Search

ROPE Report

Open Search
Category

public school

Five Reasons Republicans Should Not Support Vouchers

Though few may pay it the attention it’s due, the Republican Party has a Platform snapshotting a picture of the basic things Party members generally believe. Oklahoma has its own Platform created through a process that eventually ends in a vote of acceptance at their biennial convention. The Oklahoma County GOP has a very good one page summary of the OKGOP Platform here.

According to this OKGOP Platform, these are five reasons Republicans should NOT support ‘School Choice’ vouchers (please see “An Analysis Of Three Oklahoma Voucher Bills” for more information on what the bills say):

  1. Republicans believe in “limited government“. In fact, that is where the term “conservative” arises. We wish to ‘conserve’ the rights to the people by limiting government to the smallest footprint possible. Every universal voucher bill filed in the senate creates 6 to 7 sections of NEW LAW. In fact, they expand the Oklahoma Treasurer’s office by providing it not less than 20 new duties.
  2. Republicans believe in “personal, moral responsibility“. Taxpayers are forced to pay taxes to governments. If their taxes are not paid, the government will either take our property or our liberty (by throwing us in jail). Once the money leaves our hands, it’s not ours anymore. It is placed into one giant pot over which we have minimal control – through our legislators (taxation with representation) – as to how it’s spent. We can’t use government as a bank – our money isn’t earmarked as ours once it goes into the pot – all we can do is use the services our lawmakers choose to provide us for the money we must provide them from our budgets.
    • It is our personal, moral responsibility to raise and educate our children the way we believe is best.
    • It is the personal, moral responsibility of our elected lawmakers to do what is necessary to make government – including public schools – produce results and be accountable to the taxpayer whose dollars they appropriate.
    • It is the personal, moral responsibility of parents to move their lawmakers to force educational results (accountability) on our public schools, but it is also our personal, moral responsibility not to go to our lawmakers and demand more of our neighbor’s money so that we can put our children in schools we couldn’t otherwise afford without help. That is called welfare and/or socialism – definitely NOT a Republican ideal.
  3. Republicans believe in “individual liberty“. If the government gives a private school taxpayer dollars from the public coffers, taxpayers have the right to demand accountability for those dollars. This accountability can put boundaries on “individual liberty”. The Class Wallet debacle shows this to be true in spades.
    • In 2020, Oklahoma government officials – including now State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Ryan Walters – contracted with a PRIVATE organization called “Class Wallet” to disseminate over 17 million dollars in GEER funds (Governor’s Emergency Educational Relief). Parents who privately schooled their children were gifted $6500 for tuition to the tune of 10 million dollars total through the “Stay In School” program. Public school parents who needed help schooling their children online were gifted up to $1500 through the “Bridge The Gap” program.
    • Today, federal and state auditors are investigating over one half million dollars in GEER funds that were spent on things other than education, essentially defrauding the taxpayer. This same thing also happened in Arizona, through their private voucher program.
    • According to The Frontier, the Office of Management and Enterprise Services (OMES) is sending emails to identified users of the programs – for apparent accountability measures – asking, “What was the particular purpose surrounding your purchases during the pandemic?” And “were you homeschooling your children, or were they still in school?” ROPE has expressed continuous concern that homeschooling families taking government money would be assimilated by the government. The government gave away the money without guardrails – what good could it do to determine if families schooled at home or not?
    • Once the government begins to separate homeschooling families from private school families and online public school families from homeschooling families, Oklahoma’s previously undefined, but Constitutionally protected use of education “by other means” is in jeopardy of becoming regulated by the state, thus subverting the “individual liberty” of parents to school their children without state interference.
  4. Republicans believe in “state sovereignty“. Unfortunately, the Oklahoma legislature and public schools LOVE to get federal funding. In fact, according to this article from 2022, Oklahoma is 15th in the amount of federal funding we receive.
  5. Republicans believe in the “free market“. Public/private partnerships are not “free market”. Once the government – at any level – injects money into a private company/organization/school, the business to which the funds were given, now has an edge over the wholly-privately-owned businesses that weren’t able to, or didn’t, capitalize on on government handouts.
    • Nowhere is this better seen than the distribution of CARES Act monies. According to Forbes, private equity firms used federal funds to boost profits, crushing their competitors, the ‘little guys’ who weren’t able to capitalize on federal loans.
    • The “free market” describes a system of business free from government intervention, where businesses compete with each other so that the best companies prevail. Injecting public funds into a private school will create an imbalance in the private school system in which those taking state funding will grow and those that don’t, won’t. Sadly, the ones NOT taking public funds will do so to retain their autonomy, yet parents will slowly be denied access to an autonomous private school as the public-fund-sucking schools overpower their marketshare – leaving parents – AGAIN – with less choice than they had BEFORE government intervention.

Vouchers, like the Republican-pushed Common Core before it, are not based on Republican ideals and they will not work for Oklahoma families just like they haven’t in states like Arizona that have tried them.

As we’ve pointed out again and again, Oklahoma HAS SCHOOL CHOICE! We have a voucher program – the Lindsey Nicole Henry Scholarship for children with disabilities. We have the Opportunity Scholarship Fund which uses donations to “help[s] low-income families bridge the financial gap between what they can afford and what is best suited for their student for specialized PreK-12 education”. According to the Oklahoma section of the “National School Choice Week” website, Oklahoma has approximately 60 charter schools, several magnate schools, over 200 private schools, six fully online public schools, Constitutionally protected homeschool, and “learning pods”. The idea that ‘vouchers’ are required to somehow provide parents with school choice, should make one wonder then – what exactly do the people pushing “school choice” legislation really want?

2

Isn’t CRT Banned in Oklahoma?

