Black teachers: How to recruit them and make them stay
Lessons in higher education: What California can learn
Keeping California public university options open
Superintendents: Well-paid and walking away
The debt to degree connection
College in prison: How earning a degree can lead to a new life
Teachers working in California school districts with conservative school boards are increasingly finding themselves with a difficult decision: violate district policy and risk losing their job, or potentially disobey federal and state laws and policies and take a chance on ending up in court.
Last Monday was the first day of school at Chino Valley Unified campuses since the passage of a controversial board policy that would require teachers, counselors and administrators to notify parents if a child asks to be identified by a different gender or name, or to access a bathroom or take part in a program not aligned with the gender on their official records.
After the Chino Valley Unified decision, California Attorney General Rob Bonta warned the school district that the parental notification policy could violate the state’s anti-discrimination laws and students’ rights to privacy guaranteed under the U.S. and California constitutions, as well as federal Title IX protections and the state education code. Bonta launched a civil rights investigation into the school district last week.
A previous letter from Bonta cautioned that “outing” students to parents could result in emotional, mental and physical harm to the students and subject them to discriminatory harassment.
There is a sense of uneasiness among teachers, said Brenda Walker, president of Associated Chino Teachers. Teachers want to do what is right for their students, obey the law and keep their jobs, she said.
“We don’t understand what the implications would be if we didn’t follow through with those policies,” said Steven Frazer, a Chino Valley high school teacher, on the first day of school on Aug. 7.
Teachers could potentially be found liable or sued as a result of the policies, or they could find themselves caught up in a lawsuit’s allegations, even if they aren’t a defendant, said Laura Juran, chief counsel for the California Teachers Association.
“Teachers are liable if they don’t follow state law,” said Mark Reichel, a Sacramento-based attorney and legal expert. “On the other hand, so is the school board. You can never fire somebody for complying with state law. Retaliatory firing is a recipe for a lawsuit.”
Andrea Johnston, Chino Valley Unified director of communications, said school staff received training on the new board policy before the first day of school and that staff who adhere to district policies will be protected and supported.
“At this time, the district is not clear how educators can be held liable for upholding district policies since none are contrary to current state laws and policies,” Johnston stated in an email.
On the first day of school, teachers are generally getting acquainted with their students, reading off names and, sometimes, asking if they have a preferred nickname instead of their given name, Walker said.
“Now teachers will probably give a blanket statement that will say that, based on board policy, I’m obligated to ‘out’ you. It’s going to raise concerns,” Walker said before classes began last week.
Frazer said his students didn’t ask about the policy on the first day of school. “We were wondering if it was because of the fact students may not have felt comfortable expressing themselves.”
It was a fairly normal day, with no sign of student protest, Frazer said.
“I wouldn’t be surprised that the LGBTQ community was playing it safe,” he said. “I hope it just proves that everyone just wants to get back to school and get back to learning.”
He said he is hopeful that the civil rights investigation instigated by the state Attorney General’s Office will resolve the issue.
Teachers have told union president Walker that it isn’t uncommon for them to receive requests to change names or pronouns, adding that one teacher told her she receives 15 to 20 such requests from students each year.
Walker sent a memo to teachers last week advising them to follow the district’s new policy but to object to it if they think the policy is improper or unlawful. If a teacher feels uncomfortable talking to a parent about a child’s gender identification, they should ask one of their administrators to take on that task, the memo directed.
“Members are expected to comply with directives given by their administrators, and if a member or the association find that there has been a violation of the collective bargaining agreement, then a grievance can be filed,” Walker said.
Union officers met with district administrators last week to discuss what discipline teachers might suffer if they don’t comply with the board policy. District officials said they would use the progressive discipline procedures used for violation of all board policies, Walker said.
Progressive discipline often includes a number of steps including verbal warnings, letters of warning, meetings with supervisors and letters of reprimand before a teacher is dismissed.
In addition to their personal liability, teachers have other concerns about the policies. Some expressed concern for their students’ safety; others say it adds to their workload, and others are concerned teachers won’t work in districts with such contentious policies.
“Chino has already been struggling to attract teachers; the extreme views being imposed on the district and unfavorable publicity the board is garnering will only make it more difficult,” Walker said in a statement.
She told EdSource that teachers are worried for their LGBTQ+ students.
