Are our children of christain , muslim, jewish and other religious backgrounds that make up our diverse community going to be protected and allowed to share their views or will they be shut down and only taught one perspective? I have heard from many that if this passes their children will be going to private school, that would be very sad for Alameda and our families who pay property taxes to support our schools. All of those who fought for the property tax increase may have had out time better spent ensuring that the AUSD staff actually does what it says it will -- like get community support before developing curriculum! Couldn't the money and time staff has spent on this gone to educate our children on core areas, especially in these tough economic times for our district and its families. Alameda Resident 5/12 I have been keeping abreast of the developments with the proposed "Safe Schools" curriculum related to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender tolerance and have reviewed the curriculum materials. I find the curriculum objectionable in it's current form as I think this constitutes sex education and isn't appropriate for children of this age. Furthermore, I think the curriculum is strangely vague as to what the terms lesbian, gay, etc. mean and can really confuse kids about what the difference is between having a platonic best friend that is the same sex and being gay. Based on this review of the curriculum I respectfully object to bringing this curriculum into our schools. Thank you for your time and consideration. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am an Alameda resident and home owner. I have two school aged children and one more on the way. I wanted to go on the record for expressing my concern about the proposed LGBT curriculum. I understand that this is being proposed as an anti-bullying curriculum, and so it can not be oped-out of. However, it seems clear to me that this is being pushed as a very specific issue that goes above and beyond anti-bullying and into matters of lifestyle and sexuality. This is a matter in which I firmly feel that the school district has no business in pushing one groups agenda over another's. I am not saying that the school district should say that the LGBT agenda is wrong, but at the same time, it should not be promoting or advocating for this agenda either. In a similar way that schools should not advocate or discourage stances on abortion, pre-marital sex, death penalty, and religeon. This is a matter that should be left to the parents, or even the community to handle as it sees fit. Please promote anti-bullying to our kids. Bullying is clearly wrong. But this can be done without taking sides with one particular group or another. In addition, I don't buy for one moment that this is not a matter of sexual edcation. It is an issue that can not be seperated from sexuality and should not be forced onto our children. Alameda Resident 5/12 Please add my name in support of Safe Schools Curriculum. I appreciate the work and thoughtfulness that AUSD has taken in approaching this part of the Caring School Communities. As a parent, I have read the full curriculum and feel it is completely age appropriate and is a nessesary component of the Caring Schools Community program. As a member of the Alameda community, I appreciate the time that the BOE and the Superintendent have taken to slow this process down, to address community concerns and to make revisions to the curriculum where it could be done. I also appreciate the time and effort the school district has taken to share information on this topic with the broader Alameda Community. It is my hope that those that are opposed to this curriculum take the time to actually read it and keep this in context for what it is; another component of creating a safe, caring community for Alameda's students. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am writing to point out a comment that has been made by one who suppprts the curriculum: "Clearly, these attorneys represent, at best, a minority. Given Alameda's 68% No on Prop 8 vote, I would guess a rather small minority." I would like to point out that this comment references a political topic, Prop 8, implying a connection between this and the current "safe school" issue. It seems pretty apparent to me that there is some political agenda that is underlying the curriculum, evidenced by some of the lessons such as the mock marriage between two children of the same gender. It is not simply about teaching children to respect one another, which I am all for. I am OPPPOSED to this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 I think parents are naive in thinking that this curriculum would promote safety and tolerance. If we want Alameda to be a place of love and compassion, we need to be very careful about what goes into the minds of our children. LGBT is an adult topic that should be discussed at a mature age, when our children are old enough to understand the many issues regarding sexuality these days. How can you teach kids about something that they are too young to understand? It is a form of brainwashing, and it would only cause more tension in our community. Of course, we want our community to be safe and loving, but this curriculum will not help our community achieve this goal. There are many other and much better ways of teaching our children to love each other for who they are. Therefore, I strongly oppose the LGBT curriculum. Teacher 5/12 I am writing to you to ask for your support of the LGBT curriculum. I piloted the third grade lesson with my class at Otis and I thought it was of great benefit to my students. I only wish that the few parents who seem concerned over this curriculum could have seen how well it went. The students enjoyed the lesson and many parents thanked me later for the great conversations it inspired in their homes. I hope that we will move forward with this curriculum so that our school communities will be safe for all students and families. Alameda Resident 5/12 I have been an Alameda resident for about 7 years, and am writing to oppose the new curriculum supposedly designed to prevent bullying by introducing kids to different sexual orientations. While I wholeheartedly agree that we need less bullying and much more respect and kindness among students in our schools, I believe that this curriculum will be ineffective in addressing this important objective while in turn violating the rights of many parents/students who would object to the content of the curriculum. Having once been a name-calling (and name-called) kid myself, and having worked with children of all ages in various capacities (tutoring, non-profit volunteer, academic enrichment, etc.) I feel extremely dubious as to whether the curriculum will do anything to hinder the "bullies" and mean kids of our schools from name-calling. If anything, they'll now only know better what their words mean. The reason that they call others names is not because they don't know what the words mean nor is it because they don't know that such behavior is offensive - they are doing it precisely because it will offend and hurt others, in order to make themselves feel better. What we need is teacher training and greater vigilance to monitor and enact appropriate discipline when students are inconsiderate to their fellow classmates and/or use derogatory/offensive words, and they must do this of course whether or not LGBT-related terms are used. Not only is this curriculum going to be ineffective, it will undoubtedly offend a great number of parents and residents (including myself) who do not believe that this type of material is appropriate for students of this age. It also violates the sanctioned role of the educational system by subtly promoting a moral viewpoint on sexuality. While proponents of this curriculum claim that this is "not sex education", I ask you to consider... It's a piece of curriculum about people of different sexual orientations. How much plainer could it be? Even if the content does not talk about sexual activity or physiology, kids are intelligent and curious and undoubtedly questions will arise as to what it means to have two moms or dads or change genders. The fact is that sexual/gender identity and orientation is a deeply personal and sensitive issue and it is also tied to widely disparate moral and religious views in the community that are very strongly held. Do we really want our schools treading here? I certainly do not believe that it is the role of schools to teach on these things, and ESPECIALLY not at this age before parents choose to have such conversations with their children. In short, the curriculum is a weak and misguided solution to a broader problem, and it will only serve to confuse students, frustrate/anger many parents, and leave our schools no better for anyone. Alameda Resident 5/12 I'm writing to express my concern and opposition to the proposed Safe Schools Curriculum for Alameda Unified School District. I have been an Alameda resident for the past 6 years and a future parent of an Alameda school student. It's not just LGBT kids who get picked on at schools. If we're so concerned about protecting all kids who are unfairly treated, why not talk about kids who get picked on at school because they're obese, or because they're "geeks," or because they have physical / psychological disabilities, or because they look "different"? I don't believe in mistreating LGBT kids, and don't wish to have any harm done to them at all. I just think that if we want to promote a safe environment for LGBT kids, we need to be fair and include all other special interest groups into this curriculum. Parent 5/12 I wholeheartedly support the need for the Safe Schools Curriculum. However, I have problems with the set-aside method of teaching this and other socially progressive subjects. My concerns, especially as these subjects are separated from the core academic subjects, are as follows: We must do everything in our collective community/professional power to improve the curriculum of the core academic subjects, especially math and science. My interest in joining and participating in the School Site Council at xxx Elementary School was to make sure that the kids get as much exposure to math and science as possible. I do not want the Safe Schools Curriculum to be another substitute for teaching the basics, especially since our kids are falling below par compared to national and international groups. The Safe Schools Curriculum (including LGBT, ethnicity, gender, body image, cultural, and other topical sensitivity curricula) should be integrated to the fabric of core subject teaching. This would accomplish at least two things: it would allow for more than just the forty-five minute per year lesson on Safe Schools (or the mere one month - Black History Month - per year to discuss African-American culture), and it would minimize disruption of time for teaching of core subjects, which is badly needed, no matter how good the public school or school district. The lessons should work into the core subject curricula the stories, work problems, novels, anecdotes, examples, samples, etc., of LGBT, ethnicity, gender, body image, cultural, and other topics covered by the Safe Schools Curriculum. As the class is discussing the academic subject, the lesson should include the topics' relationship to history, math, science, grammar, literature, and other academic/cultural subjects. I am sure that the teachers of Otis and other schools in this district already include some of the topics in the subject matter, but I have also noticed during my observations of the classroom lessons and of the literature available in the classroom and at the library that the topics are not included with enough frequency to make them "normal". Rather, by the special time and attention paid to them, they are treated as out of the ordinary. This may confuse the children into thinking that these "special groups" are still to be singled out, and not to be included or considered part of the everyday. It also makes causes a hold to be placed on the teaching of the core subject matter, which only contributes to the further delay of academic progress. I hope that with the sensitivity that this issue has raised with our parents and faculty, you can appreciate that I am not trying to speak around the issue nor indirectly imply a position against teaching the subject matter. On the contrary, I am in full favor of teaching understanding, respect, and, at the very least, tolerance. I do, however, believe that our children are at serious risk of losing their future if we do not prepare them for a very competitive world. Teaching of understanding, respect, and tolerance can be done without losing sight of academic excellence. I hope that all of us, together as one community, keep that in mind when developing a holistic academic curricula, Safe Schools included. Alameda Resident 5/12 I reviewed the proposed Safe Schools curriculum. I strongly oppose it. I think the agenda is too personal and it's not something I want my future children to learn about in school. Before I married my husband with whom I live in Alameda, I lived with another single woman. I would not have wanted my friends' children to think that I was a lesbian when I am not, just because I lived with another woman and were close friends! I think the school should teach children how to respect differences in other people, whether they are a different race, have a different economic background, speak with a different accent, or hold different moral values. Bringing the LGBT agenda into the curriculum is not appropriate! Alameda Resident 5/12 As a concerned Alameda resident, I request that you vote not on the curriculum. If you do pass it, I know that many parents will want to take their kids out of school because this material is very inappropriate for 5-10 year olds. Parent 5/12 I have been an Alameda resident for more than 15 years and have two chidren in AUSD elementary schools. I want to voice strongly my opposition to the Caring Schools Curriculum. After reviewing the curriculum, I find its characterization as a safety curriculum ridiculously specious and deceptive. The suggested age at which children will be introduced to topics of sexuality is far too early and the mode of some of the exercises, rather than being instructive, is strongly coercive to a particular set of values. It is obviously sex education of a particular slant dressed up as a safety program to force an agenda and ideology on our children. These are not my values and the state recognizing this divide provides and an opt-out option for sex education. If the goal that AUSD is trying to accomplish is to create safe schools, I think there are other ways to accomplish this. There are many anti-bullying programs and teaching real tolerance (as it is was understood by prior generations) would go farther than trying just this slanted agenda. It seems that the goal of this curriculum is to inculcate in our children an idea of what is normal and good, this being a detemination that everyone should accept certain types of people as normal. I do agree that everyone should be tolerated, not ridiculed, and not shamed and such a character should be taught to our children, but the goals and means of this "curriculum" smacks of some things I have seen in other countries that were not dedicated to freedom. Teacher 5/12 I am a Kindergarten teacher at Bay Farm School and am writing in support of the LGBT curriculum. As a teacher my job is to make all students and families feel safe and welcome at my school and in my classroom. I feel the curriculum offers guidance and structure to teachers by establishing a common vocabulary. At the K level, the lesson consists of reading a story about a new girl to school; it does not mention anything about LGBT individuals or families. The content is about being inclusive and welcoming to a new person that may be different from you. As you know the lessons gradually add more to them as the children get older. I think this curriculum is a right step in the direction of cultivating a warm, friendly, and accepting community Alameda Resident 5/12 As an Alameda resident, voter and taxpayer, I would like to state my opposition to the "Safe Schools" curriculum that is proposed for the K-5 students in the school district. Though I greatly appreciate the district's efforts for inclusion and for open-minded education, I feel that this is a misuse of tax dollars since the curriculum, as I read it, does not seem to equally address concerns for the five "protected" classes. Please reevaluate the implementation of this curriculum and give equal weight to addressing issues of race, religion, age and gender in addition to the ones for the LGBT community. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am writing you today to request that the Alameda School Board do everything within its power to ensure that all students are able to enjoy a safe environment in Alameda's public schools. I believe that the Safe Schools Curriculum is a step in the right direction. Much of what I have read in letters and editorials forgets the reason for this curriculum. The reason for the curriculum is the children. All children, including the many, many children in Alameda that do not come from a "traditional" family, deserve to feel safe, included and respected in the Alameda public schools. Whether children come from a family that is of mixed race, has adopted children, has a single mother, a single father, is led by grandparents, has two moms, that has two dads, they all deserve to be comfortable sharing who they are and who their families are in their classrooms. To me, this is one of the most important goals of the new curriculum. All students in Alameda should respect others and be respected themselves. Parent 5/12 I have been an Alameda resident for more than 15 years and have two chidren in AUSD elementary schools. I want to voice strongly my opposition to the Caring Schools Curriculum. After reviewing the curriculum, I find its characterization as a safety curriculum ridiculously specious and deceptive. The suggested age at which children will be introduced to topics of sexuality is far too early and the mode of some of the exercises, rather than being instructive, is strongly coercive to a particular set of values. It is obviously sex education of a particular slant dressed up as a safety program to force an agenda and ideology on our children. These are not my values and the state recognizing this divide provides and an opt-out option for sex education. If the goal that AUSD is trying to accomplish is to create safe schools, I think there are other ways to accomplish this. There are many anti-bullying programs and teaching real tolerance (as it is was understood by prior generations) would go farther than trying just this slanted agenda. It seems that the goal of this curriculum is to inculcate in our children an idea of what is normal and good, this being a detemination that everyone should accept certain types of people as normal. I do agree that everyone should be tolerated, not ridiculed, and not shamed and such a character should be taught to our children, but the goals and means of this "curriculum" smacks of some things I have seen in other countries that were not dedicated to freedom. Alameda Resident 5/12 As a resident of Alameda, I support your proposal to expand the existing safe schools curriculum to include the LGBT community. I know many of my neighbors and fellow Islanders feel the same. My niece and nephew attend Alameda public schools and I want them to receive education that is inclusive of the LGBT community. I believe your effort to make public schools safe and reflective of LGBT youth and families is critical to the well-being of every member of Alameda’s community. Thank you for providing teachers and staff the training and tools they need to combat all forms of bias. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am strongly in support of the Safe Schools curriculum suggested for the Alameda Unified School District. From my attendance at one of the community forums, I understand that the curriculum is not about sex and is age appropriate. Since my introduction to the plan, I have learned that several other school districts have already incorporated this or a similar curriculum. Alameda is not in the vanguard in this respect. In fact we may be behind the times. This is especially important now as gay rights are the foremost civil rights issue, and equality for all families and individuals is inevitable. While every opposition to civil rights movements in the past such as women and persons of color have fallen to reason, we cannot become compacent about this issue. Children, whether gay or members of families with gay members including parents, face bullying and isolation for their circumstances. Opponents to the safe schools curriculum may claim that their childhood experience included similar treatment for their race, appearance, social status or other factor. I empathize with them, but just because someone was intolerant of them does not justify intolerance of children or anyone else. The opposition says that if tolerance of gays is taught, equal time must be given to other issues. This is a red herring. All they want is to fill the curriculum with lessons on acceptance of people who are overweight, underweight, too tall or too short, too blonde or too bald, with bad teeth and bad breath, who don't bathe and who wear too much perfume. Knowing that curriculum based on the absurd would be rejected, they hope to avoid implentation of understanding of what they oppose. Opponents also suggest the opt-out resolution to the problem. There is no problem, and opting out is not a solution. Should we allow opting out of tolerance, love and respect? If opting out is permitted the message will not get through to the children who need it the most. As a resident and parent of Alameda, I want all our children to succeed in school. Childhood and adolescent pressures are huge, and anything that you as leaders of the school board can do to alleviate these pressures is beneficial. I want all our students to have the best environment, a safe environment. My worst fear is that as gay individuals and their friends and families gain the acceptance that they deserve, more radical forces opposed to gay rights will take more extreme measures. This could include an escalation of taunting, perhaps hazing, and maybe even a recurrence of the Matthew Shepard incident. I hope and trust that the school board will make the responsible decision. Teacher 5/12 I am writing in support of the LGBT inclusive curriculum. I teach child development classes at Alameda High School for students interested in a career working with children. As you know we have a laboratory preschool on site where my students are given the opportunity to apply the knowledge they learn in class. All stereotypes - race, ethnicity, gender, age and sexual preference are harmful and included in our anti bias curriculum for our preschoolers. It is never to early to teach our children lessons about the ways we hurt our friends and ourselves. Recent studies indicate that children as early as 2 years old learn and repeat hate messages expressed by their role models, even if they do not understand the meaning or consequences. Please join me and all early childhood professionals in supporting LGBT as a legitimate curriculum for all grades. It is our responsibility as educators! Alameda Resident 5/12 I appreciate the district's efforts to create a welcoming environment for our kids. However, I am disappointed in the way the development of this curriculum was handled. Also, this subject is politically and morally charged, and a very debatable issue. So the school shouldn't have a right to teach on the topic, especially if it will favor one side over the other. Though there is effort to present the material as neutrally as possible, it's simple not a neutral topic and everyone has different values and opinions on this topic. Please just let parents decide and educate their own children on this issue. I believe it is simply inappropriate for the school to teach this curriculum and I oppose it. Alameda Resident 5/12 I support your proposal to expand the existing safe schools curriculum to include the LGBT community. I believe your effort to make public schools safe and reflective of LGBT youth and families is critical to the well-being of every member of Alameda?s community. Thank you for providing teachers and staff the training and tools they need to combat all forms of bias. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am a concerned Alameda resident. Please do not pass this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am an Alameda resident of two years, and I am writing to express my concern about the Alameda Safe Schools curriculum. Like everyone else, I want the children in our neighborhood to be safe from bullying and harassment, but I do not support the way in which this curriculum proposes to address these topics. I greatly appreciate your willingness to discuss the issue as a community and will be attending the meeting tonight. Alameda Resident 5/12 As a mother of a xxx ES second grader, a police officer who works within the schools, and a gay woman, I'd like to lend my support to the once a trimester, 45 minute lesson designed to open communication and support a safe, caring school community. Alameda Resident 5/12 Please support the LGBT curriculum in our district. We cannot afford to waste precious American lives. Many parts of the world marginalize and discount entire segments of society. These unfortunate countries waste huge segments of their national talent. Help all of our children have equal opportunity regardless of the prejudices of some of the ignorant among us. