Gilroy
– Twenty–eight high school teachers came out swinging in
response to the Gilroy Unified School Board’s unanimous opposition
of teacher participation in the Day of Silence. In a separate act
of defiance, a GHS teacher circulated an interoffice e-mail
encouraging other teachers to stop supporting
the GHS Parent Club for their stance on the Day of Silence.
Gilroy – Twenty–eight high school teachers came out swinging in response to the Gilroy Unified School Board’s unanimous opposition of teacher participation in the Day of Silence. In a separate act of defiance, a GHS teacher circulated an interoffice e-mail encouraging other teachers to stop supporting the GHS Parent Club for their stance on the Day of Silence.
In a Dispatch letter to editor, GHS English chair Peter Gray stated his support of the students’ and teachers’ right to participate in the Day of Silence and attached the signatures of other GHS faculty members who were in agreement. Gray printed copies of his original letter and dispersed them to GHS faculty members last week in their mailboxes. He encouraged them to attach their signature if they so desired.
The letter states the issue is hate, and indicates that the public would not have been upset about teachers participating in an activity such as the Day of Silence if it had not been in support of homosexual rights.
“If the Day of Silence had been in support of African American students who had been taunted with racial slurs, if it had been in support of young women who had been the victims of rape … there would have been no outrage at the board meeting,” the letter states.
Nearly half of all GHS English teachers added their names to the letter and others, including social science teachers, coaches and fine art instructors penned their names to the document, comprising nearly one–third of the school’s staff.
“There was no pressure at all (to sign),” said Eric Kuwada, GHS’ visual communications instructor. “I supported the letter. I don’t believe anyone should be discriminated against.”
Day of Silence is a nationally recognized demonstration where students and teachers remain silent for the day, symbolizing the oppression gay, lesbian and transgendered individuals feel.
While Kuwada did not participate in the April 13 Day of Silence, and respects those who feel that teachers partaking in the demonstration are bringing politics into the classroom, he insisted that the rights of all individuals be supported regardless of their race and sexual orientation.
“That was one of the main reasons I signed it,” he said.
But not all teachers follow his philosophy.
“I believe that all people should be treated with respect,” said GHS English teacher Jane Singleton. “No one has the right to harass anyone. I would defend any kid that was being harassed.” But Singleton did not sign the letter – and not because she was out of the office last week.
“I didn’t get the opportunity, but I would not have signed it,” she said. “There’s a lot of reasons … but primarily because teachers should not bring (the Day of Silence) into the classroom.”
Another reason she offered is because teachers cannot instruct effectively when not talking.
“Board policy says that if you bring a controversial topic into the classroom that you must show both sides of it … and they didn’t,” she explained. “The school is a neutral ground and we want to keep it that way.”
The 28 individuals who signed the letter have their own personal beliefs and reasoning for supporting Gray’s original statement, but the message is the same: 28 GHS teachers disagree with the GUSD School Board’s opinion.
One GHS math teacher, Wayne Scott, sent an email to the entire GHS staff encouraging them to “consider/reconsider any support of the Parent Club.” Scott was responding to an original email GHS principal Bob Bravo wrote to staff members about volunteering for the GHS Career Fair April 28, which was sponsored by the GHS Parent Club.
“In light of the fact that the executive board of the Parent Club voted to undercut teachers who participated in the Day of Silence, I for one will not be supporting the Parent Club in any way nor will be taking any of their services,” he wrote. “I strongly encourage you to do likewise.”
While there is no policy stating the do’s and don’ts of interoffice e-mail, Bravo said that “most people obey the rules of courtesy.”
GUSD e-mail is considered district property, Bravo said, but is not policed by a designated person with a specific set of guidelines. He did not believe Scott was directly saying individuals should not participate in the GHS Career Fair, but admitted, “I can understand how it could be interpreted that way due to the timing.”
According to Parent Club member Jackie Stevens, not one teacher volunteered for the Career Fair.
Stevens does not speak for the entire Parent Club, but said, “I don’t think that any of us feel this teacher represents the views of all the staff.”
She was disappointed in the way Scott was allowed to initiate his sentiment to all staff members.
“This is a reflection of the managerial style of Edwin Diaz and Bob Bravo that does not make expectations clear … They are not communicating with their staff what their expectations are.”
Stevens was concerned that a fraction of the GHS staff members do not believe parents have a say in curriculum their children follow.
“We are partners in our children’s education,” she said.
Scott was not available for comment as of press time.
Last week, GUSD Superintendent Edwin Diaz requested legal opinion from the district’s lawyer to determine whether the school board can prevent teachers from participating in events like the Day of Silence in the future. Late Monday afternoon, the district received legal opinion and distributed it to board members. Citing attorney–client privilege, Diaz declined to make the opinion public.
In a closed session Thursday, board members will review the opinion with the district’s lawyer and determine if it will be disclosed, Diaz said.
“There’s no clear legal opinion,” said GHS history teacher Sally Enriquez after consulting with the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) regarding teacher participation. “There is no legal precedence about a teacher not speaking. That’s where the area is fuzzy.”
Enriquez also signed Gray’s letter to the editor and was one of four teachers who participated in the Day of Silence.
Since the Day of Silence, Enriquez, who is the advisor of the Gay/Lesbian Alliance, and one other GHS teacher, Karen Hockemeyer, have received hate letters at the school. Both were identical and copies turned over to Gilroy Police she said.
Enriquez was uncertain if the ACLU would get involved if the district’s legal opinion allows the board to bar teacher participation in the future, but hoped current policies regarding discrimination would be enforced.
While there is strict board policy banning discrimination on district campuses, Enriquez does not believe students comprehend what discrimination entails.
In the fall, students are given a copy of the board’s policy and undergo a 15 minute presentation on discrimination in general, she explained.
“It’s not enough,” she said. “I want something positive to come out of this … Students need to know what is legally acceptable and what is socially acceptable.”
What policies say:
From the California Department of Education Section 233.5:
(a) Each teacher shall endeavor to impress upon the minds of the pupils the principles of morality, truth, justice, patriotism and a true comprehension of the rights, duties and dignity of American citizenship, and the meaning of equality and human dignity … (a) Each teacher is also encouraged to create and foster an environment that encourages pupils to realize their full potential and that is free from discriminatory attitudes, practices, events of activities , in order to prevent acts of hate violence …
Excerpts taken from the collective bargaining agreement between the Gilroy Teachers Association and the GUSD – July 1, 2002 – June 30, 2004:
3.1.1.1. A unit member shall have reasonable freedom in classroom presentations and discussions and may introduce political, religious or otherwise controversial material, provided that the material is relevant to the course content and within the scope of the law and approved Board policies.
3.1.1.2. In performing teaching functions, unit members shall have reasonable freedom to express their opinions on all matters relevant to the course content in an objective manner. A unit member, however, shall not utilize her/his position to indoctrinate students with her/his own personal, political and/or religious views.
