I remember how it was -- JR
Proposal Aims to Bolster Student Privacy in California
At the beginning of the Covid pandemic, schools confronted new difficulties when they were tossed into remote learning due to prolonged lockdowns.
Resorting to online classes, schools relied on obtrusive software to proctor online tests. State Senator Dr. Richard Pan is recently advancing with a proposed revision to California’s Business and Professions Code relating to student privacy. The California Student Test Taker Privacy Protection Act aims to curb the invasive surveillance of remote students by their schools.
The proposal would direct schools to guarantee that their proctoring software minimizes unnecessary data collection of student information while also limiting the data’s retention and disclosure. Moreover, the Act gives students and their families the right to a private remedy if a proctoring software gathers data beyond what is needed to proctor the test.
Despite the slow return to in-person classes, online tests remain, but the pernicious software should not. Not only does the use of what is effectively malware constitute both an attack on privacy and a potential network safety risk, schools have overlooked better alternatives. Schools all too often did not adopt sensible and effective strategies like remote proctors that record the live screen sharings of students or turning off settings that show the correctness or incorrectness of answers. Instead, schools drove straight into invasive surveillance.
Some proctoring software monitors computer inputs, such as peripherals like monitors, mice, webcams, microphones, headphones, and USB, HDMI, DP, and Thunderbolt connections. Some access computer administrative controls, which opens up security vulnerabilities. Several proctoring services also possess and collect facial recognition and emotion detection, which scan other people in the environment. One vendor, which initially received notice for previous work with the Transportation Security Administration’s facial recognition efforts, uses an algorithm to monitor student behavior and categorize students as having high or low “integrity.”
Beyond privacy and security concerns, the wide net cast by proctoring software is also the cause of needless interruptions for both students and teachers. One student reported that crying during an exam activated the cheating eye tracker, saying, “My French prof had to watch 45 min[utes] of me quietly sobbing.” Another student was reported to be unable to take a math class because the sound of his laptop fans triggered the proctoring software.
*************************************************
Elementary school teachers brag about ignoring parents' requests to refer to their children by their given names and pronouns
Elementary school staffers bragged about outright ignoring parents' requests to refer to their children by their given names and pronouns late last month, during a virtual panel that saw speakers refer to parents as 'caregivers.'
The virtual 'Creating and Sustaining GSAs in Elementary Schools' meeting, held over Zoom April 26, saw moderator Katy Butler, a second grade public school teacher at Harvey Milk Civil Rights Academy in San Francisco, poise a question to her fellow panelists concerning pronoun use when it comes to their students.
The inquiry, sent to the group by another, unnamed educator, asked advice on how to deal with parents peeved over teachers' pronoun use.
‘What should we do if a parent requests that we refer to their child by the pronouns associated with their sex assigned at birth instead of their preferred pronouns, and that we use a legal name instead of a student’s chosen name?' Butler - who panel organizers billed as a white queer cisgender female teacher on social media - read.
Butler - the creator of Gender Inclusive Classrooms, the group that organized the panel - then gave way for the three other panelists, staffers at public schools across the country, to weigh in on the matter.
One panelist, fellow cocreator Kieran Slattery, a fifth grade teacher in Massachusetts, proceeded to provide his advice on the matter - proudly revealing instances where he ignored parents' requests to call their child by certain pronouns.
‘So, I can respond with something that I’ve done,’ Slattery, who teaches at Jackson Street Elementary, began.
‘This came up for me - it’s come up in a couple different ways - but it’s come up for me where caregivers asked.'
Slattery said: ‘I actually refer to their child’s name… using the name the name they asked to be referred to and their chosen pronouns, and caregivers reacted very strongly.'
The teacher then detailed how parents 'followed up with me and the principal, and said, like, “I know you were using a different name than my child’s given name at birth and the pronouns we gave them, and I’m respectfully asking that you use the name and the pronouns that we gave them.”’