“Teachers don’t want to be in the middle of this,” Walker said. “They want to teach their students. They want to support all our students. I want to emphasize that — all of our students. They worked hard for their credentials and degrees, and that’s what they want to do.”
Chino Valley Unified in San Bernardino County is not the only one changing board policies. School boards across the country and in some parts of California are passing policies that ban books, restrict the curriculum and reduce protections for LGBTQ+ students. Board meetings have been raucous and divisive.
An Aug. 8 meeting at the Kern County Office of Education had to be cleared during a board discussion about whether staff in local schools should have to notify parents if students change their gender identity, according to Bakersfield.com.
Thursday night, the Murrieta Valley Unified school board voted to approve the same policy as the one adopted by Chino Valley Unified. Murrieta Valley Unified is in Riverside County.
Teachers working for Murrieta Valley Unified, interviewed before the vote, said they were uneasy about the proposed policy. Most agreed that they would rather not have to deal with this additional burden, said Chris Shoults, who teaches English at Vista Murrieta High School and is on the union’s executive board.
“Having a local policy at odds with state and federal policy creates another uncertainty in a job that is already demanding,” Shoults said.
Kimberly Chevlin, president of the Murrieta Educators Association, said she is wary of the school board’s motivation. “We are doing what is best for kids. That is what we all got into this job to do,” she said. “I do think the school board members got into this for politics.”
Chino Valley Unified also recently passed an administrative regulation that restricts the types of flags that can be displayed in a classroom.
“It’s disturbing that our classrooms are now politicized,” Walker said. “History teachers have to get approval to put a flag up if they are teaching a lesson about a country.”
A federal judge recently ruled that students’ gender identities should remain private. The judge sided with Chico Unified in Butte County, which was being sued for not informing a parent their child was transgender, the San Francisco Chronicle reported. In his July ruling, the judge said that the district’s policy not to identify students who are transgender aligns with the state’s interest in combating discrimination and harassment against students.
Guidance from the California Department of Education recommends that schools ask transgender students who, if anyone, they would like to be informed of their transgender status. The department says that rule should only be broken in rare circumstances when district officials feel there is a compelling need for parents to know the information and the student is given advance notice before parents are informed.
Last week, Associated Chino Teachers filed an unfair labor practice charge against the school district with the California Public Employment Relations Board, alleging that the district approved the new policy and regulation that restricts the types of flags that can be displayed in a classroom, without first negotiating with the union. Districts have a duty to bargain with unions if the policies change the condition of employment and can lead to discipline, according to the complaint.
If an administrative judge decides that the school district should have sought an agreement with teachers over the policy before passing it, it could be rescinded, Juran said.
Walker said she didn’t learn about the parental notification policy until she saw it on the school board meeting agenda.
District officials met with teachers about the new board policy, Chino Valley spokeswoman Johnston said. “The term ‘bargaining’ is incorrectly applied,” she said. “The process is to meet and confer with the union, which was completed.”
Murrieta Valley Unified hasn’t bargained with its union about its parental notification policy either, Chevlin said.
Murrieta Valley Unified is developing protocols, training directives and instruction to staff on how to implement the policy, said Monica Gutierrez, spokesperson for the district.
“We are in the process of working with our employee groups related to the effects on working conditions,” she said.
The local teachers unions of Chino Valley, Murrieta Valley and Temecula Valley school districts are working with the California Teachers Association to determine whether further action is needed.
Last week Temecula Valley’s teacher union joined seven students and three teachers in a suit against the district. The suit, brought by Public Counsel, a nonprofit law firm, as well as a private law firm, alleges that a resolution banning critical race theory has resulted in the censorship of teachers and taken away students’ fundamental rights to an education.
“When politicians try to push their own agendas and politicize our classrooms, educators can and will push back together in their union,” said CTA President David Goldberg in a statement to EdSource.
“California students deserve to learn a rich and inclusive curriculum in a safe learning environment, and teachers should not be penalized for providing that education or for following state law,” he said. “CTA will continue to support educators and students.”
Panelists discussed dual admission as a solution for easing the longstanding challenges in California’s transfer system.
A grassroots campaign recalled two members of the Orange Unified School District in an election that cost more than half a million dollars.