Guest Post By Dayna Mooney – Chapter Chair, Moms For Liberty (Canadian County, OK)

Like many Parents, we have discovered things being taught to our children with which we disagree.

Some members have even taken it further and begun researching the curricula being used, looking into Teachers that are in our schools, books in our School Library or even considered running for a School Board seat themselves.

For me, it was the COVID lockdowns that lead me to see what my children were being taught and what they weren’t being taught, a discovery that eventually lead me to start a Chapter in Canadian County for Moms for Liberty. Moms for Liberty works to empower Parents to advocate for their children and take back their Parental Rights.

During each of our Chapter meetings, we review School Board Agendas for School Districts that are represented within our Chapter.

During the October 27th Chapter meeting of last year (2022) we discussed Out of State Approvals for Yukon Public Schools, in particular an approval for the District Social Studies Curriculum Coordinator to attend the National Council for Social Studies Conference in Philadelphia, PA, December 1-4, 2022. Curious, we researched further.

It turns out, this conference is one of the largest gathering of K-12 social studies classroom teachers in the US. While we have no idea which of the 500+ sessions this teacher chose to attend, these were the 6 Sub Themes covered in this Conference:

  1. Connecting Educators as Learners
  2. Teaching Civil Discourse
  3. Embracing Hard History
  4. Building Critical Media Literacy
  5. Fostering Global Citizens
  6. Navigating the Political Landscape in Teaching Social Studies

These were some of the Workshops/Sessions available at this Conference:

  • Teaching History for Justice
  • Critical Race Theory and Social Studies Futures
  • Be(com)ing Stranger: Towards a Posthuman Social Studies
  • Proceeding with Caution and Care: Examining Classroom Simulations Through the Lens of Educational Equity
    • Participants will investigate classroom simulations, focusing on the challenges and dangers that surround their use. Presenters will provide administrators and supervisors strategies for identifying harmful simulations and how to coach teachers away from using them and move toward more culturally responsive, culturally sensitive, and more equitable and inclusive classroom activities
  • Embracing Student Activism
    • How a Pride Flag led to lobbying in Congress: learn how a school district located on indigenous territory embraced student activism and the opportunities it created
  • Mind the Gap: Tackling Conspiracy Theories in the Classroom
    • Combatting the prevalence of misinformation available to students is a challenge in classrooms today. Discover strategies for debunking common 9/11 conspiracy theories that translate across a variety of content and subjects.
  • Exploring Primary Sources in Ethnic Studies: Using the Library of Congress to Create School District Professional Development
    • Learn how Houston ISD leveraged their Teaching with Primary Sources grant award to expand teacher access to ethnic studies knowledge, teaching resources, and curriculum
  • Teaching Critical Race Theory with Primary Source Documents
    • Learn how two educators used primary sources to support the curriculum of a dedicated Critical Race Theory class at the college level. Connections to the K-12 classroom will be shared
  • How to Teach the Truth and Not End Up in the Principal’s Office
    • The Library of Congress and the TPS Teachers Network have resources and professional support to aid educators in their quest to teach accurate history in an era of divisive topics laws.
  • Diversity and Inclusion Pedagogy for Teaching Global Learning and Leadership
    • Explore project-based instructional techniques and best practices that empower and immerse students more deeply in the Global Citizenship learning experience by utilizing diverse and inclusive student-led engagement activities
  • The 1619 Project, Critical Race Theory, Divisive Concepts Legislation: Empowering Teachers and Communities to Confront the Politicization of Social Studies
    • Unravel the politicization of the 1619 Project, Critical Race Theory, and divisive concepts legislation with other educators who seek to confront racialized rhetoric with truth
  • Fostering Community, Understanding, and Growth Through Civil Dialogue
    • Explore meaningful methods for creating, building, and fostering civil dialogue techniques with your students to increase content understanding, promote social-emotional learning, and maintain community among your students.
  • The Color of Law: Exploring Systemic Racism in Housing Policy Using PBL
    • Using the project-based learning model, U.S. History/Government teachers can position students to raise awareness of systemic racism in housing policy using Richard Rothstein’s 2017 book The Color of Law.
  • Truth and Reconciliation: Sexual Slavery During World War II
    • Inquiry about sexual slavery during World War II with embedded best Social Emotional Learning practices by examining transgressions of the past and truth and reconciliation
  • Don’t End up on the News! A Trauma-Informed Approach to Teaching Hard History
    • Don’t let the headlines scare you! New teachers, let’s talk about ways to approach hard history using trauma-informed best practices
  • Teaching Untold Stories to Inspire Children as Changemakers
    • Challenge the dominant discourse of the civil rights movement in elementary social studies and, instead, embrace teaching unsung heroes in an effort to create social justice advocates in our students
  • Combating Misinformation with Culturally Responsive Teaching
    • Explore innovative approaches for designing and implementing culturally responsive instruction. With a firm understanding of these techniques and principles, attendees will reap the benefits of these lessons
  • Reimagining Civic Action: Human Rights Close to Home
    • Hear youth scholars and educators share how Human Rights Education can serve as a blueprint for experiential learning that promotes student civic engagement and activism

As you can see, there was a theme to what was being discussed at this Conference. Any teachers in attendance will then bring what they’ve learned back to the District and share it with their fellow teachers, maybe even during a Professional Development, or other training day.

As you can see with the picture below Critical Race Theory, Cultural Relevant Pedagogy, Multicultural Education and Civil Rights Movement are all one in the same. Many use buzz words to get around Critical Race Theory laws within the State in order to continue teaching it in our Schools.

Another commonly known buzz word that we hear now is Social Emotional Learning or SEL, MANY Schools, if not all are using some type of SEL Program within our Schools. All of these are vehicles for Critical Race Theory, no matter what you call them and are designed to infringe on a Parent’s Right to educate their children in the worldview of their family. These programs promote feelings and behaviors that are not usually reflective of our teachings as the parent.