Slattery - who panel organizers billed as a 'white, queer transgender man' - proceeded to warn the three other panelists of the legal concerns that come with rejecting parents' requests on how they refer to their children.
‘So the laws in every state are different, obviously, and I can’t speak to the laws in everyone’s particular state, but I will say - again, the resources that we’ll give you after this have some helpful sites where you can look up what the rules are for your state,' the Northampton elementary school teacher said.
'Before I responded to the caregiver, I made sure I ran it by my principal and my superintendent just to make sure that they had my back.'
The transgender teacher then revealed how he rejected the request of one pair of parents - or as he called them, 'caregivers' - touting the slight as a victory.
'And then I responded - and I chose my words carefully - and I said, “I hear you, I hear what you’re saying," Slattery said, adding that, 'I tried to really affirm what the caregiver was asking me, like in terms of, “I hear you saying that you’re feeling uncomfortable with me using the child’s preferred name and pronouns; I hear that you’re using different ones at home.'
He continued: 'But here at school, the expectation is that all of my students feel comfortable and welcome in my classroom.’
The assertion saw the educator put particular emphasis on the word 'my.'
‘So, in my classroom, I will refer to your child by whatever name and pronouns that they’ve told me they feel most comfortable with,' Slattery then said, with his fellow panelists nodding in approval.
The teacher went on to equate conveying that concept to parents to teaching children in his classroom.
‘Just have that be it,' he said - 'almost like the guidelines I try to use when I’m, like, explaining hard topics to my students. Like, less is more.'
The other panelists again nodded in approval.
Slattery continued: ‘I just say, like, “That sounds like it works really well for you at home, and you can absolutely choose to do whatever you like at home.
'In my classroom – and I even say, like, every year I start out my year by sending home information to caregivers that says, like, “Just so you know, this is an affirming class – the way that I affirm students is I call them by the names they ask to be called by and use their correct pronouns.'
The teacher then reiterated how he denied the parents' request.
'I just told them – maybe that’s not helpful – I just told them, “No,”' seemingly conceding the contentious nature of his assertion.
‘Respectfully, no.’
The assertion again garnered more impassioned nods from the other panelists.
'And because I had my principal and my superintendent’s support, there wasn't much they can do,' Slattery then said.
'And they eventually, kind of like, found another topic to squawk about,’ he added, before letting out a laugh.
‘And they left that alone.’
The remaining panelists all seemed to agree with the educator's assertion, with Butler in particular nodding affirmatively throughout her contemporary's spiel.
Another panelist, 5th grade Spanish teacher Daniel Alonso, echoed Slattery's sentiments, describing a similar incident between him and a set of parents at Chavez Elementary in Yonkers, New York.
‘Similarly to what Kieran said,' said Alonso, referring to Slattery, 'in my school district, LGBTQ+ students have a bill of rights - and the fourth one is that they have the right to be referred to by their gender pronouns and a name that fits their gender identity.
‘And so, similarly, there was a situation where a parent felt that the school was not doing what they wanted them to do, and we – I don’t even know if we were respectful about it – we were just like, “No, sorry. Like, our district-wide rule is that the student determines that, not you,”' he said, while offering a smug smile.
*****************************************************
Confusion about Australia's Anglican [Episcopal] schools
In what sense is an Anglican school that rejects Anglican teaching in order to keep non-Anglican families happy still an Anglican school?
That’s the question Sydney Anglicans are wrestling with as opposition to Christian teaching on sexuality and gender grows.
The Sydney Morning Herald reported at the weekend that alumni and parents from Anglican schools had issued a letter complaining the Anglican church was ‘imposing its social conservatism on classrooms’.
In other words, they were worried that the Anglican church was instructing Anglican schools to be, well, Anglican.
Specifically, parents were upset about guidelines for schools on dealing with students struggling with gender identity.