Legislation that would remove one of the last tests teachers are required to take to earn a credential in California passed the Senate Education Committee.
Part-time instructors, many who work for decades off the tenure track and at a lower pay rate, have been called “apprentices to nowhere.”
Comments (17)
Comments Policy
We welcome your comments. All comments are moderated for civility, relevance and other considerations. Click here for EdSource's Comments Policy.
Tony Volkas @ 1PLs 8 months ago8 months ago
I don’t think that the privacy of a student should be broken by the teacher. A teacher is not the right person to inform parents about such an important thing about their child. It is not his business here. But also, I think not all parents will freak the hell out after finding out that their child is a “member” of a LGBTQ community. Parents should work on their relationships with their children so they … Read More
I don’t think that the privacy of a student should be broken by the teacher. A teacher is not the right person to inform parents about such an important thing about their child. It is not his business here. But also, I think not all parents will freak the hell out after finding out that their child is a “member” of a LGBTQ community. Parents should work on their relationships with their children so they wouldn’t be afraid to “out.” Also, in my point of view, the district policy can make good here, because it seems fully appropriate and normal in these child/parents relationships.
Seth 9 months ago9 months ago
I am unsure why this is difficult to understand. Federal and state laws override a district or company policy. The union will need to step up and make it clear that unlawful policies passed by a district will be challenged and not recognized.
Teacher / Parent 9 months ago9 months ago
Teachers, no need to worry. The policy is lawful. AALRR, a top educational law firm in California, had one of their lawyers, Tony DeMarco, present why it is lawful before Chino Valley Board passed the policy. And most teachers are parents... so teachers, use the "golden rule" when dealing with parents. If this were your child, how would you want to be treated? With respect? or with suspicion … Read More
Teachers, no need to worry. The policy is lawful. AALRR, a top educational law firm in California, had one of their lawyers, Tony DeMarco, present why it is lawful before Chino Valley Board passed the policy.
And most teachers are parents… so teachers, use the “golden rule” when dealing with parents. If this were your child, how would you want to be treated? With respect? or with suspicion and deception? This is not rocket science.
Replies
Teacher 8 months ago8 months ago
As a teacher and a parent, if my child isn’t comfortable coming to me regarding their identity, that’s my issue and the relationship that I’ve cultivated with them and need to work on — period. Don’t drag the teacher into it.
Eleanor 8 months ago8 months ago
Have you heard of FERPA? Students have privacy rights in the Education Code and the California constitution. Even from their parents.
Paul Muench 8 months ago8 months ago
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). It mostly protects the rights of parents to have control over access to their children’s information. Once a person is 18 they become responsible for safeguarding their own privacy.
Lisa Disbrow 9 months ago9 months ago
FERPA: 20 USC- 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99 is a federal law designed to safeguard the confidentiality of a student’s education records. FERPA protects the right of parents to access information about their child from the school and protects against 3rd parties obtaining information about a student. FERPA doesn’t grant rights to minor students to prevent a parent or guardian from accessing or seeing the student’s records. AB1266, Education Code 221.5 mandates only that students … Read More
FERPA: 20 USC- 1232g; 34 CFR Part 99 is a federal law designed to safeguard the confidentiality of a student’s education records. FERPA protects the right of parents to access information about their child from the school and protects against 3rd parties obtaining information about a student. FERPA doesn’t grant rights to minor students to prevent a parent or guardian from accessing or seeing the student’s records.
AB1266, Education Code 221.5 mandates only that students be allowed to participate in sex-segregated school programs and activities, based on their gender identity. It says nothing about concealing a student’s gender identity from parents. AB1266 doesn’t address a student’s records nor does it require concealment from parents of a student’s use of bathrooms, other facilities or the sex marked on their official records.
AB1266 does not require a school to deceive parent about the sports team their student participated in.
Any such interpretation expand AB1266 beyond its plain language.
AB 1266 has never authorized concealing information from parents. The limited privacy rights extend only between the minor and his/her doctor or attorney, not to public school teachers, principals, or administrative personnel, except as provided through FERPA.