In December of 2020, CASEL (Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning) updated their definition for SEL to showcase the value of SEL as a weapon for social justice. These SEL programs gather non-cognitive data using attributes, feelings, grit, mindsets and more that’s been gathered through various programs and different terminology. None of which can be fairly assessed with a computer.

Do you remember Common Core that’s also against the law to teach in Oklahoma? SEL, CRT are just the newest versions of Common Core, just a different name, pretty bow on the surface that ultimately pushes the same message that focuses less on academics and more on mindsets, feelings and behaviors. SEL claims to improve test scores, but as we are seeing by the latest release, it’s done the opposite. Just one of many claims, that have all proven to do the opposite.

All of these programs, no matter what you call them, get in the way of good, efficient teaching. Teachers are being asked to take on the role therapists, which they aren’t trained for, nor do they want to be therapists in most cases. Running off good teachers, to make way for the activist teachers to be the student’s parent, tell them how to think and how to hate their Country!

As Parents, we have to stand up against this agenda and do our part to get our Education System back on track! Even if your children are grown, you have a place in this fight as well! The more the merrier!

These are some results of SEL Teachings. You may already be seeing them in your School;

  • Larger Class Sizes
  • More about Diversity
  • Changes to what was once a Zero Tolerance Policy
  • Grading Policy Changes on some or all Levels
  • School(s) are becoming overpopulated

Follow the link below to see a graphic to connect CRT to SEL and more

https://drive.google.com/file/d/19j0O_0aAdQPjbazAA842ncsGfTAGxvz2/view?usp=sharing

For more information on Moms for Liberty feel free to visit www.momsforliberty.org or email me, Dayna Mooney at moms4liberty_canadiancounty@protonmail.com.

For more information on SEL, see Six Reasons Why The Oklahoma State Legislature Should Ban The Use of SEL – Social Emotional Learning Through SB1442

Senator Jett has filed SB1027 (2023) to stop the teaching of SEL.

1

School Board Elections Are Coming UP! Be PREPARED With This Information!

For years, ROPE has been preaching about the importance of SCHOOL BOARD RACES to parents and students. Although many people don’t realize it, SCHOOL BOARDS have nearly ALL THE POWER in a school! NOT the superintendent – THE BOARD – which should be IDEALLY made up of parents with children in the school.

If you are interested in running for school board, you must RUN to your county election board ASAP. The date for filing for running STARTS TOMORROW – December 5-7th! Go to your COUNTY Election Board to file. Please see THIS LINK for the filing packet and all information regarding School Board Elections.

Here’s a table that gives you information on WHAT a School Board member should do – as opposed to what the Superintendent should do.

Here’s a link to Title 70 Section 70-3-104, “State Board of Education – Powers and duties” in the event you’d like to see for yourself.

In the event that you would like to have a candidate forum in your area – or simply ask questions of your school board candidates, we’ve developed the 20 below for your use!

20 QUESTIONS FOR SCHOOL BOARD CANDIDATES

  1. Do you know how to tell male from female in most species of mammals in North America? Should an educator be required to reach that level of competency?
  2. What are the pros and cons of A-B schedules?
  3. Should your Superintendent have the wisdom to fire teachers who provide litter boxes or sexual instruction for children?
  4. How many administrators does it take to provide programs that have nothing to do with education?
  5. How many federal grants does it take to prevent the need for parents?
  6. Are you opposed to parents taking the main role in raising their children (education, food, transportation, and entertainment, physical and mental health care, sex ed, spiritual guidance)?
  7. At what age is it educational for a teacher or librarian to offer your child pornography?
  8. Do you trust trained teachers to carry a firearm in class to protect themselves and their students?
  9. Will you have concerned parents arrested for attending school board meetings?
  10. Do you want to take your school board training from a “non-profit” who makes $Millions per year and considers concerned parents domestic terrorists?
  11.  Are you for or against adults having sex with minors?
  12.  Should school counselors be allowed to advise children to keep secrets from parents, or encourage them to have sex or to have medical procedures?
  13.  Who do school board members work for? 
  14.  Should children be masked and treated like lepers when .005% of them get sick? Should schools close down for those statistics?
  15.  What are the pros and cons of virtual schools?
  16.  Should parents be allowed entry to see their children or faculty during the school day?
  17.  Are you familiar with Social Emotional Learning, Critical Race Theory, Diversity Equity and Inclusion, as well as Environmental Social Governance programs and their application in the classroom?
  18.  Should schools follow the spirit of a law even if they can find a loophole?
  19.  What challenges do you expect as a member of your school board?
  20. Do you have the guts to stand strong against absurdity to protect Oklahoma children even when the globalists offer you or your school money?

Now that you have a big chunk of information to help you either RUN or VOTE for your local school board candidate – GET OUT THERE AND GET INVOLVED!!!

1

Did A Boy Identifying As A Girl Severely Injure A Girl In An Edmond Memorial High School Girls’ Bathroom?  What Does The Police Report Say?

October 26th of this year, at 8:14 am police were called to Edmond Memorial High School after an incident in a girls’ bathroom that left a student with an, “injury to ( ) eye, face and head with possible concussion” according to page 5 of the police report filed with the Edmond Police Department embedded below.  [Ellipses ( ) indicate redacted information.]

In fact, the incident was so significant, the testimony of the school nurse as reported by the officer on scene states, “student’s left side of face is swollen, left eye lid swollen, complains of headache, dizziness, blurry vision, denies any nausea.  ( ) complains neck pain and ice pack applied and urge medical attention” (pg 5)

Recently, the police report for this incident was obtained by ROPE from the Edmond Police Department.  Filed police reports are available to the public at large, however in this case, names and gender information have been redacted – most probably because the victim and assailant are under the age of 18 – consequently, we are able to report only on the unredacted text from the officer’s filed narrative. 

