Posted on 02/03/2005 5:53:21 PM PST by Ender Wiggin
Recently, a group of Hudson High School students and parents have charged that some teachers at HHHS, specifically in the Social Studies department, are teaching with a liberal bias and stifling the conservative students' opinions. In addition, these students have criticized the administration for violating their commitment to allow students their First Amendment rights.
This issue began with the creation of a Conservative Club at Hudson High School. The co-presidents of the new club, Chris Bowler and James Mellilo, hung posters around the school associating themselves with the High School Conservative Clubs of America (HSCCA), and included the Web site, www.hscca.orgon the posters.
School officials promptly removed the posters from the walls after discovering what they saw as violent material on the site. Bowler and others then began to speak out against the teachers and school administration.
Both Bowler and the Metrowest Daily News editor charge that teachers used the Web site as a means to tear down the posters because, supposedly, the teachers are trying to suppress the conservative viewpoint.
In an interview with Metrowest Daily News reporter Carolyn Kessel Stewart, Bowler is quoted as saying "I believe the teachers used (the Web site) as a red herring to tear down our posters."
Seemingly agreeing with Bowler, Editor Richard Lodge on the Opinion page of the MetroWest Daily News stated in his Dec. 12 commentary titled Hudson High Conservatives: "Educators (should not) be picking through political Web sites for statements they find offensive. That gives the impression that they are looking for reasons to stop the conservative students from meeting."
In reality, it was not only teachers who expressed concern over the Web site and its content. The principal of Hudson High, John Stapelfeld, noted that although some teachers approached him about the Web site, he received most of the complaints from concerned parents and other community members.
"Some publicity that got to the press didn't reflect the fact that what is my concern is the violence associated with the Web site that the Conservative Club chose to advertise," said Stapelfeld.
He also feels that the "Conservative Club does have a right to exist."
Hudson High School teachers were first attacked in a Dec. 9 letter to the HSCCA Web site written by Chris Bowler. Bowler made claims that his Advanced Placement American Studies class "turned out to be largely anti-American studies."
Bowler is also said to oppose a poster hung in the classroom of Social Studies teacher Beth Ferns. The poster is filled with quotes that negatively portray President George W. Bush. Ferns encourages her students to bring in other political posters and says that the poster is "basically to spark discussion."
Lodge wrote in his editorial that "if she really wanted to encourage free debate and make every student feel welcome to participate, she'd hang up a pro-Bush poster on her own instead of waiting for a gusty student to force the issue."
An important point that has not been raised in the letters and editorials in the MetroWest Daily News is that not all students agree with Bowler and the Conservative Club's view of teachers.
After accusations were made by Bowler in his letter to the HSCCA that teachers are biased because they are showing "Fahrenheit 9/11" to their classes, junior Roseanne LeBlanc, who took the Social Justice class at Hudson High, commented that she did not feel that her teacher, Caitlin Murphy, was biased. LeBlanc pointed out that they did not only watch "Fahrenheit 9/11" in Murphy's class, but also viewed a pro-Bush film called "Faith in the White House."
During a discussion in an American Studies class, Ashley Fitzpatrick, also a junior at Hudson High, said "that just because you feel discomfort doesn't mean your opinion is being threatened."
Her statement came after teacher Katy Field explained that "as social studies teachers, part of our job is to question students' ideas in order to force them to support their claims with evidence."
Field went on to say that some students may have misinterpreted these questions as threats to their opinions, and that students may have misconstrued the teachers' efforts to encourage critical thinking as attempts to suppress the students' ideas.
These Conservative students are raising serious questions over the professionalism of teachers without any real evidence to support that teachers are biased in their classroom. Although teachers may be openly liberal, that does not mean that they will judge students based on their opinions or that they will promote a liberal agenda in their classroom.
It's unfortunate that the only views expressed recently in the media are those of a small group of people. This is especially troubling considering that many students do not agree with the accusations this group has made against the teachers.
While the First Amendment must be protected, it's disappointing that it is being used by a minority group to bring into question the professionalism of Hudson High's teachers.
School board defies court ruling: Hudson committee's lawyer says superintendent evaluation is private matter
By Carolyn Kessel Stewart / News Staff Writer
Thursday, February 10, 2005
HUDSON -- To keep its superintendent's annual evaluation secret, the School Committee is amassing legal opinions it believes will show the schools' top employee evaluation is a private matter.
The School Committee decided Tuesday night not to make public minutes of a meeting during which Sheldon Berman's review was addressed.
Also kept under wraps are the reviews written by individual School Committee members, even though the records, which were requested by the Daily News, have been deemed public by the Middlesex District Attorney's office.
Richard K. Lodge, editor-in-chief of the MetroWest Daily News, said he was surprised by the School Committee's decision to ask the district attorney's office to look at the matter again.
"It seems the assistant district attorney's opinion was straightforward and what we believe is a correct interpretation of the law. We're disappointed the School Committee plans to delay the process, but we respect their right to appeal to District Attorney Martha Coakley," Lodge said.
The School Committee's lawyer, Bob Fraser of Stoneman, Chandler & Miller, advised the School Committee it would not be violating the Open Meeting Law or the Public Records Law by not handing over records.
Ultimately, the battle could be decided in court, because there is so little legal precedent for this situation, Fraser wrote in his opinion.
This is not the first time someone wanted to know what a School Committee thinks of its superintendent, said Michael J. Long, lawyer for the Massachusetts Association of School Superintendents.
"The issue comes up a couple of times a year, typically when either a School Committee person or a political person chooses for whatever reason to expose or disclose the evaluation, or local media wants to pursue the point," Long said.
The MASS has also filed legislation that would allow a School Committee to conduct a superintendent's evaluation in closed session in certain circumstances.
Berman asked Long, who is retained by MASS, to look at his case. The town pays Berman's membership dues to MASS.
Fraser is hired by the town as legal counsel for the School Committee.
Both Long and Fraser cited a 2000 lawsuit to support keeping Berman's review private.
Under Wakefield Teachers' Association vs. School Committee of Wakefield, personnel records are defined as "employment applications, employee work evaluations, disciplinary documentation and promotion demotion or termination information pertaining to a particular employee." And personnel records are private.
"The language in the Wakefield case is crystal clear and beyond dispute," Long said. "I find it hard to understand how the clarity of those words evades the DA's office."
But Assistant District Attorney Sheryl Grant wrote in her opinion letter that because superintendents are hired in a public process and are reviewed by a governmental body, meetings during which their review is discussed must be open to the public, and the records from those meetings must also be public.
Fraser said, however, that because there was no deliberation, no "meeting" took place.
Grant wrongly assumed, he said, that School Committee members discussed Berman's evaluation. In fact, they only handed in their individual evaluations to then-Chairwoman Sheila Ansley, Fraser told the committee.
Even if they had had a discussion, Fraser wrote, that would still fall under the exemption of discussing negotiation strategy.
"It is hard to imagine a School Committee adequately representing the best interests of a town in setting contractual strategy with a current superintendent without discussing in some manner the performance of that superintendent," he wrote. Those records, in his opinion, may remain secret as long as the superintendent or any non-union employee is bargaining with the School Committee.
Now you know why Chris Bowler hasn't been asking the school board for help?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.