Most importantly these rights do not apply to the communications to parents of vital information about their child. CA Education Code 51100 b states, “ Research has shown conclusively that early and sustained family involvement at home and at school in the education of children results… in improved pupil achievement.“
John Paul 9 months ago9 months ago
Why is the assumption that parents WILL freak out and harm their child for being LGBTQ+? Are we really that far off the rails? Does anyone reading this WANT to/think you would be better off being eliminated from important details of your child's life? Does it stop at sexuality? Could some detail of your child's life be next, and you are left in the dark? The district policy seems completely normal and appropriate to parent/child relationships. … Read More
Why is the assumption that parents WILL freak out and harm their child for being LGBTQ+? Are we really that far off the rails? Does anyone reading this WANT to/think you would be better off being eliminated from important details of your child’s life? Does it stop at sexuality? Could some detail of your child’s life be next, and you are left in the dark?
The district policy seems completely normal and appropriate to parent/child relationships. If a parent harms the child that is on the parents, and they will pay the consequences in this life and the next. If educators who are not the child’s parents cut parents out of the equation altogether, eliminating a parent’s ability to parent, to learn and grow with their child, they will fare far worse.
Brenda Walker’s comment “Now teachers will probably give a blanket statement that will say that, based on board policy, I’m obligated to ‘out’ you.” is insane. Any teacher who would make a statement remotely close to that should not be in a classroom. Taking what is policy and turning it into a statement like that is extremism, caring about the child who is literally your own DNA is not. Let parents be parents and teachers be teachers.
Replies
Todd Maddison 9 months ago9 months ago
Exactly right.
Yes, the definition of extremism is being turned on its head, because it’s easier to throw out a label with an immediate negative connotation than it is to think about the “other sides” case.
https://californiaglobe.com/articles/who-are-the-real-extremists-in-our-school-board-struggles/
Timothy Eric Morgan 9 months ago9 months ago
As to transgender issues being communicated to parents, teachers might want to offer to present the information to the District administration and take the position that such communication is outside the scope of their employment. Let the District take on the liability. (Personal thoughts only.)
JACK OWENS 9 months ago9 months ago
Let's stop referring to these boards as "conservative" and call them what they are - "radicalized right". There are many who consider themselves conservative or conservative leaning who would NEVER consider implementing such policies in any school district. Time to call out what is in fact going on - a concerted effort of right wing political operatives to cause disruption at the local level. The "divide and conquer" mentality has no place at the … Read More
Let’s stop referring to these boards as “conservative” and call them what they are – “radicalized right”. There are many who consider themselves conservative or conservative leaning who would NEVER consider implementing such policies in any school district. Time to call out what is in fact going on – a concerted effort of right wing political operatives to cause disruption at the local level. The “divide and conquer” mentality has no place at the local school board level. And no true conservative would ever take action to hold students and their families hostage in a culture war such as we are seeing placed into action.
Replies
Todd Maddison 9 months ago9 months ago
Who is radicalized here? On one side we have people advocating we ignore decades of history where schools informed parents when they observed a child dealing with mental struggles, on the other we have parents advocating they continue to be notified when such things happen.
But yet those who simply want to continue with historical precedent are “radicalized”?
Seems an Orwellian use of language if I ever saw one….
Todd Maddison 9 months ago9 months ago
… and when it comes to “holding kids hostage”, no one can hold a candle to teachers and their unions on that.
They routinely hold our kids hostage to obtain more money for their personal bank accounts, which is something you would think most would consider reprehensible.
Eleanor 9 months ago9 months ago
These policies will not stand in California. Legislation will be passed forcing conservative school boards to stop using students as pawns in their political game. And SCOTUS will decline to hear it. Conservatives need a wake-up call: your children are not your property.
Replies
Greg L 9 months ago9 months ago
Tyrants need to be on alert: Someone else’s children certainly are not YOUR property, and you have no basis for claiming a parent is not fullyr esponsible for their children and deserves to advised of ANY physical or mental issues. Anything else is akin to kidnapping and conspiracy to conceal, and just plan evil
Jack Owens 9 months ago9 months ago
A word of caution – referring to children as “property” implies a mindset I would hope any adult working with children would find unacceptable. Children are NOT property – and possibly when we can all come to agreement about that, we can then work to get them off the battlefields of the culture war being waged in some districts.
Paul Muench 9 months ago9 months ago
There are so many ways for a parent to find out about a child. Teachers, the district, and the state should be careful not to give a student false expectations of privacy.