The October 26th incident report includes six written statements: three from student witnesses and one each from the school nurse, Julie Drumm, Assistant Principal, Maryjel Cochrane and Principal Brandi Wheeler.

Why would we believe this to be a case of a boy using the girl’s bathroom?  Two specific reasons.

  1.  One witness statement says the following, “I was calming a friend down and I heard screaming so I stood up, went out of the stall so if I could jump in I could they were screaming, ( ) told ( ) to leave her alone and to stop looking at ( ) and then they started screaming at each other and then ( ) throug the first hit then basically jumped on ( ) started swinging to save ( ) live cuz ( ) is a man then I tried to jump in ( ) also hit ( ) from what I saw kicked ( ) in the head and the back 2 times and then we pulled ( ) up and ( ) collapsed and then the principal walked in.” (pg 4)
  2. The officer of record writes the following: “Some of the students involved informed me that they speculated that ( ) was a ( ) but did not know for sure. ( ) is enrolled as a ( ). I asked the registrar secretary for the ( ) birth certificate, but the certificate of birth did not identify ( ) gender. Another document in the file (Paternity Affidavit) had a section where ( ) was marked as being ( ). I informed the principal W-Brandi Wheeler about the discrepancy in A-( ) school record.  W-Brandi asked her to clarify.  P-( ) stated that ( ) was born ( ) but identifies as a ( ).  P-( ) stated that ( ) has suffered a lot of emotional and mental abuse in the past and they moved here to start anew.” 

Again, with pertinent information redacted, it is impossible to be sure of anything regarding the incident except that there was a fight in a bathroom that caused one person to sustain severe injury.  We can assume it’s a girls’ bathroom, however, simply because most boys do not go into a bathroom in a group, or escape there to ‘calm down a friend’.  Additionally, we can assume there is an issue with gender aspect to the incident as one witness does appear to identify the assailant as a man and the officer narrative includes a statement from the Principal that the assailant was born one sex BUT identifies as another.

The Edmond Memorial parents who spoke to us about this say they were not made aware of this severe assault – an important incident which should have been disclosed to parents no matter who was involved.  Moreover, if this was a boy in the girls’ bathroom – an issue that ROPE does not support in any way – PARENTS HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW.

Though there are poor souls who don’t wish to understand the concept of nature and biological fact – most men are much stronger than women (women boxers box each other, not other men, for example) – and that includes young men.

Girls/women deserve to be safe in their persons from rape or assault and to their personal PRIVACY while using bathrooms for girls/women – particularly at public schools and universities.  The example described by this police report could illustrate that fact perfectly.  Is this why this incident has not been publicly reported?  No matter the circumstances, schools should be absolutely transparent with parents about student safety. 

Apparently, Edmond Memorial, isn’t.

4

Six Reasons OKC Residents Should VOTE NO On BOTH OKC Public Schools Bond Issues

Tomorrow (Tuesday, 11/8/22), Oklahoma City voters will go to the polls.  After voting for numerous candidates, OKC voters will have TWO PROPOSITIONS on which to vote to provide OKC Public Schools numerous opportunities for spending their property taxes.

Let’s look at the reasons to VOTE NO:

1. This bond initiative will SUBSTANTIALLY increase property taxes on Oklahoma City residents.  The Oklahoman says the issue would “raise the district’s mill levy to $26 for every $1,000 of assessed property value”.  This means if you own a house assessed at 175,000, your property taxes per year would be $4,550.  What will this do to the elderly and those on fixed incomes?

2. Oklahoma City Public Schools has HORRIBLE scores overall.  Let’s look at just a few of these (which you can verify here):

  • Britton Elementary: 90% BELOW GRADE LEVEL in English – 97% BELOW GRADE LEVEL in Math (demographics: 6.6% Caucasian, 41% Black, .5% Asian, 46.4% Hispanic
  • Quail Creek Elementary: 64% BELOW GRADE LEVEL in English – 75% BELOW GRADE LEVEL in Math (demographics: 44% Caucasian, 29.4% Black, 2.3% Asian, 10.3% Hispanic)
  • Bodine Elementary: 89% BELOW GRADE LEVEL in English – 93% BELOW GRADE LEVEL in Math (demographics: 13.3% Caucasian, 43.9% Black, 0% Asian, 29.6% Hispanic, 4.2% Native American
  • Cesar Chavez Elementary: 94% BELOW GRADE LEVEL in English – 95% BELOW GRADE LEVEL in Math – 95% BELOW GRADE LEVEL in Math (demographics: 8.3% Caucasian, 5.3% Black, .4% Asian, 81.9% Hispanic, 1.8% Native American

These scores mean that the students in these schools are essentially NOT BEING EDUCATED AT ALL.  Why in the world should anyone reward OKCPS for NOT DOING THEIR JOB in the first place.

3. If you are a renter, you do not directly pay property tax, but the company/organization/person who owns the building in which you live does.  How can the owners NOT pass such a significant property tax increase on to their tenets.

4. OKCPS Superintendent Sean McDaniel – who broke SB658 which prevented school boards from requiring masks – asked the Board to FIRE five teachers last year for following the law and NOT wearing masks while teaching.

5. Superintendent McDaniel also spoke out against the passage of HB1775, saying, “HB1775 is a solution looking for a problem that doesn’t exist.”  After passage of the bill, the entire eight member OKCPS School Board voted to FORMALLY DENOUNCE THE BILL.

6. This year – as in previous years since 2017 – OKCPS participated in the OKC Pride Alliance Parade WITH A TAXPAYER-FUNDED SCHOOL BUS.

