Utah Teachers Unions Versus Concerned Parents
– By Howard Sierer –
An arrogant published letter from a Southern Utah teacher says it all: “Education professionals are the most qualified people to choose curriculum…[Parental] participation in the selection of curriculum is not crucial.”
The letter’s author, a local high school teacher, provides examples intended to support his contention that parents are not qualified to make curriculum recommendations. His examples include teaching those with learning disabilities, those with below-grade reading skills, non-English speakers, and those without motivation.
I readily agree that he and his fellow teachers are experts in how to teach in these difficult situations. But none of his examples addresses what to teach.
Since parents are responsible for raising children, parents should be given an opportunity to review and make recommendations on school curricula before they are finalized. This process can produce results that meet both educational requirements and parental values. Yet this common-sense approach to parental involvement isn’t applied in most school districts.
Parents across the country have awakened after the fact to the “challenging topics” being taught in their children’s schools and in far too many cases, they don’t like it. While there is little evidence here in Utah, some public schools elsewhere have been teaching critical race theory and the 1619 Project as part of their established curricula. California has gone so far as to introduce “social justice math” into its public-school curriculum.
These “challenging topics” have been introduced by a small but strident and vocal minority of political ideologues with the support of some public-school teachers and officials. But in very few places in the country do they represent the views of a majority of local parents and community members.
Virginia’s highly-publicized 2021 gubernatorial contest turned decisively against former governor Terry McAuliffe when he said during a televised debate, “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach.” McAuliffe buried his election chances even further in that same debate when he argued that parents should have no say in choosing books used to teach their children.
McAuliffe was unflinchingly supported by the two national teachers’ unions, the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers, both of whom argue, like our local high school teacher, that teachers know best while only allowing parents to see what is being taught after curricula have been established.
The unions’ position is illustrated here in Utah by their knee-jerk opposition to parental-involvement legislation being considered by Utah’s legislature this year.
SB114 would require involving parents on the front-end of the curriculum selection process and would allow them to make recommendations to the local school board. An educator-prepared proposed curriculum would be made available online for 30 days for public review before a required public meeting. After hearing public input, the board could make modifications as it saw fit and adopt the resulting curriculum.
Congress, state legislatures, and city councils hold public hearings and invite comments on actions they are considering before voting on them. Why should school boards choose curricula behind closed doors without public comment? Allowing parents to see what’s been adopted after the fact doesn’t constitute parental involvement.
Do we have such a need here in Utah? Sadly, yes. For example, parents in the Davis School District were allowed to see the district’s new anti-bias curriculum only after it was put in place. The Davis school board and staff exemplified the “teacher knows best” mindset that has angered parents across the country.
SB114 is supported by Utah Parents United which notes that the bill’s requirements apply only to school boards and do not place any additional workload on teachers.
Nonetheless, the president of the Utah chapter of the AFT opposes SB114 saying, “Teachers are done being the center of political issues.” I argue that teachers’ unions have placed themselves and their teacher-members in the center of political issues by supporting politically-motivated curricula in districts around the country, taking highly-partisan positions on contentious non-education political issues, and contributing almost exclusively to leftwing political campaigns.
The Utah Association of Public Charter Schools – highly attuned to parents since parents choose whether or not to send their children to a charter school – supports the bill saying, “Let’s engage each other in a conversation, make a decision in a very public process and people will decide whether they like the decision that’s made and they can act accordingly.” I couldn’t agree more.
As the former chairman of the Superintendent’s Advisory Committee in a school district with over 50,000 students, I speak with experience when stressing the importance of parental involvement in children’s education. I support SB114 and urge you to do the same.
Viewpoints and perspectives expressed throughout The Independent are those of the individual contributors. They do not necessarily reflect those held by the staff of The Independent or our advertising sponsors. Your comments, rebuttals, and contributions are welcome in accordance with our Terms of Service. Please be respectful and abide by our Community Rules. If you have privacy concerns you can view our Privacy Policy here. Thank you!
Click here to submit an article, guest opinion piece, or a Letter to the Editor
