The incredibly bad judgment displayed by a sixth-grade Brownell
social studies teacher in reading two sophomoric narratives is
stunning all by itself.
The incredibly bad judgment displayed by a sixth-grade Brownell social studies teacher in reading two sophomoric narratives is stunning all by itself.
The teacher apparently read a poem, “My First Time,” which leads listeners to believe the writer is describing his first sexual experience until the last line, and a narrative, “What Not To Name Your Dog,” about a canine named Sex, to her 11-year-old students.
That her students were of this age, when maturity – sexual, intellectual, physical and otherwise – varies widely, should have been enough to alert this teacher that these poems were inappropriate. As evidence of the maturation diversity of students of this age, remember: In many school districts, sixth graders are still in elementary school.
The fact that our schools have precious little time to teach the material that will prepare students for the next grade, let alone the multitude of standardized tests, should have brought this teacher to the conclusion that these works were of no value in her social studies classroom. This material is appropriate for Mad Magazine, not a sixth-grade social studies class.
The sensitive subject matter of these pieces should have been enough to set off alarm in any youth leader’s head. It’s disturbing that it didn’t ring bells for this experienced teacher.
And when you put this event in context – specifically the uproar after last year’s sexually explicit high school drama skits that cost a teacher his job – we can’t understand how this teacher could conclude that “My First Time” and “What Not To Name Your Dog” would be good choices for a classroom of sixth-graders.
These concerns about this teacher’s decision on appropriate content, on best use of classroom time, on ability to stick to prescribed curriculum should give any parent or taxpayer the right to question her ability to supervise a classroom.
We cannot ask this teacher to write “I will not waste precious classroom time on inappropriate sexually themed material with the 10- and 11-year-olds in my charge” 1,000 times on a chalkboard. But we can ask for an appropriate penalty. Sadly, we believe this lapse in judgment is so severe that this teacher should be fired.
That’s not the easy road to take. But Gilroy Unified School District cannot be wasting its time on such fiascos. GUSD is clearly not running a tight ship, and that culture has to change. The unmistakable message to all Gilroy Unified School District instructors is: Choose appropriate material and use precious classroom time wisely; anything less will not be tolerated.
That, of course, is a clear and explicit Board policy which this teacher violated. According to the backpedaling comments made in Wednesday’s story, a “communication” problem exists between the Board and GUSD teachers about policies. Let’s not make tortured excuses for bad behavior. Let’s apply the same standards to all teachers, and take the appropriate action.
This incident is also disturbing from a big-picture point of view. The teacher who allegedly read these two pieces has been teaching at Brownell for five years. Is this the first time she’s read this material? What kind of oversight and leadership is in place at a school and district level to make the standards clear? Why do these problems keep recurring at GUSD?
It is incumbent upon the district to root out the cause of the repeated inappropriate uses of classroom time and to fix it. Parents and taxpayers need to know that teachers are using classroom time and district resources wisely, that the activities in the classroom will improve student test scores and increase knowledge.
Anything less is a breach of public trust.