OKCPS does not in any way exemplify – or even typify – a functional, taxpayer-supported, educational institution; they are – like so many public schools – a system of government-supported indoctrination centers serving to spread the ‘woke’ infection.

OKCSPS DOES NOT DESERVE ANY MORE HARD-EARNED PROPERTY TAX DOLLARS FROM OKLAHOMA CITY RESIDENTS. 

VOTE NO ON BOTH OKCPS BOND PROPOSITIONS!

2

Democrat Education Policies DAMAGE Kids – VOTE NO FOR DEMOCRAT JENA NELSON for State Superintendent

With elections weeks away, Democrats are now scrambling to change history yet again. Though it was DEMOCRATS who were the main proponent of closing schools during the COVID 19 “pandemic”, the Biden administration is now attempting to shift the blame from Democrats for what we now KNOW damaged American school children possibly irreparably – the closing of public schools in favor of ‘distance learning’ for over a year.

According to the Washington Examiner, “Democratic-led states and teachers unions largely pushed school closures as a safety measure in 2020 and 2021, but both groups are now distancing themselves from those stances, as is the Biden administration.”

The article goes on to quote Education Secretary Miguel Cardona, blaming the virus itself, instead of Democrat union leaders for the school closures that kept kids out of classrooms.

“This once-in-a-generation virus upended our country in so many ways — and our students cannot be the ones who sacrifice most now or in the long run,” he said in a prepared statement. “We must treat the task of catching our children up in reading and math with the urgency this moment demands.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/distance-democrats-school-closures

Unsurprisingly, Cordona went on to try and bribe American parents away from their anger over the absolutely DISMAL NAEP scores recorded this year for English and Math, by assuring them there would be more money printed up to dole out as American Rescue Plan funds.

It’s important that American parents do not forget:

Randi Weingarten and the teacher’s unions worked with the CDC to keep schools closed according to FOIA’d emails.

https://nypost.com/2021/05/01/teachers-union-collaborated-with-cdc-on-school-reopening-emails/

If that article isn’t enough to drive that point home, here is another to review and here’s yet another…oh, and one more for your reading pleasure.

Sadly, not only has it been essentially proven (via 2022 NAEP scores) that American school students have ended up on the LOSING END OF LEARNING in the last several years, but studies have now shown NUMEROUS problems with Democrat-caused school closures.

For example, though this article sums up a number of issues, these would have to illustrate the most concerning issues beyond learning loss, including the death of students.

How the Closure of In-School Learning Damaged U.S. Children’s Mental Health During the Pandemic (TIME Magazine)

American Academy of Pediatrics: School closures, lockdown contributing to increase in children taking their own lives (Law Enforcement Today)

Covid-19 school closings linked to increase in depression and suicide, study finds (CNN)

These aren’t articles from just FOX news – or other independent, conservative-leaning news sources. CNN? TIME? Even these progressive bastions have spoken out about the damage caused by Democrat insistence that public schools be closed, though COVID 19 was NEVER indicated to have severe complications or spread in school-aged children.

But beyond even the damage done by the Democrat’s COVID policies, we can see from Oklahoma NAEP data that Oklahoma school children have CONSISTENTLY received a subpar education – and within the years of the Hofmeister superintendency, NAEP scores became legitimately ridiculous – probably because so much of public education is controlled by Oklahoma Democrats – including those in the Oklahoma’s Superintendent union CCOSA, and the Oklahoma School Boards Association OSSBA. (Please log on to our blospot and search both terms to find out how much damage these ‘nonpartisan’ (Democrat-run) organizations have done to Oklahoma education.)

Just get a load of Oklahoma’s NAEP scores:

VOTE NO FOR JENA NELSON for State Superintendent!

There can be no other way of reversing Oklahoma’s Democrat-caused public education damage than VOTING AGAINST A DEMOCRAT.

0

ROPE/Chaffin Lawsuit Against Stillwater Public Schools – Request For Summary Judgement Heard Today

This beautiful October morning, Attorney Maria Seidler argued for Summary Judgement in the case of Brice Chaffin and ROPE v Stillwater Public Schools.

Yet another hurdle in the case of Brice Chaffin and ROPE against Stillwater Public Schools was met this morning (10.21.22).  

Back in July, we updated readers about our ongoing lawsuit against SPS filed on behalf of Brice Chaffin, a member of the district who had been removed from the podium during his public comment regarding the policy of SPS to allow boys in the girl’s bathrooms.  At that time, we were happy to report that Judge Kistler (Payne County Court) refused to dismiss our lawsuit against SPS, setting a further court date for today.

Don’t forget – all ROPE and Chaffin are asking for is a PUBLIC APOLOGY from SPS for their mistreatment of Chaffin.  We chose a motion of Summary Judgement (asking Judge Kistler to decide the case) to prevent further taxing the legal system, not because we didn’t believe we could win a jury trial.  Certainly we all believe we could.

This morning, Attorney, Maria Seidler, argued for the Judge to decide for our case, while SPS’s attorneys obviously argued for their side.  

We were hoping the judge would rule from the bench this morning, however, he chose to review the video of the meeting a further time before rendering a written judgement that will be sent to the attorneys representing the parties.

This was disappointing of course, as we would have liked to know the outcome of the case sooner rather than later, but Maria was eloquent in her arguments for our side and the SPS’s attorneys argument that Mr. Chaffin was an interruption to the School Board meeting that required removal action from the Board in order to proceed, rang inevitably hollow.  

Beginning to comment at 30 seconds into his 3 minute comment time, continuing to further interrupt Chaffin additional times and then having him escorted from the room via police escort couldn’t POSSIBLY have been any less of an interruption to Board business than simply letting Mr. Chaffin – who was fully civil and under his own self-possession – finish his 3 minute statement.