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am very disturbed and opposed to the safe schools curriculum that the board is considering to implement. I do not believe it is fair or appropriate to so obviously focus so much of our tax dollars and attention on a very narrow portion of the population and thereby discriminate against everyone else as you will be doing through this safe schools curriculum. It disturbs me that such obvious sex education material is being forced upon children and that you would have such clear disrespect for parents who are against this that you deliberately make it mandatory without an option to opt-out. As a parent, I would like to determine how I want to shape and raise my children and I do not think that this sort of material is appropriate for schools to administer. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am an Alameda resident with 2 school-aged children, and oppose the passing of the recently introduced "Safe Schools" curriculum. I appreciate the district's efforts to create a safe learning environment for our children. Also, I agree with one of the comments sent that says that, "There are many other things we should be be spending our time on with respect to improving education rather than debating this question." I believe that a disproportionate amount of attention/resources/money has been placed on this issue which unfairly favors one of the five "protected classes", and while race is the number one issue related to bullying, it has not received such attention. When this question was posed in the past, teachers and other administrators replied that there is such curriculum for other protected classes, but I have not found one that is nearly as detailed as this "Safe Schools" curriculum which addresses the other protected classes. I believe that this is discriminatory towards the other protected classes. Besides this, although the curriculum on its face at this time does not appear to be sex education, due to the subject matter involved, I believe it could easily cross the line into sex education, and I have not received any verifiable or adequate assurances that this will not happen. I also have no assurance that this curriculum will not be expanded and modified after it is passed without any notice to any of the parents. Sex by nature contains issues of moral and value judgments and this is not appropriate in classrooms especially for elementary school aged children. In addition, I also do not feel that my children would be safe if they voiced their opinions regarding this matter, that might be contrary to what the curriculum propounds. I feel that they would be silenced. In fact, one teacher told someone at one of the community meetings that if that person's child said in the classroom that they think that these values are not right, the teacher would respond with, your view is wrong. Are teachers who are planning to respond in this way to students going to be trained to do otherwise? If not, then is this not a violation of our children's right to free speech? Isn't this going to create a climate of intimidation, especially as the person in authority is telling the child that their view is wrong? How will this be addressed? I fully agree that all children should feel safe and accepted, and that we should foster the best environment possible for our children to learn without distraction. I do not agree that this curriculum addresses this issue in a fair and equitable manner. For these reasons, I respectfully ask that we do not vote this curriculum in. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am opposed to this curriculum. When I reviewed the curriculum and vocabulary, it seems to me that this is inappropriate to teach as a lesson to k-5 children. The vocabulary word "Couple" is introduced in Grade 2 and the definition provided is "Two people who are married, are living together, or have an intimate relationship." This is inappropriate for Grade 2. My kindergarten age daughter asks me to define words for her all the time. If she were given this definition, she will likely have followup questions. "What is an intimate relationship?" How will the teachers answer that question? Also, based on the vague definition provided in the curriculum, kids may be led to think that "my mom and I are a couple because we live together" or "my friend X and I are a couple because we have an intimate relationship" referring to having frequent play dates. The words "Gay" "Lesbian" and "LGBT" are introduced as vocabulary in Grade 4. These are sexually charged words you want to teach our children....even before Sex Education. This is not appropriate for them. Please take seriously my concern and vote NO on this curriculum. Parent 5/12 I'm a parent of two who attend Amelia Earhart in Alameda and I have to express my deep concern over this proposed curriculum. I feel there is one thing being said and another thing actually being taught. If this is a safe schools curriculum, there shouldn't be such an overt focus on LGBT issues, but as it stands, that is what it is. This curriculum has the underlyings of a move to push the LGBT agenda to an unsuspecting age group and I think it's completely inappropriate. I am fully opposed to this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am writing to express my opposition to this curriculum. This should not be taught at school to K-5 students. Defining vocabulary and introducing these ideas to the kids of k-5 only gives them more resources to bully and tease other kids. As a parent and educator myself, I have had to deal with teasing and bullying issues. The way to do it is not to define and talk about the derogatory terms kids are using. But to teach them that we don't use that kind of hurtful language with any one. That there are never good reasons to bully and put down others. Teaching on this LGBT subject will have an adverse effect and I also believe it is not age appropriate. Parent 5/12 I am writing on behalf of my husband and myself. We have a 6-year-old son who attends kindergarten in an Alameda elementary school and a 4-year-old daughter who will attend in the future. We specifically moved to Alameda so that our children could attend great schools and grow up in a wonderful community. We want to express our full support and to urge you to vote to adopt the proposed elementary Safe Schools Curriculum addressing different kinds of families, including LGBT families. We feel this curriculum is well-conceived, age-inappropriate at the different grade levels, and is critically important for the health, well-being, and safety of all of the students in our schools. We do not support an opt-out option. All people, all kids, and all families matter. Let's make sure our school curricula reflects the diversity of families and the diversity of students that exist in our schools. Please vote in favor of the Safe Schools Curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am in favor of the schools being safe for our children. Alameda Resident 5/12 As the rector of Christ Episcopal Church, I am writing in support of an LGBT component in the Safe Schools curriculum for AUSD. As a member of the clergy and leader of a congregation, I take the holy scriptures seriously. In the Anglican tradition, however, we maintain that the reading of scriptures is always an interpretative act. Our limited minds cannot possibly be sure that we have understood God correctly from words on a page which our brains, shaped by biology and culture, must process. So, when reading the scriptures, we look to the totality of them as we seek the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and in particular we look to the life and witness of the one we claim as our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. In him, we see the fullest expression of God’s nature and will. What we read of Jesus, among many other things, was that he sought to include and lift up those whom society, by culture, marginalized. And he asked people to expand their minds to allow for the ways that the love of God could work. Specifically with regard to families, Jesus pointed to a reality deeper than biology. According to Mark’s gospel, when told that his biological mother and siblings were looking for him, he looked around the crowd in front of him and said, “Whoever does the will of God is my brother and sister and mother.” (Mk 3:35) I am not a cultural relativist. I believe God has standards and that humanity all too often misses the mark, i.e, sins. In the situation before you, I believe that God stands with all those who act in truly loving ways, including the ways God’s love can and does move through gay and lesbian partnerships. Moreover, even if the above is irrelevant or contemptible in your eyes, I hope you will agree with me that we must protect the children of LGBT families, as well as LGBT students, from abuse. And we are not yet doing so to the best of our ability. For those persuaded by religious language, let me add that Jesus was harshest when it came to the failure to protect children. For those of a non-religious disposition, it remains absolutely necessary to a free and fair society that children be protected from abuse and prejudice wherever possible. It is our duty as guardians of their hearts and minds. An LGBT component to the Safe Schools curriculum is a small step in the right direction. As a married, white, male pastor with a small child, it is what I want my child to learn. And I believe God would agree. Alameda Resident 5/12 had not realized this situation was going on until it was brought to my attention by a friend whose children mean the world to me. Teaching about Gay and Lesbian partners and families is as natural as teaching about parents whose might be a mix of Jewish and Catholic, who might be a mix of African American and Caucasian, who might be a mix of American born and Foreign born. Thanks to this wonderful country of ours, we have the freedom to love and become parents with whom ever we want. Gay people have the legal right to become parents and raise children, just like those who would rather this right not be given to them. They have the rights granted to them in this state and religious teaching, or personal belief cannot change that. It is just a fact of life in this state. Currently the right to marry is not grated to same sex couples but the right to have children and be parents is a right that does now and will forever more exist here. Not teaching about this right and these kinds of parents is leaving our children misinformed and creates confusion for the kids who don’t have this kind of family when the friends they make at school have two mommies or two daddies.. Not teaching about these families is denying they exist. I assume that denying they exist is done in the hope that they will go away. From what I can see and what I know, they are not going away and it is becoming more and more mainstream to see happy healthy gay couples with their kids shopping at Trader Joes or playing in the park or walking their dog at the dog park or having a birthday party in their yards. These are families that live next door and just like the Catholic / Jewish family and the African-American/Caucasian and the foreign born/American born parents, they want their kids to grow up feeling loved, supported and respected. To leave this out of our children’s education is a form of censorship of our lives and history. There are some people who believe there was no holocaust and they would prefer schools to teach their children that the holocaust was Jewish propaganda. Most of us would see this as child abuse. We live in California where people have come together from everywhere in the world to celebrate this big melting pot of social, religious, spiritual and political beliefs. We generally celebrate the freedoms offered to the people of California to be who ever they want to be, liberal and conservative. I personally associate misinformation and denying freedoms with other states in the union. Not California . I want our children to have ALL the information, not just a select very well scrubbed sound bite. I want our kids to make informed decisions about their lives and their choices – fully informed. Lastly, I have a question for those who would hold back this information from their kids. Do you remember being a kid yourself? Do you remember when your parents or friends held back information from you? Remember when you eventually found out this information, how either confused you were or upset that you were not trusted or worse, wanted to try it all the more because it was such forbidden fruit? Do you think kids are any different now? Let’s trust our kids, let’s give them all the information, help them understand the information and let’s celebrate this wonderful diverse community where we live our happy lives. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am very concerned about the proposed LGBT Curriculum. I just want to say that I strongly oppose this curriculum as it is essentially "sexual education" that I don't want my child to be learning at that young of an age. Parent 5/12 I am a parent of a third grader at Franklin Elementary School. I want to support the LGBT Curriculum that is being proposed. I believe that all children have the right to feel welcomed at school should not have to suffer discrimination or teasing for who they are or who their family is. A safe, welcoming and positive social/emotional climate at the school promotes academic success and social inclusivity. Every child deserves and needs to know that they belong and are valued in order to assist in their well being and I believe this curriculum helps to build that. Alameda Resident 5/12 I'm an Alameda resident who plans to raise my future kids in public schools. I love the idea that our schools want to teach kids to respect each other and not bully those who are different. I'll support that! However, I have had an opportunity to review the lesson plans http://www.ala meda.k12.ca.us/L esson% 20plans.htm and am concerned about what the LGBT curriculum will teach my kids. It is important we should be given the option to opt out of such a program at school. This proposed curriculum should not be imposed on others who don't agree with it! Just as you would not force kids to learn any religious curriculum. I have coworkers and friends who are gay and live with their partners, some in our community in Alameda. We don't share all the same values, but still respect each other and remain good friends. It is important to me such values of respect are learnt in the home and practiced amongst our community of friends. And as a concerned Alameda resident and future parent you can be sure my kids will grow up right! Alameda Resident 5/12 I am writing to support the LGBT curriculum, as I will not be able to attend the meeting tonight. I have a child in elementary school and I want him to grow up in a society that does not tolerate the perpetuation of homophobia, racism and other kinds of discrimination and bias to compromise the most basic human rights and values, and the safety of ALL of our children. Please do not compromise on the basic principles on which a fair society is built, that of acceptance and inclusion, as opposed to bias and hatred. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am an Alameda resident and am opposed to the SAFE schools curriculum. I don't believe that this curriculum promotes 'safety' and that children at such a young age should not be exposed to these kinds of issues. Alameda Resident 5/12 As a gay man who wasted years of his life feeling worthless because no one ever told me that I could be gay and also be a good person, I urge you to expand the existing safe schools curriculum to include the LGBT community. I can also speak as a former teacher who has taught a similar program to the one you are considering, and I can tell you that students and parents understand that this is about learning to respect every segment of our community and protecting everyone's right to be the people they naturally are. I never spoke to the children about sex; it was all about teaching that all forms of bias are unacceptable in our school. Thank you for providing teachers and staff the training and tools they need to combat all forms of bias. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am a heterosexual parent of an Alameda elementary school child and I wanted to voice my support of the LGBT curriculum proposed for Alameda. I was delighted to hear that we are finally proactively doing something about this very neglected issue affecting so many of our families and would be shocked if it was not adopted. This is clearly about, simply, the safety and support of ALL children in our schools, as opposed to perpetuating an atmosphere of non-acceptance, bias, ignorance and/or hatred. Thank you in advance for your work in making this curriculum a reality, we sorely need it (and then some) towards normalizing an atmosphere of support and acceptance of all children and their families in our community. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am a resident of Alameda for 16 years and I am shocked to find out what we are trying to adopt in our school system for K-5 students. I am just upset at the way AUSD is introducing it. I am very much oppose to this as concern parents. Alameda Resident 5/12 I wanted to let you know that I am in favor of the safe school curriculum. I have 2 adopted boys - one that is bi-racial so we definitely have a unique family. My children have been teased about not having a real mom and told my wife can't be his mom since they are not of the same color. I believe that the safe school curriculum will help make children aware that there are several types of family and be supportive of them. Alameda Resident 5/12 I've been reading the responses that have been posted on the site (thank you for taking the time to do that). I know I can speak on behalf of many who oppose this curriculum when I say that the opposition is not coming laden with hatred or homophobia. We are concerned that this curriculum imposes values that not everyone agrees on under the guise of promoting a safe school environment. I mentioned before that if safety is the goal there are other ways that can be taught & enforced without having to set a curriculum like this. I know you are all in a very difficult position right now, but please consider the reverberating repercussions this could have in generations to come. Alameda Resident 5/12 I strongly oppose to implement the LGBT curriculum because at a minimum there should be notice and a decision for each parent whether to opt-in. Sexuality is like sex-education, and parents should be given notice and a choice. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am an Alameda resident and grandparent of 3 kids in our school district. I heard and have seen people who are NOT Alameda residents come and speak at meetings meant for Alameda residents. They are people from special interest groups in Berkeley and others. Please do not allow this anymore. If you allow this, all kinds of people and groups can come and voice their opinions at OUR school district public hearing meetings. Also, I want to express my concern about this curriculum. I am opposed to teaching this curriculum as the means to reduce bullying and create safe schools. I looked at the curriculum for each grade and it seems to me it's trying to define and explain LGBT far more than it is trying to create a safe environment for ALL kids. Please reject this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 As an Alameda resident for years, I just want to express my concern regarding the LGBT curriculum. To me, it seems like sex education in every aspect disguised under a "Safe School" cover, and I don't believe this is appropriate to teach this to young children. On top of this, not giving an option for parents to opt out is simply not acceptable. I believe that parents have a vital part in deciding what is best for their children, especially for such young children, and especially regarding such a sensitive topic. I am very much oppose to this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 My wife and I, retired health care professionals, physician and registered nurse, who practiced in the Bay Area for decades, and reared 5 children in the Alameda Unified School District, fully support the Family Diversity Curriculum and consider it essential. This is a very good means of decreasing ignorance and intolerance among school children. Perhaps it may filter up even. We are every-Sunday church goers and see no conflict between religion and this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 I support theSchool Board's proposal to expand the existing safe schools curriculum to include the LGBT community. It is our collective responsibility as adult citizens of Alameda to protect each of our children and to actively shape our public institutions to avoid direct harm to our children. Including the LGBT community in the safe schools curriculum in one more important, necessary step in creating a safe environment for all of our neighbors - where each of us is treated with respect. This safe environment is the beginning to allow for acceptance and understanding, regardless of the "otherness" cited. If we as adults can at least shape the container of safety by drawing the line at overt LGBT harassment in our public schools, all of our children will have the opportunity to show us adults ways to create more understanding and acceptance around this issue as well as others. Please do vote with a brave heart to safeguard our children and foster respect for all of the members of Alameda's community. I'm a straight adult and a 12 year resident of Alameda. It is important to me that we continue to take constructive steps toward a community where each of us is safe. This addition to the safe schools curriculum is an appropriate step in that direction. Parent 5/12 I am a Bay Farm parent and I fully support the Safe Schools curriculum. Privately, I have had to have conversations with my own son about not using "that's so gay" as a put down on the playground amongst his friends. There needs to be a common curriculum, language and policy district wide to protect LGBTQ students and families in Alameda. Alameda Resident 5/12 am an Alameda resident and I would like to voice my opposition about the new proposed curriculum. I'm opposed to the new curriculum because of the focuses on protection from discrimination of just one particular group and this particular group being LGBT is an inappropriate subject focus for children at this age. If the curriculum was created with protection from bullying in mind, then it shouldn't educate children with a focus on a particular group. The focus on LGBT will have an effect of influencing the children's mental capacity to decide on sexual orientation when they are at an age at which they don't even understand sexuality yet. It is objectively true that bullying does not only consist of using terms associated with LGBT in a derogatory manner. In fact, the problem of bullying is an attitude believing oneself needing to be superior to the victim. The education on the topic of bullying must consist of all the aspects of bully rather than focusing on discrimination against LGBT. I oppose this curriculum but will support new curriculum that truly has protection from bullying in mind. If we want to protect the children from bullying, let the curriculum teach about bullying, and not focused on the topic of LGBT. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am writing to voice my opposition to the LGBT curriculum. This is not appropriate for children of those ages and I do not approve of it being implemented in any way or form. Alameda Resident 5/12 As a resident of Alameda, I am against this curriculum being taught in the schools. The content of this curriculum can cause a lot of confusion to children and this is not necessary. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am an Alameda resident and I am against the LGBT Curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am a grandmother of 2 kids who go to AUSD schools. The public school is not the place to teach such a sensitive and charged subject. Already our community is very divided and I am hearing name calling even among adults. Sometimes because of all this name calling, I am afraid to express my concerns. How can this curriculum be taught to our children when adults are still at such odds over this? Please, I ask you not to pass this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 Yesterday's letter from eight "attorneys residing in the City of Alameda" was a transparent attempt to intimidate School Board members. They did not write as citizens of Alameda or parents but as attorneys in a provocative and threatening manner. However, their grossly inaccurate interpretation of the law and the Constitution only accomplished to prove what very poor attorneys they are. Clearly, these attorneys represent, at best, a minority. Given Alameda's 68% No on Prop 8 vote, I would guess a rather small minority. A friend once told me that the vast majority of lawyering is bad lawyering. If that is true then these eight attorneys have found a majority to join. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am writing in support of the Caring curriculum. Every child deserves respect and to learn in a positive supportive environment. Teacher 5/12 am a fourth year English teacher at xxxx School and I am writing this email to show my support for the LGBT inclusive curriculum. During my time teaching at Alameda High School, I have had several students who were either openly gay or who came out to me privately as being gay. I feel that it is very important to do whatever we can to make these students feel safe and comfortable at school. Embracing this curriculum does not mean that we are endorsing being gay or not being gay as a lifestyle. It simply means that we are embracing ALL our students, whether they are gay, lesbian, straight, transgender, black, white, yellow, or green. We are in the business of caring for children and I strongly believe that this curriculum would make all students feel validated and safe. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am a grandparent of a couple with a child about to attend Amelia Earhart and I STRONGLY OPPOSE this curriculum. I am also a home owner, resident, and voter of Alameda as well as a business owner in Alameda County. Some have expressed their concern that parents and alameda residents are not tolerant because they oppose this curriculum; while I cannot speak for everyone, I do not think this is an issue of tolerance and acceptance. We are all for safer schools without discrimination. It’s just that this curriculum does not teach that. Where does it talk about not bullying kids that are different from you? It’s not there. Where does it teach about equal treatment? It isn’t there. Instead this is education about a certain sexual orientation that doesn’t even give equal treatment to other minority groups of which I am part of. In this curriculum’s claim to be fair and tolerant, it is actually extremely bias to the lgbt agenda! In all fairness, it think any new curriculum should focus more on acceptance of ALL groups, tolerance of different view, teaching against bullying and name calling, and friendships across all differences instead of sexual orientation. Parent 5/12 I'm a parent of two who attend Amelia Earhart in Alameda and I have to express my deep concern over this proposed curriculum. I feel there is one thing being said and another thing actually being taught. If this is a safe schools curriculum, there shouldn't be such an overt focus on LGBT issues, but as it stands, that is what it is. This curriculum has the underlyings of a move to push the LGBT agenda to an unsuspecting age group and I think it's completely inappropriate. I am fully opposed to this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 I support your proposal to expand the existing safe schools curriculum to include the LGBT community. As a father of an 8-month old, I look forward to a day when students feel safe comfortable at school, regardless of their family background or personal beliefs. I believe your effort to make our public schools safe and reflective of our LGBT youth and families is critical to the well-being of all members of our community. Furthermore, you are making Alameda a welcoming place for families to live and ALL students to thrive. Thank you for providing teachers and staff the training and tools they need to combat all forms of bias. Alameda Resident 5/12 I'm writing to strongly urge you to support LGBT curriculum in our schools. Alameda Resident 5/12 Please add my name to those who support the proposal to add LGBT awareness to the Caring Schools Curriculum. I haven't heard any rational argument against the proposal, whether based on logistical, financial, or moral considerations and the irrational arguments seem to betray the very bias for which the program was developed. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am a lifelong Christian and a lesbian and my life would have been so much better if I could have learned in kindegarten that I am loved and good just as I was created by God, which is as a gay women; I have not been able to be all that God calls me to be due to the wounds of homophobia. Please pass this curriculum and teach love and inclusivity, we are way overdue for it! Alameda Resident 5/12 I am writing to express my opposition to the curriculum. Even thought I agree with the Safe School curriculum, I don't believe that addressing bullying with this curriculum will bring more awareness to children and prevent bullying from occurring. I agree that bullying should be addressed, that tolerance should be thought, but I do not agree that such a moral issue should be handed over to teachers to teach. In addition, I am concerned that teachers will not be adequately trained to respond to various questions children may have. From the curriculum, it is very clear that certain vocabulary references sexual education topics which are not age appropriate. I am concerned that children who are not at an understanding age level will get confused. My greater concern is that this curriculum does not actually address how this is related to bullying. As a whole, the curriculum is developed to teach about different kinds of families and bullying is not brought it. Alameda Resident 5/12 I am writing to express strong support for maintaining the inclusive LGBT curriculum in our Alameda schools. It is our profound responsibility to ensure that as community and family leaders we are raising children who are aware and informed, who understand that bias and discrimination exist in many forms, and that through education we can bring an understanding that those who may seem "different" from their own experience are not inherently "wrong" or unworthy of fair and equal treatment. Anyone protesting inclusion of a civil rights or gender equality curriculum would have been called out as racist, sexist, or worse. Sexual orientation should be treated no differently, and by turning a blind eye to these issues as a community and leaving it to others produces a "Don't Ask Don't Tell Mentality" that will only foster ignorant children who become young adults more likely to discriminate and pursue a close-minded agenda that is based purely on fear of the unknown, and what does not match their picture of that terrifying word - "normal". So much historical progress on discrmination was started in and has been made in our country's public school system Help us maintain Alameda and California as a bastion of inclusion and open-mindedness. The nation looks to us to be the leader on these issues, and one decision like this can have far-reaching and sad repercussions. We have a young daugher who will be entering Alameda schools shortly, and we rely on our schools to extend our message of compassion and fariness to all people, regardless or race, creed, religion or sexual orientation. A decision to remove this teaching is driven by all the wrong factors, and would make us have to think long and hard about our child joining such a community. Alameda Resident 5/12 As a resident of Alameda, I am emailing you to voice my opposition to the "Safe Schools" curriculum as I believe it is effectively sex education veiled under the label "safety." I do not believe this is an appropriate topic to be teaching to elementary school children, and at the very least, I am appalled that the parents' rights to opt out of such education, if passed, is being deprived. I hope that you consider this as you make you decision. Alameda Resident 5/12 I will be attending the mtg tonight and look forward to telling you in person why I am opposed to the LGBT curriculum. It is very credulous that this curriculum is being guised as "Safety Schools" when it is clearly sex education. I feel for the parents who don't even know that this is going on. Please for our children's sake do not pass the LGBT curriculum. Parent 5/12 As parents of 2 AUSD children, we urge you to vote NO on this curriculum. This curriculum is NOT age appropriate and does NOT promote the kind of safety in our schools that is stated as the objective. - The curriculum is not age appropriate. k-5 is too young an age group to discuss these issues. It is best done in the home, by parents who know their children. It is not right for public schools to teach our children lessons that we as a parents have clearly vocalized our opposition to. PLEASE, do not define for our children terms and concepts that are not age appropriate!! That is our job. - Also within this curriculum is there are many instructions given to teachers on how to teach it, but NOTHING ON HOW TO PROTECT THE RIGHTS OF CHILDREN WHO BELIEVE NOT ALL FAMILIES ARE EQUAL. Clearly we do not encourage our children to have divorced families, nor do we hold it up as an ideal. Not all families are equal....but ALL human beings are equal and should be treated with respect. There is no instruction to teachers on how to handle this properly. We have no confidence that all teachers will teach this in a neutral way, not denigrading what parents have taught their children, honoring each students' view point, and withholding teachers' own personal opinions. If this curriculum is adopted, our children will NOT FEEL SAFE at school. WE WILL NOT FEEL SAFE to send our children to public school, and will seek out charter/private schools. Alameda Resident 5/12 I hope that today you will exercise your leadership to promote equality and tolerance. The proposed diversity curriculum is important to help children learn to respect all people, regardless of difference. The curriculum also sends an important message of welcomeness to LGBTQ families in the district. Alameda Resident 5/12 Please approve the new inclusive curriculum for Alameda schools. Our teachers need help to keep all children safe and feeling unthreatened and feeling good about themselves and their families. I live in Alameda and strongly urge the passing of this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/12 This is just a short email to ask your support of the LGBT curriculum going before the board tonight. I hope that you will help in assisting a fair and equal meeting as well as support of a curriculum which is attempting to embrace all walks of life and persons thereof. Alameda Resident 5/12 I support your proposal to expand the existing safe schools curriculum to include the LGBT community. I believe your effort to make public schools safe and reflective of LGBT youth and families is critical to the well-being of every member of Alameda's community. Thank you for providing teachers and staff the training and tools they need to combat all forms of bias. Alameda Resident 5/12 First, I would like to say thank you to the board members for allowing us concerned parents to voice our views. As the father of a young child in bay farm, this issue is very personal and I understand that many people are affected by what happens with the vote of this curriculum. With that said, one of the emailers called those opposed to the LGBT curriculum a “vocal minority” which I believe is a clearly false. Could it be that those opposing this curriculum were not given adequate notification and so in a last ditch effort have decided to speak up. It’s also true that those from minority positions, those who are pushing this curriculum, normally organize first since it is their plan that they are trying to push forward. That being the case, it has taken the majority of people who are strongly opposed to this curriculum to come forward and make their position known. Alameda is not a huge district, but it is amazing how many parents have spoken up now and are continuing to do so. If you read the responses, overwhelmingly, parents are against the approval of this curriculum. THEREFORE, it would be very unfair, and a betrayal of the board’s majority constituency, to allow such a curriculum to pass without further careful review and edits. I believe we are all for safety in our schools. I believe that our schools should be safe for all kids, whatever background you come from. I just don’t believe that this curriculum is the accomplish this goal Alameda Resident 5/12 I am a resident of Alameda and I am writing this email to you to let you know that I support the inclusion of the Family Diversity-LGBT curriculum being included in Alameda Schools. Diversity is the cornerstone on which America was founded. I believe that inclusion is the only way for all of us to feel safe, cared for and protected through having access to education that is inclusive. I heartily support this Initiative to include Family Diversity in Alameda Schools curriculum Alameda Resident 5/12 Please register my Strong Opposition to the LGBT Curriculum as an out of town parent of a public school student. I have seen other out of town opinions included in your website and I commend you for including them because the decision of the AUSD will not just affect Alameda. Your website is full of the well expressed and thoughtful concerns of parents, and others, who are against this special interest curriculum that would violate the religious freedom of many parents in your community. I agree that this sex education must be kept out of the school and I am so dismayed to know that there are many families who would rather remove their children from your school district than have them exposed to this curriculum. No parent should be forced into removing their children from public school because they strongly believe that this kind of sex education is not appropriate for young children or for public school. Please especially consider the families who simply cannot afford home school, private school or to move out of Alameda. I do use the term "LGBT curriculum" rather than "safe school curriculum" because we must call things what they are rather than giving things titles that I can only conclude were adopted to mislead. I also use the term "sex education" for the same reason. I want to support the Alameda residents who are against this proposal. They need it. They are being called horrible names like "homophobic" and "bigot" and "intolerant" and "hateful". Some of them are afraid to openly express their concerns. Powerful words are being thrown at them and the effectiveness of these words at shutting people up should not be underestimated. I hope and trust the AUSD will see beyond this meaningless name calling and carefully consider how strongly so many families feel about the introduction of this highly controversial material into the schools. I agree that these families have good reason to be against the LGBT curriculum and I hope your community can find a safe school program that will include all the precious children in Alameda. Parent 5/12 I support the district approving the LGBT curriculum. Growing up in Alameda in a single parent house hold in the 70s and 80s I felt my family was never discussed in the school and as a child that was hurtful. I believe that all families should be discussed in our talks about families in school and I support this curriculum. As a parent of a former student I also support this curriculum because I feel my child should be taught about all families so she can respect and appreciate all different types of families Parent 5/12 My son is a 7th grader at Lincoln Middle School and we live in Alameda. My son attended Bay Farm. I support the LGBT Diversity Curriculum. Teacher 5/12 As a teacher in Alameda Unified, I support the new LGBT curriculum that may be adopted. We really need to have these conversations with students and I need the tools to help. Too many of our youngsters (due to lack of education) are intolerant of those who are different. This curriculum is no different than “Caring Communiites” it enhances it. Hopefully, this curriculum would curb the hate and bullying that goes on in school, and worse follows them home through cyberbullying. Parent 5/12 I have noticed that there are many more people writing in opposition to the proposed curriculum. I believe the majority of Alameda parents would be opposed to this curriculum had they been notified about its possible adoption. I also believe offering no opt out as your legal counsel has advised would anger many parents. I recognize that you are in a difficult position where you will likely disappoint many of your constituents no matter how you vote on this topic. I have dropped off a couple of books at the Superintendent's office for your review. It may help ease the disappointment if this curriculum is not adopted if LGBT families see that the Board is making a real effort to include books in the classroom that mirror their family situations. "All Families Are Special" by Norma Simon includes a lesbian couple and has a warm, positive tone. "Families" by Susan Kuklin is a collection of photographs of different families. The text is the children's own words describing their family situation. The diversity represented in the book is incredible. It includes a lesbian couple with two children and a gay couple with one adopted child. After reading the book, the kids can do a project where they write about their own family and draw a picture. Then they can bind them to make their own "Families" book for their classroom. Both of these books avoid moral judgments about homosexuality. Other people have written about the flaws in the current curriculum. They are many. I just wanted to point out that AUSD landed itself in the national news in October 2006 when parents realized a Lincoln School Teacher was conducting a lesson similar to what is proposed in the LGBT lesson for Grade 4. In both cases, the teacher directs the students to brainstorm ways that people name-call. This results in the children listing the hurtful words they know and then defining the terms. It is ironic that the stated purpose for this lesson is to prevent name-calling when the more lasting effect will be to increase children's vocabulary of hurtful slurs and to upset parents. I hope these books can help the board assure LGBT families that they and their children are welcome in AUSD schools. They certainly are!!! Alameda Resident 5/12 As a resident of Alameda and someone who works regularly with elementary school students, I would like to express my opposition to the LGBT Curriculum, also known as Safe Schools. I understand the concern for safety for children of all circumstances and think it is important to instill the value of tolerance in the next generation. However, this curriculum is biased toward the safety of only a single group and does not do enough to protect all children from bullying and intolerance.This curriculum is not balanced to protect children who different in other ways than having LGBT families. Teaching of this curriculum would inescapably touch on sensitive topics that parents will have disagreeing views that should also be respected. Teaching on views toward family, sexuality and gender identity should be reserved for parents to teach their own children and the curriculum should be made available with an opt-out option. I believe these topics are not suitable for K-5 graders and may cause more confusion and bullying than if children were not sensitized to the topic through this curriculum. If some students are bullying other students, it is more effective to speak to and discipline those specific children. Alameda Resident 5/12 I'm a resident of Alameda, and I just wanted to voice my opposition to the implementation of the proposed LGBT curriculum. I strongly believe that this will not be effective in the long run, and the time and money could be much better used for other purposes. Alameda Resident 5/12 As an Alameda resident with plans to have a family here in Alameda in the near future, I firmly oppose the "Safe School" curriculum. As I reviewed the curriculum it is not about safe schools, but instead it is sex education, this is very deceptive. In addition, it is especially inappropriate to introduce young children in Grades K-5 such material without giving parents the right to opt out. Please take my opinion into strong consideration when voting for this curriculum, as I chose to be an Alameda resident because I firmly believe in the wonderful work of the board members and superintendent when making such decisions. Alameda Resident 5/12 As a concerned Alameda resident and a parent, I OPPOSE the Safe School Curriculum. Please reconsider before you make this important decision. Alameda Resident 5/12 I have been an Alameda resident for almost 10 years. I am a mental health worker who has run four "social skills groups" at elementary school level this year. Having looked at the curriculum, it seems that the material does NOT seem to teach kids on HOW to be accepting of other groups, including LGBT group. Rather most of it merely shows what a LGBT family or person is like. Elementary school kids need concrete examples on how to treat others... just teaching them about a certain minority group is not enough for them to know how they should treat other people. This curriculum does not seem to fit under a "safe school" curriculum. And other minority groups should also be added. Why is only LGBT mentioned? Kids are teased for various reasons. We need to teach kids the proper way to treat all people. My son is enrolled at Franklin Elementary and I want to express my support of the LGBT curriculum. Teaching our students tolerance with sensitivity at an age-appropriate level will only enhance our community where we all live and work. I strongly urge you to support this curriculum.Parent 5/12 As parents of an Otis Elementary School kindergartener, we support the expansion of the existing safe-schools curriculum to include a component that identifies famous LGBT people in history, acknowledges the existence of LGBT families, and teaches respect for LGBT youth. According to scientific research by the California Safe Schools Coalition, when LGBT people and issues are included in the curriculum, all students feel safer and school climates objectively are safer. Alameda Resident 5/12 As a voting resident of Alameda and a parent, I am writing you to express my strong opposition to the adoption of the proposed LGBT curriculum. I have examined the curriculum and read through many of the emails on Mike McMahon's website expressing concerns both for and against. I believe the curriculum to be critically flawed both in terms of its content as well as its handling. It seems quite clear to me that it will fail to accomplish its expressed purpose, and, more importantly, fail to address the concerns of those parents who support it for the sake of their children. It is already stirring up a counterproductive divisiveness in our community with regard to an important and sensitive issue. I believe that adopting this curriculum will aggravate, rather than help, the situation that it seeks to address, and result in no real benefit to anyone in our community. Alameda Resident 5/12 I would like to reiterate my concern regarding this curriculum. After much consideration, I still DO NOT support this new curriculum being placed into schools. I feel it is misleading and not categorized correctly, and I am ethically responsible as a concerned citizen to voice this concern. This is not a safety issue, but an issue of redefining relationships and families and to implement this as normal early on in schooling with no option for parents or teachers to opt out. Once again, I am an Alameda resident that is NOT IN SUPPORT of this curriculum, and I will continue to support this opinion. I will be present at the discussion meeting tomorrow. Alameda Resident 5/11 I voted for you as my elected representative and feel it necessary to voice my opposition against government involvement in the issue of introducing and promotion the LGBT childrens' curriculum to our elementary schools full of our young and innocent minds, setting the precedence for future generations to come and opening up a can of worms. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident in Alameda, and I would like to voice my objection to the LGBT curriculum because I do not believe that its content is necessary or appropriate for our children who are attending K-12. Alameda Resident 5/11 First of all, I'd like to thank you for all your work for our Alameda community. Thank you for responding to my email in February '09 personally regarding my opposition toward the "Safe Schools" curriculum. Being an Alameda resident, I'd like to re-iterate that: I do not believe that my tax dollars should go to fund the "Safe Schools" curriculum for the public schools. This value-based agenda advocated by a special interest group (LGBT) does not represent the general point of view of everyone. So I do not agree this curriculum should pass. If it does pass, it should at least allow parents to opt in or out. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a concerned Alameda resident, and wish to voice my opposition to the Safe Schools Curriculum. I firmly believe that this proposed curriculum is not in the best interests of either our community or children. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and want to voice my strong opposition to the proposed "Safe Schools" curriculum. After reviewing the curriculum, I was surprised to find that the curriculum does not have to do with safety as much as it has to do with sexual education. Rather than addressing bullying, the material addresses homosexuality, which is a morally charged subject matter that is inappropriate for not only this age group, but also for public schools. I believe the negative consequences of implementing this curriculum would far outweigh any advantages. Please reject this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a parent in Alameda school district and I support this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda parent who supports the LGBT curriculum. I will not be able to attend but wanted to make suure my voice is heard. Every parent and neighbor in my community that I have spoken to is also in support of it - even though some opposed it before I explained and showed them exactly what this is about, with a copy of all of the curriculum and information on the materials that accompany it. Please do not be intimidated by those who want to polarize the community with their homophobic ignorance and bias, because they are not well informed. I was also against it until I read it all and understood what this is about. It is not about sex education (and there is no sex education in this curriculum, for those who have not read it), it is about a safe and accepting environment at school, which all children deserve. Alameda Resident 5/11 For the sake of our children and for the good of our community, the Safe Schools or Caring Schools curriculum should be taught. It's absolutely important and necessary for the LGBT community to have an identity and awareness of their families. I'm a straight mother with 3 children and just shudder at the thought that in this day in age, in the San Francisco Bay Area, that we are having to deal with opposition to this curriculum. School is meant to not only teach reading, writing, and arithmetic but also social behaviors that are acceptable and carried forward as adults. Students should be proud of their loving families regardless of whether they have 2 fathers or 2 mothers. Educating children and bringing awareness of the differences in families will help these kids become more respectful and understanding adults. I strongly urge the board to vote in favor of moving forward with this curriculum and to ensure that there is no option to opt out (as it is those who will opt out that need it the most!). To tolerance and social justice! Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a parent of two elementary children and I want to say I am happy that the school district is finally going to adopt this curriculum which has been missing. I think it is about time we think about the collective instead of the individual; that is the meaning of public education - for everyone! We need to support diversity be it in how we look, how we act or who we have in our repertoire of family and friends. Every child deserves to be happy about where they come from and who loves them. Inclusion is the key to a peaceful society and school populace. Although not everyone believes the same thing we must respect them for their beliefs and maybe learn something! Alameda Resident 5/11 I am the mother of a 7 year old in 1st grade at Otis School. I support your proposal to expand the existing safe schools curriculum to include the LGBT community. During my careful review of the curriculum for each grade level I feel the content is thoughtful and age appropriate. Our motto at home is Respect and Kindness - isn't this what the curriculum is all about? I hear that many of the oppositions are from followers of certain religious beliefs. Irregardless of religious beliefs isn't the underlying lesson of religion to love and respect one another? I believe your effort to make our public schools safe and reflective of our LGBT youth and families is critical to the well-being of all members of our community. No person could want any child in our community to face the risks associated with school harassment. Permitting families to opt out will undermine the program’s effectiveness and is inconsistent with its very purpose. Even if only a few people ever choose to opt out, creating a special rule that allows it will send a message that respect for LGBT parents and youth is optional. Thank you for providing teachers and staff the training and tools they need to combat all forms of bias. It takes a community to raise a thoughtful and respectful person! Grandparent 5/11 retired elementary school teacher (16 yrs) and elementary principal (16 yrs). I am a grandmother of two Alameda Unified School students. I am writing to urge the passage of the proposed additions to the Caring Schools Curriculum in your district. I believe it is essential to include lessons and books selections in your school libraries that present and represent all students and families, including ethnicities, races, religions, varying cognitive and physical abilities, and sexual orientation. I believe that the AB 537 directs schools to provide staff training and classroom instruction about school safety. Alameda Resident 5/11 It saddens me to see that the subject of the LGBT curriculum has created controversy in the community. I believe we all agree that when students are affirmed for the totality of who they are, they have a better chance at educational and vocational success. There are many other things we should be be spending our time on with respect to improving education rather than debating this question. There should not even be a question about it. Please count on me as a supporter of your implementation of this needed curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a heterosexual parent of an Alameda elementary school child and I wanted to voice my support of the LGBT curriculum proposed for Alameda. I was delighted to hear that we are finally proactively doing something about this very neglected issue affecting so many of our families and would be shocked if it was not adopted. This is clearly about, simply, the safety and support of ALL children in our schools, as opposed to perpetuating an atmosphere of non-acceptance, bias, ignorance and/or hatred. Thank you in advance for your work in making this curriculum a reality, we sorely need it (and then some) towards normalizing an atmosphere of support and acceptance of all children and their families in our community. Alameda Resident 5/11 I completely support the Caring Schools curriculum and think that it's important to teach tolerance to all kids! Alameda Resident 5/11 I have read the LGBT curriculum and am writing to register my support for the program. It is a much-needed supplement to the Caring Schools Curriculum. I encourage you to follow legal counsel's advice and not allow parents to opt out. This is important for all kids. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a concerned resident of Alameda and I strongly disagree with this curriculum. The classroom setting is an inappropriate place for this curriculum to be taught as not everyone agrees with the values being imposed by this curriculum. Out of respect for those who do not agree with these values, I urge you not to implement the LGBT curriculum. Parent 5/11 As a parent of 4th and 5th graders and a 2 ½ year old, I have been very interested in the discussions around the introduction of LGBT into the school curriculum as a way of showing understanding and tolerance to those who are “other” than us. My husband and I moved to Alameda in September 2007 into what we hoped would be a safe, family friendly and ultimately tolerant community. Our school age kids continue to go to a private school in Oakland that they attended prior to our move, but our toddler we hoped would go to school here in Alameda. However, the fear and hype I have heard from allegedly concerned parents around this issue has shown a rather ugly side of Alameda that surprises and saddens me. Whether or not the curriculum is allowed to continue being taught in the schools, and I think it would be a huge mistake to cave to the uneducated and fearful among the community, I would have serious concerns about attending a school in Alameda or anywhere for that matter, which did not show tolerance and compassion for all. Parent 5/11 Please- I am writing to you as a parent- my children need to feel safe in our community- how can they when their friends are being taught that they are part of a 'sub-culture'? That leaves them open to shame and bullying. I support expansion of the existing safe-schools curriculum to include a component that identifies famous LGBT people in history, acknowledges the existence of LGBT families, and teaches respect for LGBT youth. According to scientific research by the California Safe Schools Coalition, when LGBT people and issues are included in the curriculum, all students feel safer and school climates objectively are safer. Parent 5/11 Regarding the LGBT Curriculum: The Board of Education should vote against this proposal. I am the parent of three children, the last of which, an African-American female is still in the program. Ever since grade school at Otis, then at Lincoln, and now Alameda High, my child has experienced discrimination based on the color of her skin. Alameda Resident 5/11 Thank you for taking the time to consider my opinion. I strongly support educating our youngsters (I have two at Edison) regarding lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, how they are different, and how they are o.k., in the same fashion that we need to teach about problems with racism. Alameda Resident 5/11 Please add my voice to those in support of the proposed Caring Schools Community LGBT Curriculum. Although I do not have children in the school system, I am a part of the Alameda community. The education that these children receive impacts the entire Alameda community. If they are taught tolerance and acceptance, that lesson will be resonate throughout the community as a whole. If they are taught that it is okay to discriminate against others, that too will be heard loud and clear. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda parent of a 4-year-old who will enter Kindergarten in September, 2010, and a 10-year-old fourth grader. I am also a mother who strongly feels the need for curricula supportive of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender experience. I urge you to support the inclusion of this curriculum in Alameda Schools. I am a woman who strongly identifies with the LGBT community, as for many years I identified as lesbian and am now married to my daughter's father. When I moved to Alameda nearly 3 years ago from Oakland, I interviewed friends, neighbors, and school officials (including the principal of our prospective elementary school) about how gay friendly this environment would be. This is because I am deeply committed to raising my children in an environment that actively, proactively supports gay and lesbian people and promotes positive thinking around sexual orientation. What I learned was that Alameda had a gay and lesbian presence in the community, but that schools could do more to combat homophobia and promote a positive, healthy environment around this issue. I have personally experienced the pain of homophobia in my own life, and want my children to grow up in a community that encourages them to feel that people of all sexual orientations and gender identities are loved, respected, understood, and considered important members of the community. These ideas begin at the earliest ages, and need the support not only of families, but also schools and other community institutions. Parent 5/11 I am a heterosexual parent with an elementary school child writing in support of the LGBT curriculum. I think this is very important to introduce early in elementary school, because negative judgments are established by the time children reach 4th Grade. Please do not compromise on the principles of fairness and safety of all families in our community. Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda resident, I am greatly concerned over the proposed “Safe Schools” curriculum. I strongly agree with the many Alameda parents and residents who have already pointed to the fact that this curriculum is misleading and breaches into topics that should be taught by families and parents. Alameda Resident 5/11 As a heterosexual parent of 2 children in an Alameda elementary school, I strongly support your proposal to expand the existing safe schools curriculum to include the LGBT community. I applaud your efforts to educate the community about this curricular component and to invite community feedback. I urge you to pass this curriculum that helps to promote a safe, welcoming and nonviolent learning environment for all children, and espouse the values of fairness, caring and respect Parent 5/11 I am writing to urge you to support the safe schools curriculum. All students and families, regardless of their particular make-up, need to feel included and safe within the walls of Alameda schools. As a parent, I can say I have looked at all the proposed lessons and feel they would be a welcome addition to my daughter's classrooms (past, current, and future). As a substitute teacher and as a tutor I have spent a great deal of time in Alameda middle and high schools and have often asked students to stop using phrases like "that's so gay" etc. Such phrases do negatively effect the school's environment and the comfort and emotional well-being of LGBT or questioning students and those with LGBT parents (I know because they've told me). All students deserve to study and learn in an harassment-free environment, and I strongly believe that this curriculum will help us to create that environment in our Alameda schools. Please adopt the Safe Schools curriculum. Thank you for your time, and for the energy you put towards our schools and our children. Parent 5/11 As a parent with two children in the Alameda Public Schools, I support the Caring Schools Curriculum Alameda Resident 5/11 It is pertinent that in changing times, attitudes improve in the name of equality, acceptance and respect for all people, not just those we understand, but for others whom also deserve the same rights and previleges. Love, healthy family values, are strengths for all not just some. I have taught for over 17 years, (8 years in Castro Valley, 8 years in Alameda, 1 in the Bay Area) and bear witness to the great potential all families have and qualities they have to offer with both families, straight and gay. Love is love. Freedom of choice and equality is necessary for all to live harmoniously. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident, taxpayer, voter, property owner, etc, etc..... I am writting to express my strong support for the caring schools curriculum. The idea that educating our children about the diverse community they live in is some how dangerous or inappropriate is just plain false. You have received many many emails from individules who oppose the caring schools program on the basis that being an LGBT person is somehow a choice one makes. Many of these families are raising a child who will grow up to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender and do not even know it. It is those children who will be helped the most from a school enviroment welcomes and supports them. One that encourages them to repect ALL. Alameda Resident 5/11 I hope you will support the adoption of this curriculum in Alameda Unified School District. Our children need to be safe from hate, prejudice and bullying. The Safe Schools Curriculum is a positive step in that direction. Alameda Resident 5/11 I want to first thank you for readng through all of our letters and for your commitment to keeping all of our children safe. Your work is a high calling and know that you have my deep appreciation. I do want to share with you the full text of a commentary I wrote to the Alameda Sun last week in full support of the curriculum. As the pastor of First Congregational Church Alameda, United Church of Christ, I want to express my gratitude to the Alameda School District for actively responding to the requests made by our teachers for a curriculum that would give them the tools and resources they need to foster respect for, to quote Mr. Rogers, "all the people in our neighborhood" by putting a face on same gender parented families who up to this point have been invisible in K-5 curriculum. In addition, the district is to be applauded for heeding its mandate to keep all of our children safe from emotional and physical harm by providing lessons to address the ways that words like "gay" are being misused by children as early as kindergarten to tease, humiliate and bully fellow students. As a local church pastor and a former social worker, I write as one who has spent hundreds of hours listening and bearing witness to the heartache and deep sense of shame experienced by people who knew from an early age that they were gay, but kept this core part of their being hidden because of the anticipated sense of loss, rejection, ridicule, judgment or abuse they might face from their friends, family, co-workers, and most grievous to me, their churches. To be a Christian, as I see it, is to pattern one’s life after Jesus who said that the whole bible could be summed up by one command: Love God and love your neighbor as you love yourself. On one occasion when someone tried to pin Jesus down by asking him: " Who is my neighbor? Jesus responded with a Parable about a Good Samaritan which could well be subtitled: "Why Opting Out is Not the Road To Take." In Jesus’ story, a man is beat up and left bleeding by the side of the road. Two very pious religious people see the man laying on the ground and take the "opt out" route. They intentionally cross over to the other side of the street to avoid to seeing and interacting with the man for fear of being contaminated. The irony of the story is that Jesus names a Samaritan -- someone from the most hated people group of the day – as the neighborly hero who not only stops but goes out of his way to tend to the man’s wounds. The bottom line moral is that every human being is not only your neighbor, but part of the human family and thus of inestimable value to God. One of the goals of the Caring Schools Curriculum LGBT lessons, is recognize the existence of same-gender parented families in our community and to help children to get to know them so they won’t cross the street but welcome them into their neighborhood. This brings me to addressing the comment made by Rev. Joe Caldwell that a literal interpretation of the bible does not allow for the open definition of family – that is to say gay and lesbian families -- taught by this curriculum. In essence this means that gay and lesbian families may be our neighbors, but we would rather not have our children get to know them (as if these same children would not ask their parents why they can’t go to school on a particular day and thereby learn about the existence of gay and lesbian families anyway). This got me thinking about what it would it would mean for us to take everything the bible says about "family values" literally. Just a few examples: children can be put to death for talking back to their parents (Ex. 20:17). Incest and domestic violence are sanctioned by God (Gen. 19:33-36; 34:1-17); a man can own his wife and daughters like he owns the animals in his barn and therefore can pass her off to other men as well as have as many wives and mistresses as he wants (too many verses to mention); being single is better than being married (I Cor. 7:8); to follow God you must hate your father and mother (Luke 14:26). All of these injunctions are in the bible and have to be read in light of their cultural and social setting. Cultures change. How we interpret the political and religious texts handed down to us changes. What we deem to be acceptable changes. At one time, people could read the Declaration of Independence and the Bible and still justify stealing land from Native American people, buying and selling African American people as slaves, denying women the right to vote and making interracial marriage illegal. We can not read the bible and pick and choose what we are going to take literally or not. For instance, do you know how many times Jesus talks about same-gender couples? (0). Do you know how many times the bible actually refers to same-gender couples in a committed covenanted relationship? (0). One of the goals of a public school system and thereby its curriculum is to teach democratic norms of equality and mutual respect for all people in our communities, whether we agree with their beliefs and lifestyles or not. I may not agree with a certain reality of life, but the job of the public school system is to teach children, in age-appropriate ways, about the facts and realities found in the world around us. Just because I am a Christian and a pacifist does not mean I am not going to ask that my children be able to opt out of the facts about the Civil War for instance. It is our job as parents to come alongside the school system and help our children become good citizens and to dialogue with them about what they are learning. As a parent of a toddler, I am becoming increasingly aware of the power we have as adults to shape a child’s sense of self and place in the world as well as their understanding of the people and world around them. Children are sponges of sensitivity no matter what their cognitive level. In light of this, we can not underestimate the internalized self hatred that can develop when a young person is judged, teased, bullied and sometimes hurt by others because they are perceived to be different. From a young age, our longing is to belong, to fit in. I often wonder about the rational of those who vehemently declare that people are not born gay, but make a choice to be gay. Who would choose a life long sentence of being ridiculed, shamed, judged, made to feel invisible, physically at risk, and treated unequally under the law as a despite living in a country that prides itself on the declaration that all people are created equal? At the same time this curriculum has been hotly debated in our community, two 11 year old boys took their own lives because they could not bear another day of being incessantly teased and called "gay" by their classmates. Consider the incredible inner angst that drove them to believe that it would be better to hang themselves than to get up and go to school the next day. We will never know whether these boys would have grown up to be gay, but what we do know is that this one word, said in a mean-spirited way has an enormous power to harm. To the extent that we as a community are silent, complicit or active in promoting anti-gay sentiment, we have not been "good neighbors" and bear some of the responsibility for the death of these two boys. We can debate the ins and outs of this curriculum for years to come, but the bottom line is that any of our children can be the targeted with gay slurs. All of our children are at risk. If one life is saved, if one child grows in their acceptance of others in our community because we have put this curriculum in place, it will be well worth it. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and have 2 children who attend public school in Alameda. I strongly support the Caring Schools curriculum and believe it is very important to teach values of tolerance and acceptance, and make our schools safe communities for all. Alameda Resident 5/11 We want to add our voices in support of the proposal to expand the existing safe school curriculum to include the LGBT community. We believe your effort to make our public schools safe and reflective of our LGBT youth and families is critical to the well-being of all members of our community. Thank you for providing teachers and staff the training and tools they need to combat all forms of bias. Alameda Resident 5/11 I wanted to let you know that I am in favor of the safe school curriculum. I have 2 adopted boys - one that is bi-racial so we definitely have a unique family. My children have been teased about not having a real mom and told I can't be his mom since we are not of the same color. I believe that the safe school curriculum will help make children aware that there are several types of family and be supportive of them. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am writing in support of the Safe Schools Cirriculum. As an Alameda resident and mother of a child in AUSD school system, I think this cirriculum will have a significant, positive impact on our community and the lives of our children. Please consider the lives of LGBT youth in our community as well as the children of LGBT families when considering the addition of these lessons to the elementary cirriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I understand that the vocal minority of people opposed to the LGBT curriculum have mobilized at the last minute with in e-mail campaign to influence your vote. As a straight parent of two children in Franklin School, I strongly support implementing it. That said, I think the board should not decide based on which "side" is more vocal, but rather on principle and in accordance with both the California and U.S. Constitutions, which prohibit discrimination. Acceptance, awareness and children feeling safe and supported seem to be the whole point of the Caring Schools Curriculum. To include some protected classes (e.g. racial) while excluding other protected class (in this case, LGTB) would be, *in my opinion* (I am not a lawyer), not just hypocritical and immoral, but may be illegal and unconstitutional. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am writing you tonight to request that the Alameda School Board do everything within its power to ensure that all students, including my own three children, are able to enjoy a safe environment in Alameda's public schools. I believe that the Safe Schools Curriculum is a step in the right direction and hope that you and your colleagues will do the right thing tomorrow evening. Alameda Resident 5/11 I live in Alameda, and want to support the LGBT curriculum in our community. I believe it's good for our kids to know the diversity of our communities. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am writing to support the LGBT curriculum to reflect the diversity of our communities and to fill the void in the current curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am sending this email to you in support of this extremely important issue. I am in support of the LGBT Family Diversity Curriculum. There are two school age children in my family who attend Alameda Schools. I want this curriculum being included in their studies. Alameda Resident 5/11 My son is enrolled at Franklin Elementary and I want to express my support of the LGBT curriculum. As an educator myself (of students with Autism, Aspergers' Syndrome, Bipolar Disorder and other disabilities) for nearly 14 years, I believe strongly in educating our students that there is a diversity of thinking, living, and learning in our community. Teaching our students tolerance with sensitivity at an age-appropriate level will only enhance our community where we all live and work. I strongly urge you to support this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a straight parent of two AUSD elementary students, neither of whom currently exhibit gender variant tendencies, nor show any indication of being attracted to the same sex. I urge you to vote to approve this very important piece of the Caring Schools Curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am writing to voice my opposition to the proposed "Safe Schools" curriculum. As a public elementary school teacher, I am keenly aware of the harm that teasing and bullying can do to a child's psyche. I have always taught my students that belittling someone for any reason is wrong and unacceptable, and I firmly believe that part of a teacher's responsibility is to educate their students about appropriate, respectful behavior towards all students. Since the proposed curriculum singles out a specific group, I cannot support the idea of this program. Alameda Resident 5/11 I'm a concern resident living in Alameda and I'm very opposed to the teachings of this LGBT curriculum in our public schools. These issues should be educated by the children's parents. The issues should belong in the area of sex education because it is focused on sexual orientation. If the curriculum passes, there should be an opt out rule. Alameda Resident 5/11 As a resident of Alameda and future parent, I would like to voice my opposition to the Safe Schools Curriculum that is in the works right now. I think the curriculum is too much to introduce to kindergartners at such a young age and also inappropriate to introduce in the public school setting. In the current age where schools are falling behind in basic math and reading curriculum, I think this material should be the last to be taught at kindergarten and elementary school level. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have recently heard about this curriculum and wanted to express concern regarding it. As an Alameda resident, I oppose the curriculum. I don't feel like it maintains an objective stance on a highly controversial topic. It is a matter for families to discuss their values with their children. Alameda Resident 5/11 I support the Safe School Curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 Thank you so much for working so hard for our city. I am an Alameda resident and I heard about this safe schools curriculum issue. I strongly oppose this. Please do not let it pass by all means. Alameda Resident 5/11 I think there should be Family Diversity because I don't think its Fair that others think that marriage should not be a man & a man or a woman & a woman. Its not Fair!! Alameda Resident 5/11 I have been a resident of Alameda since 2006. I live on Bay Farm Island. As a resident that will soon have a child attending the public schools here, I am deeply concerned and strongly opposed to the LGBT curriculum proposal. I just wanted to express my opinion that I do NOT want this curriculum to be mandatory for my child, I believe it is highly inappropriate to teach this in public schools. I fully support a safe learning environment for all children, however, I do not believe this curriculum will achieve this goal. Parent 5/11 I am a mother of a 2.5 year old child in Alameda who lives on Bay Farm Island just down the street from Amelia Earhart, and I strongly oppose the safe schools curriculum. It is absurd that this curriculum, which is clearly the agenda of a single small constituency is being touted as a safety issue when it is more appropriately categorized as an health related issue or even a sex education issue. The unequal treatment of this curriculum which I have reviewed clearly is bias toward the lgbt agenda and does not protect the many other groups that receive bullying and abuse. I am appalled that such a curriculum is being forced no us alameda residence in the name of safety and acceptance. The entire process through which this curriculum is being addressed and the limited access of it to the public is also a huge concern of mine. Finally, as the public meeting is being held tomorrow, I want to call for checking IDs or Driver’s License to prove that people attending are actual Alameda Residents. It has come to my attention, and many others in our community, that those from the LGBT camp are gathering people throughout the state to come to the meeting tomorrow. This is absolutely unacceptable! Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda resident, I'm deeply trouble to hear that you are in discussion of incorporating LGBT worldviews into our schools under the guise of safety and I oppose such curriculum. I am in favor of ensuring that our schools are safe places to learn. However, in that process, this proposed curriculum is in fact imposing a worldview of intolerance and hatred toward children who do not agree with this curriculum and thus a more dangerous culture of appeasement and blind compliance is imposed onto our children. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident of Alameda, and I am opposed to the proposed LGBT curriculum. Looking strictly at the votes of Emails Supporting Curriculum against Emails Opposing Curriculum, although emails supporting the curriculum are slightly ahead, that does not include emails expressing concerns about this process, which will then greatly outnumber people supporting the curriculum. Nevertheless, even if the polls were to end today and the curriculum passes, you can say at least 45% of the families would consider withdrawing children from AUSD schools. This does not take into consideration that a single vote from one email may represent two or more children attending the schools in the area. Further, on the actual curriculum, this topic is definitely not age appropriate or does not even address the necessary steps to promote safety among kids. Bullying could be addressed by diverting funds so that there are more chaperones during recess hours and after school hours to watch the kids so they won't be left alone to attack each other. I am not attacking the LGBT curriculum or the community, but at the ages specified, it is certainly not the right time to introduce ideas to children. Alameda Resident 5/11 As a concerned citizen of Alameda, I wanted to express my strong opposition to the proposed LGBT curriculum in the AUSD for grades k-5. I think the curriculum wrongly tries to push on the children the idea that LGBT families are morally equal to the traditional family. While, I believe that every individual must be respected equally, ideas and moral values should not. I believe that the new curriculum wrongly imposes a pro-LGBT agenda on the kids which impinges on a parent's right to teach their children moral values that might oppose the idea that LGBT families are morally equal to the traditional family. For this reason, I strongly oppose the curriculum, and I would pull my child out of the AUSD if need be to prevent my child from learning the material from the curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a 10 year resident of alameda (living on Versailles right now, just 2 blocks from Otis Elementary) and have just been made recently aware of this proposed LGBT lessons being proposed to be included in the Caring schools program. Having a 3 year old daughter who I'm looking forward to send to Otis School, I am very disappointed by the lack of judgment that the school board has had on this issue. To be clear, I have no problems with people that belong to the LGBT community. I have lived in the bay area for most of my life, known quite a few very reputable and honorable people that were LGBT and I have the upmost respect for them. Having said that, I feel like the introduction of this lesson into the caring program demonstrates a mishandling of what we are trying to teach. I am 100% in favor of teaching our children what it means to respect each other and to rid our schools of bullying. This is the time honored lesson that all children must learn. Having been the child of an immigrant (that still to this day has a heavy accent) who had a prosthetic leg (stepped on a land mine in WWII), I had my fair share of being made fun of. So to be clear, those kinds of actions must be stopped. But the way that bullying was stopped at my grade school was by teachers telling us to respect each other's differences, by having us play with each other and get to know the each other and see that we are all the same on the inside. When we started building relationships with each other then the differences melted away and bullying stopped. But we were never sat down and then talked to about the struggles that immigrant parents have in coming to the USA, or the courage it takes for people with disabilities to overcome them. We were never given a comparative religions talk nor was it explained to us why some families only have 1 parent and not two. Why not? Because as children we wouldn't have been able to fully understand that material. It would have gone over our head. What was a lot more effective was to simply tell the children that it is unacceptable to judge someone because of their circumstances and then have activities that let the child interact while forgetting their differences. Further, I am not so confident that the material/teaching would be able to adequately address some of these issues to the parents liking. Particularly for the LGBT lessons, I am sure that there are many parents out there that feel like WHILE the tolerance and respectful treatment of LGBT peoples is absolutely essential, the putting forth of the LGBT lifestyle as being the same as that of heterosexual lifestyle is something they might like to teach their children about firsthand. I give 100% approval to any teach that catches my girl bullying (for any reason) to discipline her and let her know that it will not be tolerated, that she needs to treat everyone with respect. BUT I am not willing to let a teacher impart the values of the school board (because the school board is who is making up these values, not even the teachers) onto my child. Respect, yes, but values, no... That is not the job of the school. As a final note, I would like to just assert that I do not think that the material is being fair to the problems at hand. I have heard from many people that the largest problem of bullying at our schools is because of ethnicity/race. But how come there is no lesson plan isolating just that? I think that to make a separate lesson plan about LGBT isn't accurate representation, when NONE of the other protected classes have their own lesson plan. Why does this one issue carry so much weight when objectively speaking it isn't nearly as large of a problem as many others? So for this reason, as well as many others, I would like to voice my opposition to this new curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 While the revised curriculum is an improvement on the old version, it is still unacceptable as a mandatory lesson for children. The material still espouses only one viewpoint: the pro-LGBT viewpoint. It opposes other viewpoints and values that are not pro-LGBT. The community is highly divided on this issue as evidenced by Prop. 8. These values should be taught by parents and in the home, not at school, or in the alternative, must be presented with multiple viewpoints without teaching a correct value judgment. Any curriculum that attempts to force one side's value judgments on our children, especially on a topic so controversial, is unacceptable. The school board would never accept a curriculum that teaches that homosexuality is morally wrong. It has no business teaching the opposite message. Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda resident and tax payer, I am completely opposed to the LGBT curriculum that is being proposed. Under the guise of "school safety" this curriculum infringes on the rights of parents teaching children their personal values. Also, I feel strongly that children at such a young age are not prepared to critically evaluate curriculum with these types of values. This curriculum seems to have no evidence for how it will promote "school safety," based on the given lessons. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a former classroom counselor, working with severely emotionally disturbed kids and their families, am currently a UC Berkeley masters and credential student, and am an Alameda resident. I am writing to express my opposition to the addition of the LGBT curriculum into the existing Safe Schools curriculum. As someone who has worked with severely emotionally disturbed students in the past, and who has had to restrain many kids who've "acted out" I know how important it is to have a safe school and a safe space within the classroom. However, looking at the lessons myself, the curriculum doesn't achieve its intended purpose of preventing bullying and hate language. Rather than teach a particular ideology, I would rather teach students how to adequately handle situations regarding bullying and hate language so that they know how to think critically and behave properly in all such situations and focus on tolerance. Alameda Resident 5/11 I simply don't understand why this curriculum would pass when our community is so obviously divided about it... Or at the very least, give the parties that are not in favor of the curriculum the opportunity (and the right) to pull our children out of class when this curriculum IS being taught. My child will soon enter into Otis Elementary School as a kindergartner, but if this curriculum passes, I will consider the option of sending my child to a private or charter school, or even homeschooling until Middle school, when the curriculum is NOT taught, from what I understand. And if the curriculum passes without the right for famillies opposed to this curriculum to OPT OUT, the consideration will be all the stronger. I am writing to voice my concerns regarding your purported intent to pass the proposed LGBT curriculum. As a resident and future parent in Alameda , and as someone who has reviewed the curriculum, I believe that the purported LGBT curriculum is offensive to parents who have the legal right to opt out of this curriculum. Please have some respect for parents who simply have a different moral opinion regarding the issue of LGBT from you and the author[s] of this curriculum. Just because people disagree does not make them bigoted, and just because parents and students disagree do not mean that they will be bullies on the playground and therefore must be forced to sit through this clearly biased curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a concerned Alameda resident and parent and I would like to express my opposition to the curriculum. I have seen the curriculum and have been to discussions regarding this issue. I do not think the issue of name calling is properly addressed and the agenda of trying to teach elementary school students these issues is inappropriate. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident, and I oppose the LBGT curriculum Alameda Resident 5/11 I'm a voter registered in the county of Alameda. I am opposed to the Safe Schools Curriculum. Upon reviewing the material I feel it is not beneficial and even harmful to the children of Alameda. Alameda Resident 5/11 I'm writing to express my concern and opposition to the proposed Safe Schools Curriculum for Alameda Unified School District. I have been an Alameda resident for the past 6 years and a future parent of an Alameda school student. This curriculum comes disguised under the banner of "school safety," but let's be frank here. It's not just LGBT kids who get picked on at schools. If we're so concerned about protecting all kids who are unfairly treated, why not talk about kids who get picked on at school because they're obese, or because they're "geeks," or because they have physical / psychological disabilities, or because they look "different"? The fact that this curriculum is so strongly focused on LGBT kids leads me to believe that this is their way of promoting their own agenda rather than actually trying to provide a "safe" environment for all children. I will be attending the public hearing tomorrow, and will be strongly opposing this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 As a substitute teacher of the AUSD, I am all for teaching students to be accepting of one another regardless of gender, age, race, religious belief, sexual preference, cultural background, heritage, etc. I am thankful to work with our future generation, but I am concerned about the LGBT curriculum and would oppose it, saving it for their later education.
Parent 5/11 I know that the vote is coming up very soon, so I just wanted to email and tell you that my wife and I are very much against this LGBT curriculum. I know of many parents who are in agreement with us, and even considering pulling our kids out of our district or taking legal action, because we're so upset at how our rights as parents seemed to have been dismissed. My objection is as follows: Please consider how the majority of the parents feel about this curriculum’s deceptive tactics before blindly approving this curriculum Parent 5/11 As a proud resident of Alameda the past 7 years, I was dismayed to hear the school board is considering the introduction of the LGBT curriculum into our kindergarden and elementary schools. I finished college and settled in Alameda, cherishing the blend of small town ethos nestled within the fast-paced urban Bay Area life. I live in Alameda, I work nearby, I got married here and am raising a child with my wife here. I love this town. I am a very concerned parent, and can't help but feel a little indignant that a difficult issue like sexual orientation and gender identity is something the school district feels obligated to instruct our children about at so young an age--kindergarten! As difficult and controversial as this issue has been within our country, our state, and in Northern California, I'm surprised that the AUSD is introducing curriculum purporting to "teach" our children how to think about these issues, when our children are still unequipped with the moral faculties to properly decide for themselves where they will side. I feel this is an affront and violation of my parental rights. When I brought up this issue with other Alamedans, they said this isn't about LGBT at all, but serves the purposes of promoting "Safer Schools." I was shocked by this. "LGBT" is how this curriculum is referred to in Alameda's "The Island" and on the AUSD website. Is this curriculum really neutral in introducing these issues and moral categories to our children, or is there an ulterior agenda that is being promoted beyond merely "Safer Schools"? I want to ask for an opt-out at the very least, and ask the School Board members to vote against the inclusion of this material into the school curriculum. If it's included, I will feel obligated to pull my child out of the Alameda school system. Thanks for your time. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have heard about the recent discussions on a potential curriculum that would be added to the Alameda School district requirement for Elementary schools. I do not have children of my own as of yet, but am very concerned as to how the implementation of this curriculum may affect my future children. I am opposed to this new curriculum, and do not desire it to be part of the district requirements!!! Parent 5/11 I am a resident and parent of Alameda, and before tomorrow’s meeting, I really just want to express my concern and vote AGAINST the new school curriculum that is being proposed in our schools. My very young child will be entering grade school in a couple years, and I do not want her to be taught the ‘curriculum’ that the LGBT community has proposed. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident and parent of Alameda, and before tomorrow’s meeting, I really just want to express my concern and vote AGAINST the new school curriculum that is being proposed in our schools. My very young child will be entering grade school in a couple years, and I do not want her to be taught the ‘curriculum’ that the LGBT community has proposed. Alameda Resident 5/11 I oppose this curriculum for elementary school children that is being proposed to be implemented in the coming school years and will attend the hearing tomorrow. Alameda Resident 5/11 I would like to let you guys know that I'm very against the LGBT curriculum. Though I think that every person should be treated fairly (and as decent human beings), I'm questioning why such a specific curriculum needs to be brought into the education system. I have many nephews and nieces who are currently in (and many more who will be in) the Alameda school district, and they are all Asians. Now, they also face biases and prejudices based on their race (just like every other kid), but I don't foresee any curriculum that deals with Asian awareness (or Latino, or African, etc)... and the population for each ethnicity listed exceeds that of LBGT (http://www.movoto.com/neighborhood/ca/alameda/94501.htm). Again, I agree that we should impart the Golden Rule to our children, but to go so specific into this one subject is not worthwhile, and in my humble opinion, a mistake. Parent 5/11 Please consider this as a no vote for the LGBT curriculum. I am a parent of AUSD school children who feels strongly that this topic should not be taught to my elementary school aged children by others on such a politically charged topic. Elementary school is not the place for political groups to push their agenda onto my children. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and have lived here for the past several years. I recently heard about the LBGT Curriculum proposal and am writing to say that I STRONGLY oppose it. Alameda Resident 5/11 I've been an Alamedan for nearly four years and will be a future parent of a child who will be attending this district I also taught for three years at the elementary school level. I am very concerned about the 'Safe Schools curriculum'. I believe that this is a sneaky attempt to impose values that are inappropriate to our children. Alameda Resident 5/11 As a concerned Alameda resident, mother, and educator, I have reviewed the curriculum and reading the varying opinions on both sides of the argument, I am strongly opposed to the "Safe Schools" curriculum. I've received an MA from UC Berkeley's Graduate School of Education and have taught in the Albany Unified School District. From an educational standpoint, I'm unclear how prematurely introducing terminology and concepts to young children will reduce the amount of bullying in schools. No parent wants their child in an unsafe school and because of that, I would propose implementing a curriculum that actually promotes safety rather than an underlying agenda from a one self-interest group. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a public school teacher (Berkeley) and very concerned resident of Alameda. I would like to express my OPPOSITION to the LGBT curriculum being proposed. It is clearly teaching morality and ethics that will be opposed to by many religious and cultural values. I am definitely against bullying and support the Safe Schools initiative, but teaching curriculum at a public school, which defines things as charged as family, is clearly crossing the line. These sorts of beliefs and values belong in homes, NOT in public school classrooms. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and would like to voice my opinion that I strongly oppose the LBGT curriculum. The current curriculum I am sure mentions info on LGBT so it is unnecessary to have an entire curriculum on it. Alameda Resident 5/11 I oppose this curriculum for my children. I have not commented on the "updated" curriculum yet, and my thoughts have not changed at all as the material still crosses boundaries and is INAPPROPRIATE in the public schools - period. Every form of bullying should not be tolerated - and should be disciplined at school and at home by the parents. That is a given. But our children should NOT be indoctrinated with LGBT agendas. The public school is NOT a religious school for the LGBT community. They can start their own private schools if they please as many others have done. Please teach my children Math, English, Reading and Writing... not your morals. Don't indoctrinate my children in the PUBLIC schools with controversial beliefs. I oppose this curriculum for my children. Please use our tax dollars wisely and not allow people to waste parent's time and tax payer's money. Please use your time wisely on things that support all our children in school - not on LGBT agendas or the parents will be questioning your main agendas... Alameda Resident 5/11 I would like to voice my opposition to the LGBT curriculum here in Alameda. I currently reside in Alameda and have been a long time, proud resident of this wonderful community. As a child, I attended the kindergarten and elementary schools here. Alameda Resident 5/11 As a resident of Bay Farm Island in Alameda, please understand that I am not supportive of the proposed LGBT curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a Alameda Resident and a parent of kindergartener who is signed up to go to Amelia Earhart this Fall. After hearing about the Safe School Curriculum and attending one of those meeting and talking to many people about it, I am writing this to express my opposition to the curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a very concerned member of the city of Alameda. You have to and must understand, that when you teach about LGBT, sexuality comes into play. S-E-X. It will end up being sex education. then there goes the theory of the Christian right, that liberal want to teach sex ed to 1st graders, because it would be TRUE. This will bring these kids into even earlier sexualization than what the media is inflicting on them now. Just understand what early childhood sexualization does (whether its through LGBT teaching or otherwise): You get a adults with a sex addictions and you get teens, adults and even pre-teens with eating disorders/body image issues. People are going to take there kids out of public school in Alameda. You know this in your heat but hope that you may be wrong because you don't want a lawsuit. To go through with this is to show that you don't care for all the kids and that saving face is more important. Don't shoot yourselves in the foot while slapping us in the face. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda (Bay Farm) resident, and I am strongly opposed to the "Safe Schools" curriculum. I am especially against the proposal that parents do not have the choice to opt their children out of this class. This type of material, especially, should not be presented to children in elementary school, when there are much more critical elements (math, reading, science, etc) that should be emphasized. Please take this into account and vote against implementing this "Safe Schools" curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have been a resident of Alameda for the last 2 years, and would like to let you know that I am strongly opposed to the LGBT curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident writing in opposition to the LGBT curriculum. Under the guise of "safety" this curriculum would be teaching these children what is right and wrong when it comes to the moral issue of sexual orientation. At such young ages, they take in everything they learn in school without question, and could result in much confusion should they be taught something else at home. Shouldn't parents have a part in shaping their children's moral beliefs? I agree that children need to be taught to respect each other, but I do not think imposing this curriculum is the answer. This would only result in prejudice towards those who do not agree with such a lifestyle. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have been a resident of Alameda for 8 years and one thing that I treasure about the City is that it is a place where I want to raise my children even though I do not have children yet. This proposed curriculum makes me have second thoughts about this as I oppose the proposed curriculum. While I agree that tolerance and anti-bullying should be taught and enforced at schools and at home, this curriculum does not meet this goal and is a curriculum to teach about LGBT issues. That is not right and something that I would want my children to learn about when I am not there. It will certainly be discussed at home, but I do not think the schools are the arena for this. Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda resident and voting citizen since 2002, I am extremely disappointed to hear about the proposed curriculum for the Alameda Unified School District called "Safe Schools", especially since it does not give parents the opportunity to opt out if they so choose. As an academic advisor on the UC Berkeley campus, it is my job and responsibility to equip students and their parents with the vast array of choices available to craft the best education possible. I value this ability to evaluate and to choose based on what specific needs that need to be met. And, so, all the more, I believe that parents should also have such a choice when shaping the education for their children in the K-12 system. Please re-evaluate the implementation of this BIASED curriculum and GIVE PARENTS A CHOICE to opt out if they so choose. Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda resident, I would like to state my opposition to the proposed "Safe Schools" curriculum. While I do agree that respect for all individuals of different backgrounds is a value that should be upheld in our schools, to focus an entire curriculum on a single group is not in line with the diversity statute. Furthermore, the "Safe Schools" curriculum seems to be a veneer that conceals a value-based agenda that is advocated by particular special interest groups and is not representative of the values that should be taught across the board to children in our schools, with no option to waive out. Moreover, the approach taken by this program would give classroom instructors free reign to teach on this topic, providing no way to moderate the kind of message that would be taught to children in Alameda schools. For these reasons, I request that implementation of this curriculum be halted. Alameda Resident 5/11 I support expansion of the existing safe-schools curriculum to include a component that identifies famous LGBT people in history, acknowledges the existence of LGBT families, and teaches respect for LGBT youth. According to scientific research by the California Safe Schools Coalition, when LGBT people and issues are included in the curriculum, all students feel safer and school climates objectively are safer. We already have an established curriculum designed to address many other forms of bias. And there is nothing novel about the District’s proposed plan to include LGBT people and issues in the curriculum at all levels. In fact, five years ago, only 23% of California schools reported in a survey by the California Safe Schools Coalition that they didn’t include LGBT issues in their elementary schooltolerance curriculum. The effects of school harassment can be devastating. Researchers at San Francisco State University have studied LGBT young adults (ages 21-25) who experienced high levels of anti-gay victimization in middle or high school. They found that 68% had attempted suicide, compared with 20% of those who reported low levels of anti-gay victimization during adolescence. And the suicide risk continued into adulthood: 44% reported suicidal ideation during the past 6 months, compared with 8% of those who experienced low levels of victimization during adolescence. No sane person could want any child in our community to face this sort of risk. The District is to be commended for recommending expansion of the existing safe schools program to include a curriculum aimed at preventing anti-LGBT harassment. Training teachers and staff how to intervene once harassment has developed is not enough. Given the serious consequences of school harassment, I urge you to reject any proposal that would permit individuals to opt out of aspects of the curriculum that are designed to reduce anti-LGBT harassment. Permitting families to opt out will undermine the program’s effectiveness and is inconsistent with its very purpose. Even if only a few people ever choose to opt out, creating a special rule that allows it will send a message that respect for LGBT parents and youth is optional. Alameda Resident 5/11 I currently reside in Bay Farm and have been a resident of Alameda since 1992. It has come to my attention that AUSD is considering a new curriculum that will focus on bisexual, transgender, and the like. I am highly opposed against this new curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 My wife and I have lived in Alameda for the 7 years and as residents and future parents, I want to express my opposition to the "Safe Schools" proposal to revise the school curriculum. Although I wholeheartedly agree the tolerance should be taught in our schools, I feel very alarmed that this proposal under the banner of safety, as understanding of the family related to homosexuality is such a politically and morally controversial issue across the country. I feel very concerned all the more that this is taught to elementary school children, when even sexual education in general is handled with more discretion and allowing more input from parents. Therefore, I would like to ask you to reject this proposal to change the curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an alameda parent of a young child that lives on Roxburg Lane on Bay Farm Island, and I am writing to express my strong DISAPPROVAL of the safe schools curriculum. This issue recently came to my attention, as well as my parents, also residents of Alameda, and we are extremely concerned about the unfairness of the curriculum, the way it has been pushed forward, and how this has been handled. Not only do we oppose the curriculum, but we heard that those from the LGBT camp have been bringing NON-ALAMEDA RESIDENTS to public hearings only for residents. This is a legitimate claim because some of the speakers have showed up at other cities/counties claiming to be residents of those places as well! This is both unfair and illegal.
Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a current Alameda Resident (have been living in Alameda for the past 7 years) and would like to express my deep concern and opposition to the "Safe Schools" curriculum that is in discussion. I am strongly opposed to this curriculum and I feel uneasy about sending my child to an Alameda Unified District school if this were to pass. I personally am very accepting of the LGBT community, but I don't believe this section of the "safe schools" curriculum is necessary or even accomplishes anything. In my opinon, all it will do is confuse children even more about this area which I think should be talked about in the home by the parents especially because it deals with sexuality and understanding sexual differences. I hope you will carefully consider both sides and make a wise decision. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have heard about and reviewed the proposed LGBT curriculum at Alameda Public Schools. As a resident of Alameda and as a parent, I am writing to you to in opposition of this plan. First of all, I am disturbed that you have taken steps to bring this very politically charged topic into the public school system at Alameda. In light of the current climate in California regarding this issue, I find this action to be highly political and it should not have been brought into discussion in the first place. I find the timing of bringing in this highly political issue for discussion in the school system very questionable and suspect. Second, this is one of the most morally charged and debated issues in our State today. This debate should not be decided by the school system by granting the rights to teach on a topic that clearly favors one side of the argument. It is absurd for the administration to say that this is a neutral stance. If this proposal passes, Alameda School District is making a moral statement and a political statement that clearly favors one side of this issue. Third, you are proposing to take a position that usurps my right to teach my child on this topic. We all have different values and opinions on this topic, and I should have the final say on what my child should learn on this moral issue, not his teacher at school. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have been an Alameda resident for 9 years and my husband and I will become parents for the first time next month. As we plan to raise our daughter in Alameda and send her to a public school here, I am very concerned about the proposed LGBT curriculum for the Alameda Unified School District. Personally I'm accepting towards individuals in the LGBT community, but this curriculum and its development process seems like a deceptive attempt to impose values that are inappropriate to be taught in public school. This curriculum SHOULD NOT pass, but if it does pass, at a minimum there should be a provision allowing parents to opt in or out. Parent 5/11 I am a mother of two kids who are currently attending Amelia Earhart School. I was so shocked to hear about the LGBT curriculum that is in the planning process to be taught at elementary schools in Alameda. I just wanted to let you know that I'm really against this curriculum. All other moms that I know of are vehemently against this curriculum as well and I hope that the school district listens to all the parents' opinions on this matter. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am emailing to inform you that I am against having the LGBT curriculum in the Alameda schools. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident, and I oppose the Safe Schools curriculum as it currently stands for the following reasons: - I do not believe discussions around LGBT topics is appropriate for elementary age students. Given the controversial nature of the topic, this should not be taught at the elementary school level. - It seems the curriculum's purpose is to reduce bullying by teaching that LGBT is normal and acceptable. From an non-moral, highly practical point of view, I believe the more appropriate and effective approach to reduce bullying is to teach students how to identify and report bullying and teach that bullying is not acceptable. Trying to convince students that the LGBT lifestyle is normal and acceptable is neither realistic nor the best use of the school's resources. The majority of Californians do not believe the LGBT lifestyle is normal or acceptable, and given strong religious opposition to the LGBT lifestyle, it's not likely to change any time soon. Furthermore, the school should not get entangled in a highly controversial moral issue if it does not have to. Doing so would be a misappropriation of the school's resources. The better solution to bullying, rather, is to teach students how to properly deal with differences of opinion and lifestyles as they relate to individuals and engage the public square. We can end bullying and promote safer schools by teaching students to respect those who are different and hold different views. And no one would oppose such a program. - Again, from a highly practical point of view, given that race, sex, and religion are also protected classes and such issues impact far more students, I believe these topics should be addressed in a curriculum and at greater length than LGBT issues that affect far fewer students. - As a cheaper, less controversial alternative, bullying should be dealt with on a case by case basis. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident of the city of Alameda. I heard about installment of a new LGBT curriculum in Alamedapublic school system. I am opposed to the LGBT curriculum for our children since it seems too controversial to be taught for public schools at this point Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident, and would just like to express that I am against the proposed curriculum as it is clearly one-sided on very politically and religiously charged issues. I will attend the meeting tomorrow. Alameda Resident 5/11 As a resident of Alameda, I would like to express my opposition to the Safe Schools Curriculum that is currently being deliberated by the board. I am especially concerned at the lack of any kind of opt-out option for the proposed curriculum, which would be the minimum I would expect given the content of the curriculum. I would like to make sure that this opposition is noted before the public hearing that will take place tomorrow, May 12th. Alameda Resident 5/11 Thank you for taking the extra time to carefully consider our community's position on the new curriculum. As a resident of Alameda and a person who works as a mentor to elementary school children, I must discourage you from passing this new curriculum. In short, I disagree with this new curriculum because: 1) of the inevitable unfair representation of lifestyles. 2) resources (time and money) could be better used in other areas. I would prefer, in these times, that the money used be to retain current teachers and staff instead of overhauling current (perfectly fine) curriculum on sexual education and essentially testing out a new one. Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda resident and vested member of this community, I am very concerned about the proposed “Safe Schools” curriculum. Categorizing this curriculum under the guise of school safety is misleading and unethical. It is the duty of the board to protect its students and its teachers; however, creating a special curriculum to focus exclusively on the safety of a single group is inconsistent with the intent of Education Code section 2000 and Penal Code Section 422.6 (a). The existing statutes already protect all classes of people, regardless of race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, gender, or sexual orientation. I am personally accepting of members of the LGBT community, as well as all other groups. However, the proposal to adopt a special LGBT curriculum seems like a deceptive attempt to impose values on our children regarding a special interest rather than an attempt to ensure a safe school environment for all groups. Furthermore, barring parents from opting in or out of such a controversial curriculum with an inherently sexual component would be extremely irresponsible and inappropriate. After all, sexuality pertains to matters regarding sex. To try to disjoin sexuality from sex is nonsensical. I am planning on attending future meetings, including tomorrow’s public hearing, but wanted to voice my strong concern in advance. Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda resident for 7 years, and having attended pre-school and elementary school here in Alameda back in the early 1980s, I am opposed to the proposal for the LGBT curriculum, on the grounds that it tries to re-define what a family is. I will be extremely disappointed if this proposal passes, and I do not wish for my 2 year old daughter to be learning what a family is, contrary to what I teach her at home. I am against this LGBT curriculum and please do not vote to have this into our public education system here in Alameda. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have been an Alameda resident for 3.5 years. I am very concerned about the proposed LGBT curriculum for the Alameda Unified School District, and I do not want my tax dollars to go to support this curriculum. I am opposed to this curriculum as I think that homosexuality is a very politically and morally charged topic, and I do not believe that public schools is the place where kids should be taught about this issue. Alameda Resident 5/11 This coming year, I am getting married and plan to raise my children in Alameda, and I am strongly opposed to the proposed LGBT curriculum for K-5. Although I understand that tolerance and acceptance should be taught, the main topic of this curriculum (LGBT) is inescapably sexual in nature and amounts to sex education, which K-5 is far too young to receive. In addition, the curriculum only lends to asserting one moral viewpoint on these issues rather than providing a balanced survey of the viewpoints on this controversial issue. If adopted, this curriculum will teach the students a singular viewpoint rather than teaching them how to tolerate and accept each other despite differing values and viewpoints. Please do not adopt this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and have been for the past 3 years and I have heard about the curriculum that is in the process of being passed and am not only outraged but also very concerned about what you want to teach the next generation of children. I am strongly opposed to this and would like to know why you would start this new curriculum and your reasons of how this is beneficial to children? Alameda Resident 5/11 As an resident of Alameda, I would like to express my opposition to the "Safe Schools" curriculum. I understand the heart behind this curriculum is to create a safe environment where kids are tolerated and respected for their differences and I think that is fine. I believe that anyone who is engaged in this kind of ostracism should be disciplined and corrected. However, I don't believe that teaching kids on this specific topic of homosexuality. I feel like the values that this curriculum expresses pushes a certain set of values that not all families may necessarily agree with, and it is a very touchy subject as seen in the political arena lately. I don't believe a public school setting is the proper arena where this should be taught, especially placed under the label of "safety." If anything I believe that this should belong under sexual education, with some sort of opt-in or opt-out option. I understand that this will be voted on soon, and hope you would hear my concerns. I would like to see this curriculum be rejected or at the very least be reviewed with a little more detail to see that this doesn't belong under the banner of "safety." Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda parent, resident, and homeowner, and would like to voice my opposition against the new "Safe Schools" curriculum that is being proposed. I agree that stemming bullying and promoting a safe environment at school is and ought to be an important concern for the board and parents. However, I oppose this curriculum on the grounds that LGBT is singled out as a "special" group to be protected--giving them special provision when all groups ought to be given the same kind of protection. Jewish kids who wear yarmulkes, special needs kids with visible physical deformities, kids who pray before meals--these, then, are all examples of kids who need protection. Oughtn't we to adopt curriculum to address each of them? Why not adopt curriculum that is even broader? Secondary to this my opposition is based on the inability for parents to opt-out of this curriculum for their kids. The curriculum, though designed to stop violence/bullying, approaches this not from a "violence is wrong, period" perspective, but rather, "these people are different, but they are ok. hence we should not be violent." I think this is overreaching and unfortunately pushes a very highly debated issue as truth when it may not widely be accepted as such, even in a "liberal" state as California. Finally, I would like to encourage you to see that the extended time and resources spent discussing this matter, which seems to have become very divisive and polarizing to many Alameda residents (As of the 5/11 @ 11am, there are 154 emails in support, 141 in opposition to this curriculum per Mike McMahon's website--hardly a settled issue), appears to be an inappropriate use of tax dollars, especially during these financially lean times. I would like to respectfully voice my opposition to this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and I am strongly opposed to the proposed LGBT curriculum. These discussions are not something should happen in school; it should be left to parents who know their children to decide how and when to raise these issues. Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda resident, I strongly oppose the LGBT curriculum. Though it is wrong to discriminate against LGBT people and their kids, it's also wrong to impose on kids the wrong definitions of family structure and confuse them at such a young age while they are not fully capable of thinking this controversial issue through. I am getting married in Alameda in a few months, and I definitely do not want my kids being educated in this way in the future. What they should be taught more is to respect their peers even if they may have different family structures. Alameda Resident 5/11 We have been Alameda residents for 9 years and homeowners for the past 4 years. As a voter and taxpayer, I am very concerned about the proposed curriculum for the Alameda Unified School District. I believe that the public was not given sufficient opportunity to participate in the development of this curriculum, and that categorizing it as a "Safe Schools" curriculum is misleading. It is a value-based agenda advocated by a special interest group, and is not proper for our schools. I do not believe my tax dollars should go to fund such curriculum. Though I am personally accepting towards individuals in the LGBT community, this curriculum and its development process seems like a deceptive attempt to impose values that are inappropriate to be taught in public school. Ultimately this is a polarizing issue that was handled in a manner that could cause a backlash. This curriculum should not pass, but if it does pass, at a minimum there should be a provision allowing parents to opt in or out. Alameda Resident 5/11 I recently found out from friends and neighbors about the proposed LGBT curriculum in Alameda. Though I am sure you are all motivated by good intentions, I would like to take this opportunity to express my opposition to this curriculum. From where I stand, I am having a hard time seeing the justification of the use of public funds, especially in economic times as this when budgets are coming up short for basic educational programs, to promote such a controversial curriculum. I am all for respect for the LGBT community. Please don't get me wrong. However, this curriculum isn't just doing that. It is overstepping the bounds of traditional families and parental responsibility in instilling values in their children. This is and ought to remain the responsibility of indiviual families and not the school board. We should be careful not to destroy the traditional roles of the family in the name of progress or pushing a particular agenda. The board should remember that their commitment is to serve all residents of Alameda and not just those who hold a certain view. By teaching all children out of this curriculum, the board would be doing just that. And I'd like to say that I think we can trust our parents to teach their children to be fair and respectful of all people. We have to trust our parents on this score. What else will the board have to take on if you won't trust parents to raise their children? At the very least, this curriculum should be optional with a plan set in place to ensure it is so in practice. Again, I want to say that the decision about what to teach children about LGBT issues should remain in the hands of parents. I hope that you will consider the deeper implications that this curriculum will have on the choices parents have in raising their children. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and am expressing my concern. I am against this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 This is an email stating that I’m against Safe Schools Curriculum Alameda Resident 5/11 As a resident of Alameda County, I want to voice my strong support for the Caring School Community curriculum. It is critical that children in our community learn the values of fairness, helpfulness, caring, and respect that the curriculum espouses and engenders. I also wish to add my voice of support for the additional lesson being planned for the Caring School Community curriculum. This lesson would include education on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender for K-5 students to encourage a safe, welcoming and nonviolent environment at all school sites. It would further cement our values as an inclusive and caring community, and allow us to continue to be a model for the nation and beyond. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am excited to attend the hearing tomorrow to express my opposition toward the "Safe Schools" curriculum for the Alameda Unified School District. I am worried that the curriculum is rather politically driven and not suitable for young children. Thank you for your time and I look forward to attending the hearing tomorrow. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident of alameda. I heard about the LGBT curriculum as one of the agenda that our school district is considering to adopt. although i am not a parent yet, I would like to express my concern about this curriculum and like to communicate my opposition regarding this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident of Alameda at Bayfarm Island. I am writing to express my deep concern at the proposed Safe Schools Curriculum. I've attended informational sessions, and the more I hear about this curriculum, the more I am concerned. I have also taken the time to examine the curriculum that has been posted online, and want to thank you for making the curriculum available for perusal by concerned residents. My wife and I are a young couple and plan to start a family in the near future, and so we have been paying close attention to this and other educational issues in AUSD as we begin to think about educational choices for our children in the future. As one who is trained with an advanced degree in Clinical Psychology, I am concerned that this proposed curriculum does very little to combat bullying or to promote "Safe Schools". While the argument can be made that in one sense it may allow members of a particular group to feel more accepted, I am concerned that such a curriculum is not developmentally appropriate for children beginning in elementary school, particularly as certain vocabulary words are presented in 3rd and 4th grades even before sex education is given in the 5th grade. While of course the curriculum is not meant to be sex education at all, it will inevitably involve discussions pertaining to children and couples, and may unnecessarily beg questions that the children are not developmentally prepared to deal with. Additionally, the curriculum does little to address other types of bullying, such as those pertaining to ethnic background, body shape, weight, gender, disabilities such as nearsightedness, etc. Furthermore, at best the curriculum seems only tangentially related to school bullying, as the core issue behind bullying is not so much that bully-ers somehow believe that others are not equal to them, but in fact the issue is the poor self-esteem and issues of power and control within the bully-er himself or herself. I appreciate the opportunity to express my views tomorrow night at the public forum, and look forward to meeting you there Alameda Resident 5/11 I'm a resident of Alameda and I'm writing to you to express my strong disapproval of the LGBT curriculum. The material related to sexual identity and the redefinition of the word 'family' is confusing and inappropriate for elementary school children. This curriculum does nothing to resolve the problems of creating a safe environment as it narrowly defines and focuses the bullying problem with a small minority. I do believe in creating a safe environment for learning and am strongly against discrimination based on gender, race, religious affiliation, and sexual identity. But the agenda, the process in which the curriculum has evolved, the presence of pro-LGBT members in the meetings AND who do are NOT residents of Alameda, clearly indicates that this is a politically-driven agenda. One of the board members said that I needed evidence to back up my claim. Well, it's impossible to do this because it would require wiretapping people's phones, intercepting their emails and calls and such. In other words, coming up with evidence is nearly impossible. Please look at the process and vote against this curriculum. Otherwise, your actions will leave me no choice but to take my child out of the school system (which is money that is lost for you guys) and into the private schools. I will also be sure to vote against those members who passed this curriculum in the next election. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and wanted to voice my concern about the LGBT curriculum. If we want to teach kids to not bully other kids, there are more generalized ways of doing that and more disciplinary measures that can be taken versus presenting such a curriculum that would redefine what a family should be in the younger generations' minds. If we want more peace among the children and in our schools then what about targeting the parents and educating the parents to educate their children properly so this kind of bullying behavior is not let loose on our schools? And if the parents fail to do that then the child needs to be disciplined either through suspension or expulsion (after repeated offenses). I don't understand why this kind of curriculum is necessary or why its being considered a set curriculum. Parent 5/11 I heard about the AUSD Safe Schools Curriculum and I am against the implementation of this curriculum. I am an Alameda (Bayfarm) resident and have a 9-month year old son. I am planning to send my son to school at Amelia Earhart Elementary School once he gets to kindergarten age, however if this curriculum gets passed, I will not be sending my son through the AUSD school system. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have been a resident of City of Alameda for three years. After hearing about the LGBT curriculum Alameda School District is planning to implement, I am strongly against and concern having the LGBT curriculum be implemented. I am very concerned about the curriculum, and categorizing it as a "Safe School" curriculum is misleading. Though I am personally accepting towards individuals in the LGBT community, this curriculum and its development process seems like a deceptive attempt to impose values that is inappropriate to be teach at schools. I would like to voice my concern and urge the Board of Education NOT to implement this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I'm an Alameda resident who plans to raise my future children here in public schools. I love the idea that our schools are teaching kids about respecting each other and not bullying people who are different. Of course I'll support that! However, I am concerned about the LBGT agenda and teaching only one side of this lifestyle. I grew up in San Francisco and currently work there, and know coworkers and friends who are raising children with their partners. We don't hold the same values, but we respect each other. I would rather teach my kids my values and be given the option to opt out of this program. I don't think this proposed curriculum needs to be imposed on others who don't agree with it! Please consider giving the option to pull our children out of this program. Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda resident and a voter and taxpayer, I wanted to voice my opposition about the proposed curriculum on LGBT in the Alameda Unified School District. I did not know that voting for Measure H would lead to developing and incorporating such a curriculum. I do not want to see my tax money being used in such a bias curriculum. I understand that this curriculum was design to prevent hate crimes and increase tolerance, but I believe that it is not fair that the curriculum focuses so much on one group of people when hate crimes include bias against race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex disability, and sexual oreintation. Though I am personally accepting towards individuals in the LGBT community, I do not beleive that it should be taugh in school such a focused way since the topic is current very polarized in our society. When currently public education system is even very sensity about religious issues and have taken out any imposing religion acts out of school system, I don't understand why such a sensitive and bias topic should be tauch in school. Once again, I want to express my opposition to such curriculum to be taught in the public shcool. Alameda Resident 5/11 As a resident of Alameda, I against the curriculum. The nature of the curriculum is not about Safe Schools. It is a value-based agenda that a special interest group advocates. It is not proper for our schools. I strongly suggest you not pass this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident of Alameda, and I am opposed to the proposed LGBT curriculum for the Alameda Unified School District. I am aware that there have been public a few public hearings held to discuss the merits of this proposed curriculum, the last one being tomorrow 5/12. I won't be in attendance, so I am writing you to let you know that I oppose this curriculum because the intent of this curriculum is deceptive, being driven by LGBT interest groups, not to mention that the content that would be covered is highly inappropriate for children in our emlementary schools. I understand that bullying is an issue that needs to be addressed in our children's schools. However, and with all due respect, I do not believe that it ought to be the platform for initiating LGBT special interest agendas. Please reject this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I’m a VERY concerned parent and a resident in Alameda . My child attends Amelia Earhart School and I’m extremely opposed to this curriculum. Many of my friends and family will be at the hearing tomorrow night to express our concerns but I wanted to email all of you as a parent in Alameda that I’m extremely opposed to this curriculum being in the Alameda schools and am prepared to pull out of the Unified School system with many other concerned parents. Alameda Resident 5/11 I've been an Alameda resident for 15 years, I have two children in the Alameda school system, and I strongly oppose this curriculum. Also, it seems unfair to educators in the Alameda Unified School District - if they speak out against this curriculum, it seems that their jobs may be threatened, and so silence is the only option for teachers who oppose the curriculum. Parent 5/11 I am a parent of 2 AUSD school age children and I am asking you to oppose the LGBT curriculum. This curriculum's objective is to address the issue of bullying and teasing and to create a safe environment for our children. While the objective is a good one that should be fully supported, the means (LGBT curriculum as proposed) poorly suits this purpose. This curriculum focuses too much on defining what is a family, what LGBT is and how all families (giving emphasis to LGBT families) are equally viable. Instead of this, the curriculum SHOULD focus on why bullying is wrong and how no one should ever be bullied and teased for their differences. Clearly, this curriculum is pushing the LGBT agenda instead of addressing bullying and teasing. I ask that you would vote NO on implementing this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident in Alameda. I just want to start off by thanking you for serving on our Board of Education. However as a resident here, I am very concerned about this curriculum passing in our city. I don't think it is fair to subject students who come from families of different values to this curriculum. I understand that perhaps the intent behind this was to originally promote acceptance and tolerance. I understand that desire and intent and in support of it. However I have spoken to others and seen the curriculum myself and it seems a lot more of a promotion of this lifestyle rather than just informational. I personally am strongly opposed to the idea of young impressionable minds being exposed to this kind of promotion. The curriculum needs to be seriously edited for me to consider it suitable in terms of teaching tolerance and acceptance. Please consider voting against this current curriculum. As it stands right now, I don't feel that it is suitable for young children. Alameda Resident 5/11 I'm writing to express my opposition to the proposed LBGT curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident, and I'm writing to restate my opposition to the Safe School Curriculum for Alameda School District. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have recently moved to Alameda with my wife and we intend to raise our children here due to the reputable education system. However, I have been aware that the AUSD is moving towards instituting a LGBT curriculum. Though I am for embracing people of different backgrounds and walks of life, one's views on issues associated with LGBT are moral ones and should not be taught in our schools. At the very least, parents should have the option to opt-out of such programs. I hope you may take heart to my concerns and not impose this LGBT curriculum in the AUSD schools. I believe that the greater lessons of disagreement yet tolerance and respect should be taught by the parents. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am writing to voice my opposition to the Safe Schools Curriculum being proposed to the Alameda board of education. I am a very concern citizen, because I do not think that including a LGBT curriculum is good for our children. I do not agree on the freedom of marriage for homosexuals, as I believe that marriage is a scarce unity between a man and a woman center on God. Teaching our kids the LGBT curriculum could possibly encourage them that it is alright for them to choose their own sexes as long as they feel like it. Like a boy can be a girl if he feels more feminine or a girl can be a boy if she feels more tomboy for example in transsexuals. Instead, we should teach kids to accept their gender roles and be comfortable with who they are, instead of trying to change themselves and present themselves in a different way like what's been happening in Facebook & MySpace. I think the school shouldn't encourage this kind of "freedom" without any boundaries. We should teach children about abstinence and safe sex instead of wasting resources/money on a LGBT curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I've recently been hearing about a Safe Schools Curriculum that is under consideration for our children. I'm troubled to hear that the content of this curriculum covers education and awareness about LGBT issues, and would like to express my disapproval towards it. I believe that incorporating such curriculum will adversely affect the intentions of those who are trying to institute this material into our schools. Rather than generating awareness and tolerance, I believe it will create greater intolerance and misunderstanding among our children. Having gone through several years of schooling myself, I think that our children are not able to properly handle and process such awareness curriculum, and the results of teaching such material will do more harm than good, both to them and the fellow students around them. I urge you not to pass this curriculum, and to take to heart the opinions of the several community members at the hearing tomorrow. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and would like to voice my opposition to the proposed "Safe Schools" curriculum. I request that this curriculum be rejected. Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda resident of over eight years and a parent of a young girl who will soon enter the Alameda school district, I strongly oppose the "Safe Schools" curriculum. Although we have not personally benefited yet from the educational system, I am very appreciative of the work that you already do. However, undeniably there is a moral agenda which is driving the LGBT curriculum. To not even allow parents to have their children opt out of this indoctrination by placing it under "School Safety" is highly deceptive. If we are teaching tolerance, let's keep it general and not to just one interest group. The teaching of morals should not be left to one interest group in the public schools. Alameda Resident 5/11 Alameda Resident 5/11 I received word from a close friend of a new Safe Schools curriculum that is under discussion among the Alameda School Board. I have been resident of Alameda for the last 7 years and am highly concerned with the direction our school curriculum is taking and would like to voice my opposition against this new proposal. I think there are ideological motivations behind this new curriculum and I challenge the the legitimacy of this proposal. There are ways of keeping our schools safe without bringing ideology into this. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a parent of 4 children in the AUSD and am strongly opposed to the Safe Schools Curriculum. If the board approves it, I will be looking into private or charter schools for my kids. Parent 5/11 I am an alameda parent of 2 young children - one of whom will be entering kindergarten in 2 years and I wanted to express my deep concern and opposition to the LGBT curriculum that I have read and heard about. First of all, I believe that this kind of curriculum can be addressed under the broad and wide teaching of health education. The proposed curriculum of "Safe Schools" seems misleading as this is an advocacy of a single special-interest group. Tolerance of others and respect for others is a virtue that we ought to promote across the board and not single out one group. Additionally, I do not believe this is an age-appropriate material that we should be teaching our children and would not like my tax dollars used in this way. And also for such material, I am offended that there is not even an opt-out policy for parents, which would be possible if we placed this under the appropriate category of health education. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and am opposed to the SAFE Schools Curriculum. I don't believe this curriculum is appropriate for elementary-aged children. Alameda Resident 5/11 First of all, thank you for your hard work for our Alameda schools. I do sincerely appreciate your efforts in trying to listen to the public's concerns and being open to our feed back regarding the LGBT curriculum. However, after carefully reviewing the revised lesson plans and talking to different members of the board and community, I would like to express my opposition to this curriculum as it stands. While I fully agree with the view that we need to teach our children tolerance and agree that no child should be bullied because their family is different, this curriculum goes beyond that stated purpose and clearly has the agenda of teaching our children that all lifestyles and all families are equally viable and moral. The curriculum does not merely teach tolerance towards people, but teaches our children that the LGBT lifestyle is just as valid and morally acceptable as any other view. While I believe people are free to hold this view, it is wholly inappropriate topic to teach this moral viewpoint in the classroom. I am particularly concerned because this curriculum is intended for children as young as first and second graders who do not have the mental and emotional capacity to understand this topic. As a voter and resident of Alameda, I am very deeply concerned, and urge the board to reject this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 I understand that there will be a hearing on May 12th. I'm writing to let you know once again that i am vehemently opposed to the adoption of THE LGBT curriculum. I've been a resident of Alameda since 1993, and have enjoyed this community and have come to love it. I decided to settle in Alameda and to raise my children because I have come to believe that Alameda is a good place to live. Now I feel threatened by the presence of a minority group that intends to teach my children beliefs and values that I do not believe should be taught in our public school system. I find that the whole process of adopting this curriculum was done poorly and with deception. I do not believe the LGBT curriculum is an issue of safety, it should not be required and it should not be funded with public tax money. Alameda Resident 5/11 I would like to express my concern of the new material regarding homosexual education. While I'm not a homophobic person, and I have high sympathy for those who has that tendency, I think it is a mistake to generalize such issue, and make it seem like a norm for the younger kids, who are not mature enough to grasp the whole idea and understand the implication of those relationships. I would really hope you re-considerate implementing the curriculum Alameda Resident 5/11 First, I would like to thank you for your commitment to education, to our children, and for your dedicated service. I am a resident of Alameda, and have fairly recently heard about the new Caring School's Curriculum. I think the spirit of the curriculum is to be applauded. I agree that the existence of bullying needs to be addressed, and that character and love needs to be encouraged. However, as someone who is planning on getting married and having troubled, I am concerned that Alameda schools will be inculcating my future children with ideas and opinions that I may or may not agree with. I'm not sure how I feel particularly about the LGBT emphasis, but I don't like the idea that schools and teachers will have the power to teach my future children what is wrong or right in a matter that has been for as long as history can dictate, a gray area. And, as an educator, I am concerned that you will be putting teachers in a position in which they will have to endorse positions and ideas they may or may not agree with. Lastly, I think the goals of creating caring schools can be more effectively facilitated through community building endeavors, and efforts. In addition to this, I am concerned that any group of any interest gain such a monopoly of influence in our public schools. I think we have enough on our hands in teaching state standards. In short, I think the spirit of the curriculum is good; however, as it is currently spelled out in the curriculum, it is clear that the interests and perspectives of one group is over-represented. If any other group received center stage in the curriculum for bullying, that group would be targeted for having too much power and say. Thank you for taking your time to take note of my concerns. Alameda Resident 5/11 I recently found out about this curriculum. As a concerned mother and a long time resident of Alameda, I strongly oppose adopting of this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 After learning about the safe schools curriculum that has been proposed, specifically the LGBT curriculum, I was struck with concern and worry for the children. I understand that the motivation is to make our schools safer for LGBT kids, to make schools a place where these kids don't have to feel threatened in any way and I completely agree that this should be our end goal. However, I strongly disagree with the methods outlined in this curriculum. By introducing such young children to very adult and complex conceptions of gender, we will be confusing their own gender perceptions of themselves and hindering their natural emotional and psychologcail development. Yes, more understand towards LGBT might result, but at the cost of confusing and stunting our children's development? I believe that the LGBT curriculum that is part of the safe schools curriculum will do much, much more damage to our children than benefit. I am firmly against the LGBT curriculum that has been proposed to be a part of the safe schools curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 As a resident of Alameda, I am against this curriculum being taught in the schools. The content of this curriculum can cause a lot of confusion to children and this is not necessary. Alameda Resident 5/11 Once again, I want to express my opposition against the LGBT curriculum. Teaching our children about gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender issues will not create a "safe" school. In fact, it may even create more confusion, tension, and name-calling among our children. I believe strongly in treating every single human being with respect and dignity. I have been taught that, and I continue to teach that to younger generations. However, having a set school curriculum to talk about these things will inevitably be biased. It will point fingers to those who continues to stand by traditional family values. Our children will not be given all sides of the LGBT issue. And they may develop misconceptions of their own about what it means to be gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual. I am disappointed and saddened that so many Alameda residents do not see the danger in passing this curriculum. I don't think the word "Safe" is an accurate description of this curriculum. I can only foresee more violence and prejudice. Parent 5/11 As a parent and Alameda resident, I was made aware about a Safe Schools Curriculum. After looking into the curriculum, I oppose the Safe Schools Curriculum. I am especially opposed to it because there is no Opt Out for the curriculum given that it teaches sexual values that I do not consider appropriate for young children. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a writing on regarding the proposed addition to the safe school curriculum. I am parent of two children at Amelia Earhart and I am against this curriculum. I've been to two presentations of the lesson plans and I did not like the material that was presented. As the state of California is doing poorly in education, I would like to see the school investing more time and resources to better educate our students. I would like to see an improvement in California's Education system overall. I look forward to seeing you on Tuesday at the town hall meeting. Alameda Resident 5/11 I strongly oppose to implement the LGBT curriculum because the nature of the curriculum is not about Safe Schools. It is a value-based agenda that a special interest group advocates. It is not proper for our schools. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident in Alameda and am against this curriculum Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident of Alameda and have heard about this upcoming movement/initiative for what is called the Safe Schools Curriculum. I would like to express my opposition to this, and I would not like to see this happen. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident in Alameda and am deeply distraught to hear about the new curriculum being implemented in our public education I am against this curriculum, I hope my voice as a resident can be taken seriously Alameda Resident 5/11 I just wanted to inform you my concerns that as a resident of Alameda, I am against this curriculum being taught in the schools. Not that I am uninformed or support bullying in the schools, but this curriculum can cause much confusion to children and is unnecessary. Also, I will definitely be at the final public hearing for this curriculum tomorrow at the Alameda City Council. Alameda Resident 5/11 As a resident of Alameda, I would like to express to you my opposition regarding this curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 Please do not pass LGBT curriculum in our public schools. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am a resident of Alameda and also I am a former high school teacher in San Francisco . I have many gay friends, coworkers, and I respect and admire all of them. However I am strongly opposed to this proposed curriculum in the Alameda elementary schools. During my years as a teacher in San Francisco many of my coworkers were openly gay and the high school students still had huge problems with bullying and insensitive language. The school plays, the sensitivity training, none of it made a huge difference in the culture of that high school. Perhaps that is why people are pushing for this kind of curriculum at a younger age. Perhaps there is a subtle: “get them while their young” attitude pushing this agenda. I agree that bullying of any nature should not be tolerated. But I do not think that this curriculum is the answer to problem of school bullying. The answer is not to say: “sexual orientation, attraction, affection” should all be accepted, understood and tolerated. It should be to point out that bullying is wrong and will not be tolerated. I find it ironic that people who promote this curriculum are using the language of “tolerance”. Anything that promotes tolerance is good! But the curriculum is really just saying that all personal lifestyle choices and values will be tolerated. If you happen to respectfully disagree with that, then you will not be tolerated. I think this is foolish and will ultimately not accomplish the true intentions of the program. I think that if this curriculum is passed it will only create more animosity, more fights, more quarrels, and will end up hurting the students a lot more than helping them. In my experience in the high school, and now in the middle schools I only see more and more that school bullying will always be a problem because it is just second nature to hurt others. If anyone says this is not a moral issue then why do we even have the curriculum to address bullying? Aren’t we saying that it is wrong to make fun of others, whether it’s about race, religion, sexual orientation? If so, than it is fundamentally a moral issue. We are saying that it is right to be accepting and understanding and to be friendly even when we meet people who are very different. The curriculum is making clear moral claims, and sadly I think the curriculum falls really short of the mark. I think it will not adequately address the problem of bullying and it will only serve as the ignition to sparking more bullying because the students will not be ready or able to deal with these large issues at such a young age. As others have commented I believe it would be more appropriate for older children, and also parents should be given the opportunity to opt. out of the curriculum if they respectfully disagree with the purpose of the curriculum. Alameda Resident 5/11 Attached please find a copy of a letter sent to your office this morning via hand delivery. In this letter, I—along with several other attorneys residing in the City of Alameda—express our serious concerns and doubts as to the legality of the proposed “Safe Schools” Curriculum, especially if it fails to include an opt-out provision. A carbon copy has also been sent to the Alameda City Attorney’s office. For reasons more fully discussed in our letter, we respectfully request that the Board reject the proposed Curriculum. Thank you for your consideration of our concerns, and for your valuable service to this community. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, or would like to discuss the contents of this letter. Alameda Resident 5/11 I want to know if the District or the Board members has received any concerns from currently employed teachers and/or school administrators about this curriculum? Your response will be much appreciated! Alameda Resident 5/11 I have been a resident of Alameda for 4 years and have heard a lot of good things about the district's education system. However, I was astonished and concerned when I heard about the development and proposal of the LGBT curriculum under the name of Safe Schools. All people should be respected no matter what kind of background they come from and such a principle should be taught in schools for the sake of every child's safety and protection especially against bullying, but to teach specifically about this group to students does not seem appropriate and as a tax payer, I do not support it in the public school system. In the event that this agenda should pass, at minimum, I would ask that parents be able to opt their children out of this curriculum as they are able to with sex education. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and I am opposed to the "Safe Schools" curriculum. I reviewed the proposed curriculum, and I don't believe it is addressing bullying as much as it is trying to teach kids at a young age about homosexuality. I believe that one specific group should not be singled out and the curriculum should stick to the general topic of bullying. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have been an Alameda resident for two+ years. As a voter and taxpayer, I am very concerned about the proposed LGBT curriculum for the Alameda Unified School District. I think the curriculum will impose values that are inappropriate to be taught in public school. I would like my tax money to be used to further the fundamentals of education and not involuntarily subject the children to this "education." I believe that the public was not given sufficient opportunity to participate in the development of this curriculum, and that categorizing it as a "Safe Schools" curriculum is misleading. It is a value-based agenda advocated by a special interest group, and is not proper for our schools. Had I known about this proposed curriculum, I would have thought twice before voting for Measure H, as I do not believe my tax dollars should go to fund such curriculum. This curriculum should not pass, but if it does pass, at a minimum there should be a provision allowing parents to opt in or out. I am planning to attend the future meetings, but wanted to voice my concern in advance. Alameda Resident 5/11 As an Alameda Resident I wanted to let the board members know that I am in opposition to the proposed "Safe" Schools curriculum. I believe tolerance is very important and that bullying is a problem in schools, however this curriculum is NOT the way to go about it. I believe schools and teachers SHOULD play a part in asserting good moral values to children (we've lost a lot of that in the last decade), however this particular curriculum has too many controversial topics especially in regards to homosexuality that should not be addressed by teachers directly to the children. I am sure you will agree that children are very impressionable so the type of message we paint can greatly influence their views on many things, and for such controversial topics that right should be left solely for the parents. I am appalled that this kind of curriculum is not even being deemed as something "optional" because it categorized as a "safety" topic. I ask that the curriculum itself be completely rejected. If not, then the topics of homosexuality and references to gays and lesbians be completely removed. We do not need young children being exposed to topics of sexuality, romance as well as exposed to derogatory terms at such a young age. Let parents deal with their own children on their own timing. Can you imagine the looks on a mother's face when their 6 year old daughter comes home asking about lesbians and saying words like "fags"? I don't think people have fully grasped the massive influence just simple exposure to such topics will have on the child. Perhaps there is some other way of offering discussions among parents in how to best address the issue to their kids or training teachers in how to deal with bullying, but this curriculum is NOT the answer. Also again I am very upset that parents have no say to opt out of this if it is somehow approved. I can easily see parents refusing to send their kids to school when the curriculum is being taught. For every one person who takes the effort to email or call the board members I am certain there are many who are opposed or are simply not aware of what is happening. I have many Alameda resident friends who also were outraged when they heard about this topic. Alameda Resident 5/11 I have been a resident in Alameda for the past 4 years and my fiancee and I plan to settle here and start a family. I am also a registered voter in Alameda and recognize many of you who are on the Board and also recall voting for some as well. Having introduced myself, I am writing to say that I was appalled when i heard about this Safe Schools Curriculum that was being created and voted in without the awareness of the rest of the community, many who may not yet have children attending the public school system (such as myself), do not attend the PTA meetings (may be by choice, or unable to due to language or personal circumstances), but are very much a part of the community and will also be impacted by this decision. This is NOT just an issue that should be made aware to just the few parents and board members, and I wanted to write an email expressing some concerns. I will also be attending the hearing on May 12th (tomorrow). I understand and approve of having a curriculum that promotes tolerance and respect amongst our children. However, if teaching the normalcy of homosexuality is the main topic of promoting safe school environments, I would have to push that it simply seems like a political scheme hiding under the misleading title of "safe schools curriculum". Bullying and intolerance and disrespect that goes on in schools among our children isn't (just) about one's sexual orientation. Why not teach about race, religious tolerance, loving one another despite appearance or cultural differences? Why not just a general course that teaches children about respect for one another? I can suggest so many other topics under which disrespect forms WAY BEFORE we were aware of any sexual orientation. I would also like to include that this topic that will touch upon sex ed (sexual orientation, right?) should be something that parents have a right to opt out of for their children. As a friend of many who are homosexual, I do have to admit that there needs to be educaiton on tolerance and respect. Please do teach respect and tolerance at schools. However, I am completely disappointed at how this issue, which is by the way a huge political topic upon which people get voted in and out of office, has somehow come under a banner in which parents wouldn't even be allowed to opt their children out if passed. For many households, homosexuality isn't just a social issue, but a teaching of values & morals which is under the rights of the parents. I would like to request for this curriculum to be rejected. However, if this is not the case, please diversify and generalize this curriculum to include topics that will teach children to respect one another with issues that may be more appropriate without impinging on the rights of parents. I don't think our tax dollars shuld be used to support a curriculum that will take away the rights of parents and bring in a whole new topic into young children who many not have the ability to discern what they're learning. Honestly, I could see such a polarizing issue being implemented backfiring and creating more problems in our public schools. Alameda Resident 5/11 I am writing to voice my opposition against the Alameda LGBT curriculum. I don't think this curriculum will promote "safe" school environment. As young children do not yet have sufficient capability or moral discernment to stand up for their values, teaching these morally and emotionally charged values will only lead them to bully kids that are different and ultimately generate more confusion. In fact, I seriously think that this curriculum will create more (not less) confusion and name-calling among children. While teaching tolerance, respect, and acceptance must be included in education as a whole, it should not single-out any one special interest group as one particularly in need of such "special attention" and "accommodation." I request that at least parents are given an option to opt-out of the curriculum, and that the curriculum be part of sex-educatioin and not safety education, as that label is greatly misleading. Parent 5/11 I am an Alameda resident and would like to voice my opposition to the proposed "Safe Schools" curriculum. I agree that tolerance and respect should be taught in our schools and that schools should take disciplinary action for bullying and name-calling. I would prefer that this curriculum be inclusive of other groups and not necessarily this one. I don't think public schools should teach on such a morally charged topic since there is a wide range of emotional responses surrounding this topic. In addition, I have read the curriculum and I don't believe the essential issue of bullying is specifically addressed. I strongly believe that this curriculum has been designed with a specif agenda and it is being veiled under the concern of 'safety'. I don't think we have been given enough time to review such a curriculum. I will be attending the meeting tomorrow, voicing my rejection of this curriculum. I respectfully, request that this curriculum be rejected. California Resident 5/11 I'm not a parent of Alameda Unified, but one from Cupertino Union. And yet, I'm a parent of 6 children, and feel strongly about the rights of parents to "opt out" of lessons that have agendas. I do believe that the rights of the parents in Alameda Unified should be allowed to opt-out of multisexual lesson plans presented by AUSD, if these become a part of your curiculum. Lessons on homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality should be a small part of a school curriculum, but in HIGH SCHOOL not elementary schools, and parents should be able to opt out even at the high school level. These were issues of concern when we were defending Proposition 8, and when it went to the vote of the people of California. Children in the elementary schools are not the voters, their parents are, and to dis-allow elementary school children's parents their voice of opting out, if you are to pursue this curiculum thinking, is just plan wrong. Schools are the wrong place to equate “tolerance” with “multisexual agreement. You are in elected position, and as such, should use your power wisely. Pushing forward an agenda of homosexuality, bisexuality, and transsexuality is wrong....especially with children who don't even understand themselves and are very modelable. Shame on you! Let the parents mode their children, and if you choose to ignore your voting population, then at least allow parents to opt out. Marriage between a man and a woman was decided by 52.7 % of the California population, and the courts will decide the constitutionality of it, not AUSD. Don't push your agenda until the California Supreme court makes their decision!! Parent 5/11 Reviewing this curriculum more, I find another issue that is concerning to me as a parent. Due to this concern, I ask that you would vote against implementing this curriculum. I think the purpose of bullying is not clearly communicated. The lessons do not accomplish what their stated objectives are. For example in the 5th grade lesson, the title is "Discussing Stereotypes, Including LGBT", but the lesson does not clearly define what the word stereotype is. In Activity 2, the teacher asks each group of students to "brainstorm all the words that come to mind when they think about LGBT people." Words that come to mind might be, kind, generous, conscientious, but wrong. At this point, how will the teacher respond to the student who says "I know some LGBT people who are very kind and caring people, but I think their lifestyle is wrong."? The lesson then asks "Where did you learn the things you brainstormed?" How will the teacher respond if the child says "I learned it from my parents and grandparents?" Will the teacher correct the child's view? This becomes a moral issue at this point. And if the teacher corrects the child's view, they are impinging on the right of the family to teach their own moral values. The 5th grade lessons is about stereotyping, not moral values. Moral beliefs of families and cultures are NOT stereotypes. But this curriculum does not distinguish that clearly. This curriculum (Grade 5 lesson) makes kids think that their moral views on families are stereotypes that must be fixed. And it is also not clear how teachers will distinguish between stereotypes and moral beliefs such that they can properly honor each child's moral belief and still create a warm and safe environment in the classroom. Parent 5/11 I am opposed to the proposed LGBT curriculum for the following reasons: I urge the Board to reject the curriculum, or at least remove the sexually related terms from the family lessons, and to address the two separate issues—inclusion of non-traditional families and bullying—separately, and in an age-appropriate manner. Parent 5/11 I have read through the currently in place Caring School Community curriculum, the proposed April version of the proprietary AUSD LBGT curriculum as well as the articles and references in the California Association of School Boards publication for the current quarter. I appreciate all of the work done by the AUSD staff in preparing the proposed material and the work of the BOE in working through the issues involved in the current and modified drafts, obtaining community input, etc. This is a lot of work and a very difficult and sensitive issue that demands seriousness and consideration. I take it as a given that all parties have, what they believe to be, the best interests of the students at heart. That all said, and after reading and hearing many comments to the board, I believe that going beyond the constructs of the published Caring School Community curriculum with the proposed modifications would be a mistake for the AUSD, or any other entity, for the following reasons: In summary, I think the BOE should elect to emphasize the importance of the CSC program, particularly the bullying and teasing (name calling) sections and abandon the proposed materials all together for the immediate future while the restructuring process is underway. While this is unlikely to make anyone happy, I think it is the best approach to reaffirming the AUSD’s commitment to treating all students with respect and fairness while fostering a nurturing and caring environment. This extracts AUSD from appearing to pass judgments on moral issues by singling out a specific group and issue and while ignoring the most frequently experienced forms of bullying, etc., as identified by AUSD’s own surveys and those published based on state wide student surveys. Once the restructuring process is complete, the CSC curriculum process should be started over with a new district/community committee that itself is carefully chosen to represent all viewpoints in the community. With that composition, and full consideration of the legal requirements and limitations, a broadly based committee is much more likely to develop a fully considered and comprehensive recommendation that will have broad support and be less polarizing than the current single issue proposal. The restructuring of the district is critical to the long term survival of AUSD, this is absolutely the wrong time to be polarizing and distracting the AUSD and community at large with a narrowly focused issue that is so divisive as it is currently formatted. Parent 5/11 I am writing in support of your new curriculum, "Addressing Issues of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity." Your mission to make our public schools safe and supportive for all families including our LGBTQ families, their children, and LGBTQ youth represents a great step in starting early to eradicate discrimination and foster understanding of our community's diversity. I would also like to share my concern that providing notification to families and/or giving them the opportunity to "opt-out" supports bias. Imagine how offended the community at large would be if given notification on a unit about racism or the lessons of Martin Luther King, Jr. This is about respecting diversity, not about morality or sexuality. Please don't let these issues become entangled. Parent 5/10 I have lived in Alameda for 7 years and have a child that starts kindergarten this fall. I have several thoughts on the proposed curriculum: Parent 5/10 After reviewing the LGBT curriculum, I am strongly opposed to it. The curriculum focuses on only a special group and that doesn't seem right. I think this is a poor use of school funds, and I am terribly disappointed in this school district. Parent 5/10 I am an Alameda resident and tax payer. I am writing to you to express my opposition to the LGBT curriculum that is being proposed. This information is not a relevant component of elementary education and infringes on the rights of parents to teach their own children about personal values and family perspectives. I hope you will consider my objection to this program. Parent 5/10 As a member of the Alameda community, I am writing to say that I am opposed to the Alameda Unified School District's proposed LGBT lesson plan, including the new and softer version. It appears to me that the curriculum will subtley push a special-interest group's way of thinking in the guise of teaching children respect for one another. Thank you for counting my vote. Parent 5/10 Some of the concerns voice by those opposed include 'why single out the LGBT population?' In various places, this new curriculum is described as Lesson 9 in a broader curriculum but I cannot locate information online about the first 8 lessons and whether any other lessons are expected in a longer-term strategic plan. Is there an online resource for at least lessons 1-8 so that those of us new to the district or overall curriculum have some context? I remain very supportive of an anti-bias curriculum explicitly addressing the needs of the LGBT population. The concerns of those opposed have raised some interesting questions about including more neutral explanations including the ideas of those who label themselves with 'traditional values.' So while I'm not attached to a specific curriculum, I do wholly endorse the need to address and prevent the raging harrassment, with sometimes deadly consequences, of the LGBTQ community in our schools. As a heterosexual parent about to adopt children into the district, I want to be sure they are part of a community that welcomes multiple perspectives, including gender and sexual identities. Community Member 5/10 Please add my name in support of Safe Schools Curriculum. I think it is vital that parents and schools recognize and act in collaboration to teach youngsters the importance of respect for others, to understand and honor differences, to know how much taunting, bullying, and mean spiritedness is cruel and demeaning. We must all come together as a community and as a society – and particularly in Alameda with its rich diversity – to ensure that our children are safe in our school environments as well as throughout the community in general. Disclaimer: This website is the sole responsibility of Mike McMahon. It does not represent any official opinions, statement of facts or positions of the Alameda Unified School District. Its sole purpose is to disseminate information to interested individuals in the Alameda community. FAIR USE NOTICE |