The Anglican Diocese of Sydney has advised its schools to show compassion, reject bullying and abuse, and note that nobody was immune from ‘brokenness’, but to also tell students to ‘honour and preserve the maleness or femaleness of the body God has given you’.
All of which sounded a little too much like Anglicanism for Anglican school parents.
‘I feel awful for any student who has to endure this senseless attack on their identity,’ a transgender woman (who identified as an Anglican parishioner) told the Sydney Morning Herald.
Another parent told the Herald that most families at his daughter’s Anglican school were not religious, and that he worried ‘socially conservative’ forces were pushing the school ‘in a different direction’.
By ‘socially conservative’ he presumably meant Anglican. And by ‘different direction’ he evidently meant Christian.
If only those Anglicans wouldn’t be so Anglican, their Anglican school would be less Anglican so that non-Anglicans could enjoy it!
Judging by the reported comments of disaffected parents, it will likely come as a surprise for them to learn that Anglican leaders don’t take their cues from Libs of TikTok.
Church leaders base their doctrine on the teaching of Jesus who, among other things, told his followers: ‘Surely you have read in the Scriptures: When God made the world, He made them male and female.’
Jesus’ words align with science, but not with the new-fangled gender transformation fetish.
The Anglican Diocese has essentially reminded its Anglican schools – which include some of the most exclusive colleges in the country such as The Kings School and Abbotsleigh – that they are Anglican.
Sydney Archbishop Kanishka Raffel said the guidelines:
‘Emphasise care and compassion for those who experience gender dysphoria and give schools wide discretion to respond to individual situations while holding to a Christian view of the inherent goodness of our bodies, as each has been created by God.’
But parents are threatening to withhold fees if the guidelines – including that school principals and board members must endorse the Christian view of marriage – are not rescinded.
A gay parent whose daughter attends St Catherine’s asked: ‘How do you explain to a girl that the leader of your school is opposed to your way of being?’
Imagine his surprise when he discovers there are literally hundreds of state schools in Sydney that endorse LGBTQ+ ways of being. And his daughter can attend any of them for free!
Upset non-Anglican parents don’t want their children to go to non-Anglican schools. But nor do they want their children’s Anglican schools to be Anglican.
So they are determined to leave their children in Anglican schools where they will oppose Anglicanism until the Anglican school is Anglican in name only such that it becomes a non-Anglican Anglican school.
The angry parents have found some support among senior school staff.
One Anglican school principal was said to be ‘livid’ at being asked to endorse the Christian view of marriage.
Others said the requirement would reduce the already small pool of potential candidates for principals and compromise the quality of school leadership.
A ‘high achieving woman with a public profile’ reportedly withdrew from the board of an exclusive Anglican school rather than sign a statement of faith endorsing the biblical view of marriage.
The Herald reported this as a problem. I suspect the Sydney Anglican Diocese may view it differently. The statement of faith had the intended effect of weeding out a board member not committed to Anglican doctrine.
The woman told the Herald: ‘It’s going to limit new principals – you’ll end up with a whole set of socially engineered principals across Anglican schools in the Sydney diocese.’
If by ‘socially engineered principals’ she means Bible-believing Christians (can there be any other kind?) then she is right. And the Sydney Anglican Diocese, along with Anglican parents who sent their children to Anglican schools because they are Anglican, will be delighted.
The woman continued: ‘Restrictive ideas about sexuality should not be tied up in the statement of faith and the fact that they are speaks to something deeply concerning about the Sydney Anglican Church right now. To me, this is not Christ-like.’
I imagine Christ, who taught that marriage was between a man and a woman, would be greatly amused to hear that He is not Christ-like.
The Sydney Anglican Diocese is not laughing.
After all, what is an Anglican school if it is no longer Anglican? What value are grand sandstone buildings if they sit on nothing but cultural quicksand?
https://spectator.com.au/2022/05/waiter-can-i-get-some-more-anglican-in-this-activism/
***********************************My other blogs: Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
*******************************
No comments:
Post a Comment