Certainly, as soon as we get word from the Judge regarding his decision, we will pass the information onto you.

In the meantime (and again), continue to think on these two things:

Taxpayers paid for TWO ATTORNEYS to deal with a lawsuit that could have been resolved via a PUBLIC APOLOGY for mistreatment of a parent and community member by SPS Board Members during one of their regularly scheduled open meetings.

How much money will it cost taxpayers – and how much will the ATTORNEYS MAKE OFF TAXPAYERS – to fight a suit in which SPS is clearly in the wrong and over a simple public apology?

0

Sex Education – An Asset, Or A Liability, To Oklahoma Students?

In September (2022), Senator David Bullard asked me to do some research on Sex Education in Oklahoma for an Oklahoma House of Representatives Common Education Committee Interim Study on Sex Education created by himself and Representatives Sherrie Conley and Danny Williams. Senator Bullard didn’t provide instruction as to what the research should say, just to perform the research.

Candidly, though no scientific researcher worth their salt should, I began the project believing that Sex Education was a liability to Oklahoma students simply because of my history.

I am Oklahoma born (1962) and bred; the child of a public school English teacher and a student of public education throughout the 1970’s, graduating one of the largest, Oklahoma City high schools (John Marshall) in 1981. I remember all 6th grade girls (it couldn’t have been 5th grade because we were all bussed clear across town to provide Oklahoma students ‘equity’ that year) being drug into a darkened room and shown a film about the basic anatomy of a girl which included a bit about puberty and menstruation. I remember nothing similar over my entire public school career.

I’m not a spring chicken. Growing up, we didn’t have the internet and our TV screens went dark after a round of the Star Spangled Banner at midnight each day, playing nothing but the call sign and white noise until 5 am the next morning.

Sex, however, was on the mind of most every student I knew after 7th grade in one way or another. Yet for my girlfriends and I, discussions about ‘sex’ were mostly confined to what guy was the cutest or could be the best kisser and who would we marry – at least until high school. Even then, between what parents had actually told one or two of us and what had been passed around at school from other sources, by 10th grade we’d figured out nearly every gory detail about sex whether we were interested or not, or whether or not we would – or could – bring ourselves to actually do anything about what we’d found out. Even if we’d wanted to try, most all our mothers were at home during the day, so finding someplace to go where we wouldn’t be found out was gross and not a risk any of us were willing to take.

Yes, I did know a girl who got pregnant in high school, but there was never a ‘rash of pregnancies’ in any of my grades. No, though there was always scuttlebutt in the halls, I never knew anyone who admitted to being gay while in high school. In fact, the vast majority of us had no idea what a ‘transgender’ person was – nor any of the other gender categories identified today – and all our school ‘clubs’ were related to either sports, academics, or the arts. Most kids were NOT having sex and those who were, were branded a ‘slut’, or ‘easy’ behind their back and just the idea of having one of those nouns attached to your name was not okay with even the wildest child . (During my high school career, the rural guys all carried shotguns or rifles in racks on their back window and school shootings were exactly ZERO, FYI.)

Today, life is massively different for kids in every single way; nearly all children are exposed to non-stop media across all levels of technology – be it a computer, a computer pad or a cell phone – on a daily, minute-to-minute basis. Most kids are ‘latch key’ kids whose parents both work and are – on some level – raising themselves. Gone are the days of kids getting information from kids – who more than likely got it from a parent or an older sibling. If parents aren’t using really great software filters – and sometimes even if they are – the internet and computer apps are flooding kids with messaging, pictures and ideas meant to be way beyond their abilities to decode at their developmental states in attempt to destroy their innocence and create little sexualized automatons who feel more than think and have minimal attachment to their parents (and certainly none to Jesus).

Meanwhile public school, administrators – many of whom live on their woke-sy hatred of the idea of ‘shame’ as a motivator (probably because it’s actually worked for hundreds of years and produced many times less suicides than gender transition surgery) – are dutifully marching the Marxist line of pushing and accepting every form of behavior known to man, with, or without the knowledge of a parent or guardian, in order to most effectively sever the tie between parent and child while inserting the state into that role.

Consequently, who could really determine how or where young people are influenced by sex most today – technology, or the state (through public education).

HERE’S WHAT WE KNOW

According to the Oklahoma State Department of Health Adolescent Sexual Health in Oklahoma report for 2021, STD rates are climbing at an alarming rate while pregnancy rates are falling.

On a side note, there is a HUGE difference between pregnancy rates and percentage of pregnancy. A pregnancy ‘rate’ is a function of time – the number of pregnancies per the population number studied across a span of time usually multiplied by 1000. Pregnancy percentage is simply the number of pregnancies in an age rage divided by the total number in the age range multiplied by 100. Pregnancy RATES are MUCH LARGER than pregnancy percentages which is VERY MISLEADING. For example; for 1991 the teen birth RATE in the age group 15-17 is 41. The percentage of pregnant girls between 15 and 17 for 1991 is 5.7% or 0.057 of the entire 15-17 population of young women in Oklahoma during 1991. What sounds scarier? The first or the second?

Additionally, when you look at that page on the Oklahoma State Department of Health website, you’ll notice that the date across which birth rates are compared becomes more recent in time. Where are the stats across more than one decade? Where are the stats from MY era? Why continue to move up the date for comparison to current time? Do you suppose it suits the needs of Health Department programming NOT to have to show linear, historical data from previous decades?

Public health officials (I was an Epidemiologist for the Oklahoma Health Department from 1990-1992 so I have a bit of a clue) are often in the business of pushing PROGRAMMING to justify taxpayer dollars, not protecting individual rights – we should keep that in mind.

https://oklahoma.gov/health/health-education/children—family-health/maternal-and-child-health-service/data-and-evaluation/teen-birth-statistics.html
https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/health/health2/documents/teenbirthreport-2016-revsed-8-2017.pdf

We know that the ‘evidence based’ sex ed programs being used in Oklahoma, Making a Difference!, Making Proud Choices!, Love Notes and Positive Prevention PLUS are being provided by the Oklahoma State Department of Health thanks to a grant provided by PREP (Personal Responsibility Education Program) via the US Department of Health and Human Services, Family and Youth Services Bureau (an Office of the Administration for Children & Families) – did you get all that? In other words, the federal government is subsidizing Oklahoma sex ed through the Oklahoma State Department of Health.

We know that ETR provides these – and other – sex ed curricula.

https://www.etr.org/

We also know that etr advocates engaging in sex with HIV-infected persons.

https://www.etr.org/blog/get-prepped-tips-for-giving-your-sexual-health-toolbox-a-glow-up/

We know that Planned Parenthood teaches that abstinence can include “outercourse” which is everything but vaginal sex and that kids should try and ‘avoid’ sexually transmitted diseases.

We know that an organization called “Amplify” out of Tulsa also provides all of these programs – and more – to Tulsa area public schools. According to their website, “Evidence-Based Sexual Health education is being taught to every student enrolled in 7th-grade science and high school biology at Tulsa Public Schools unless a parent opts their student out.”

We know that Amplify partners with Planned Parenthood and PREP. We know that PREP is an activist organization which pushes abortion and contraception.

We know that the PREP website prominently provides access to a newsletter called “The Bedsider” and the “Abortion Finder”.

Family Watch International has created a website against Comprehensive Sex Education that provides many valuable resources for parents concerned about sex education in their child’s school.

One of their handouts lists numerous harmful effects of sex education on children under 18, many of which were covered in my research and discussed during my presentation to the Interim Study Committee. Here is the list: it sexualizes children, teaches children to consent to sex, normalizes anal and oral sex, promotes homosexual/bisexual behavior, teaches children sexual pleasure, promotes solo or mutual masturbation, eroticizes condom use, promotes early sexual independence, fails to establish abstinence as the goal, promotes gender confusion, teaches abortion/contraception, promotes peer-to-peer sex ed/sexual rights advocacy, undermines traditional values and beliefs, violates or undermines parental rights and refers children to harmful resources.

Sex Education in Oklahoma schools should be stopped IMMEDIATELY. Parents must be allowed to parent their own children without interference from the state, and state-promoted sex education puts the state between a child and their parent. Yes, parents in Oklahoma may ‘opt out’ of sex education, however, just like opting out of dirty literature, students feel intense peer pressure from having been excluded and are often targeted for bullying by teachers and school administrators. Please look through the citations provided and like and share our video and slide presentation as well.

You may also find these – and other videos – on our Rumble and YouTube channels as well.

CITATIONS

0

PARENTS – Be Informed About Any Sex Ed Curricula Your Child May Be Getting At School! State Laws Included For Reference.

Frequently, we receive questions from parents as to whether or not their children may be opted out of Sex Ed courses – the answer is YES.

Because Sex Ed curricula is being bombarded onto your child in different ways through public school programs, I thought it might be nice to publish the state laws regarding Sex Ed in order to be clear about what IS and ISN’T to be taught.

First of all, please know, that as a parent, you have the right and responsibility to remove your child from ANY teaching that you believe undermines your rights as a parent to educate your child within your family’s values.  Write a note to your child’s teacher, the Principal and the Superintendent simply saying something like; 

“I reserve my right as a parent to remove _____ from ____ class for the reason that it undermines my family’s values, Signed _____”

You can do the same thing for a class assignment or book reading – YOU are the PARENT, not the state.  It is of absolute importance that you take this right seriously and assert your rights when necessary.

Next, please also know that Oklahoma schools are not mandated to teach Sex Ed programming and where it is, it must be taught with ABSTINENCE as the PRIMARY GOAL.  This is important because organizations like SEICUS (Sex Ed For Social Change) are working to make the most graphic Sex Ed programs available to your child – especially within state schools.

This year, the Oklahoma Health Department (OSDH) has received funding from PREP (Personal Responsibility Education Program), a 501c3 non-profit somehow affiliated with the federal government, of a bit over $600,000.  According to the OSDH website, they are providing schools with four separate ‘evidence-based’ sexual education programs – all produced by a company called ETR (Education, Training and Research); Making a Difference, Making Proud Choices, Love Notes and Positive Prevention Plus. 

Above is the PREP website homepage.  Please note the ‘abortionfinder’ in the upper right corner next to the ‘bedsider’.  The Bedsider is an online magazine that only deals with sex issues.  Mind you, this ‘magazine’ is linked to a YOUTH SEX EDUCATION provider.  Here’s a screenshot from down further on the page.

Because what parent doesn’t want their child subscribing to ‘Frisky Fridays‘ and  learning about sex toys?

A group in Tulsa, Amplify – whose mission and vision are; “Advancing youth sexual health and well-being through collaboration, education and advocacy”, “Informed Youth, Equitable Access, Vibrant Communities” – provides all four programs found on the OSDH website along with training and support.

I was unable to find anything about these programs but brochures – which appear nearly harmless.  The descriptions posted on the Amplify website also set off no alarm bells at all.  I was only able to find them on the ETR website for PURCHASE.  There were no samples to see but the Table of Contents.

Family Watch International apparently ordered  facilitator guides for several of the curricula, however, and posted a PDF of several pictures from two of the guides.

The one for Making Proud Choices (provided by Amplify and the OKDH) is alarming.  Here is the page on the ETR website.  Below is a screenshot of the FWI PDF.

Not very ‘ABSTINENCE’-friendly at all.

This is exactly why parents need to get involved and ASK TO SEE WHAT THE SCHOOL IS TEACHING THEIR CHILDREN – and make sure to ask to see the FACILITATOR’S GUIDE, not just the lessons – which, beyond making 12-year-olds fully aware of sexual issues they are not developmentally ready for – are relatively tame.

In closing, PARENTS are the people who should be informing their children about every issue they encounter – even if you need an ‘easy button’ because they’re uncomfortable.  Get a book from Amazon to help you – or carefully check one out of the library – that might give you a start, but don’t leave this very important job up to Kaiser-funded non-profits and state schools that don’t have the same investment in your children you do.

Check out this website for more information.  It provides a long list of the harmful effects sex education can have on children – one of which reminds us that the ‘consent’ portion added to the sex ed curricula in Oklahoma (proposed by Kay Floyd – a Democrat – but was passed by a Republican legislature), teaches children to consent to sex.

PLEASE NOTE! Your school MUST “conduct for the parents and guardians of the students involved during weekend and evening hours at least one presentation concerning the curriculum and materials that will be used for such education”, in terms of AIDS Education – AND – your school Superintendent (or designee of the school district) MUST “provide prior written notification to the parents or guardians of the students involved of their right to inspect the curriculum and material and of their obligation to notify the school in writing if they do not want their child to participate in the class, program, test, survey or questionnaire.”

If your school/Superintendent does not do either of these things, you can SUE the school for breech of duty and not following the law.

OKLAHOMA LAW

AIDS PREVENTION EDUCATION: OS 70 Section 11-103.3

A. Acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) prevention education shall be taught in the public schools of this state. AIDS prevention education shall be limited to the discussion of the disease AIDS and its spread and prevention. Students shall receive such education:

1. at the option of the local school district, a minimum of once during the period from grade five through grade six;

2. a minimum of once during the period from grade seven through grade nine; and

3. a minimum of once during the period from grade ten through grade twelve.

B. The State Department of Education shall develop curriculum and materials for AIDS prevention education in conjunction with the State Department of Health. A school district may also develop its own AIDS prevention education curriculum and materials. Any curriculum and materials developed for use in the public schools shall be approved for medical accuracy by the State Department of Health. A school district may use any curriculum and materials which have been developed and approved pursuant to this subsection.

C. School districts shall make the curriculum and materials that will be used to teach AIDS prevention education available for inspection by the parents and guardians of the students that will be involved with the curriculum and materials. Furthermore, the curriculum must be limited in time frame to deal only with factual medical information for AIDS prevention. The school districts, at least one (1) month prior to teaching AIDS prevention education in any classroom, shall conduct for the parents and guardians of the students involved during weekend and evening hours at least one presentation concerning the curriculum and materials that will be used for such education. No student shall be required to participate in AIDS prevention education if a parent or guardian of the student objects in writing to such participation.

D. AIDS prevention education shall specifically teach students that:

1. engaging in homosexual activity, promiscuous sexual activity, intravenous drug use or contact with contaminated blood products is now known to be primarily responsible for contact with the AIDS virus;

2. avoiding the activities specified in paragraph 1 of this subsection is the only method of preventing the spread of the virus;

3. sexual intercourse, with or without condoms, with any person testing positive for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibodies, or any other person infected with HIV, places that individual in a high risk category for developing AIDS.

E. The program of AIDS prevention education shall teach that abstinence from sexual activity is the only certain means for the prevention of the spread or contraction of the AIDS virus through sexual contact. It shall also teach that artificial means of birth control are not a certain means of preventing the spread of the AIDS virus and reliance on such methods puts a person at risk for exposure to the disease.

F. The State Department of Health and the State Department of Education shall update AIDS education curriculum material as newly discovered medical facts make it necessary.

CURRICULUM AND MATERIALS USED IN SEX EDUCATION CLASS: OS70 Section 11-105.1

1. A. All curriculum and materials including supplementary materials which will be used to teach or will be used for or in connection with a sex education class or program which is designed for the exclusive purpose of discussing sexual behavior or attitudes, or any test, survey or questionnaire whose primary purpose is to elicit responses on sexual behavior or attitudes shall be available through the superintendent or a designee of the school district for inspection by parents and guardians of the student who will be involved with the class, program or test, survey or questionnaire. Such curriculum, materials, classes, programs, tests, surveys or questionnaires shall include information about consent and shall have as one of its primary purposes the teaching of or informing students about the practice of abstinence. For the purposes of this section, “consent” shall have the same meaning as that provided by Section 113 of Title 21 of the Oklahoma Statutes. The superintendent or a designee of the school district shall provide prior written notification to the parents or guardians of the students involved of their right to inspect the curriculum and material and of their obligation to notify the school in writing if they do not want their child to participate in the class, program, test, survey or questionnaire. Each local board of education shall determine the means of providing written notification to the parents and guardian which will ensure effective notice in an efficient and appropriate manner. No student shall be required to participate in a sex education class or program which discusses sexual behavior or attitudes if a parent or guardian of the student objects in writing to such participation. If the type of program referred to in this section is a part of or is taught during a credit course, a student may be required to enroll in the course but shall not be required to receive instruction in or participate in the program if a parent or guardian objects in writing.

B. The superintendent or a designee of a school district in which sex education is taught or a program is offered which is designed for the exclusive purpose of discussing sexual behavior or attitudes shall approve all curriculum and materials which will be used for such education and any test, survey or questionnaire whose primary purpose is to elicit responses on sexual behavior or attitudes used in the school prior to their use in the classroom or school. The teacher involved in the class, program, testing or survey shall submit the curriculum, materials, tests or surveys to the superintendent or a designee for approval prior to their use in the classroom or school. This section shall not apply to those students enrolled in classes, programs, testings or surveys offered through an alternative education program.

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