by Ed Steele | Sep 19, 2024 | Opinion
By Sharon Benson and Ed Steele |
In its heyday, Mesa Public Schools (MPS) was the district to attend; the envy of the East Valley. From academics to athletics, from artistic endeavors to award-winning music programs, Mesa provided excellent programming from kindergarten to graduation. So much so, that parents would often bring their own children back to Mesa Schools, often to the same school they attended as children.
In 2011, MPS students were achieving at levels in keeping with the stellar reputation that Mesa had always experienced. But between 2014 and 2015 achievement in MPS, as well as across the state, plummeted, and MPS hasn’t been able to break the 50% achievement rate since that time. There were a few ‘events’ that occurred during this time period, only one in which your school board would have had direct input; unless they were to be extremely courageous and decide to refuse federal education dollars.
The state assessment test switched from AIMS to AZMerit, there was a full implementation of Common Core across the state, and districts began to go down the road of developing a ‘Portrait of a Graduate’. As these took hold, publicly funded schools began to face steep declines in enrollment. MPS, for example, lost a total of 8,979 students as of the 2021/22 school year according to data located here. Consider that our 15-day student count for the school year 2024/25, is 54,339, a loss of 20,610 students since the 2011/12 school year. These trends are not exclusive to MPS, and this is where your vote for school board matters.
I have a friend who has said repeatedly that if an organization, which begins with conservative values, does not hold fast to those values, the organization will ultimately become liberal. The core conservative value which directed education in MPS, as well as many other districts across the state, was focused on developing a solid academic foundation upon which students could build. This value was supported by a few other core values such as individual responsibility, discipline, working hard, perseverance, and merit. These values have been eroding over time, often due to a lack of leadership from a district’s governing board.
The trend in education in Arizona, which has been in works since at least 2014, is the Portrait of a Graduate. This has become the framework upon which other elements have been built into our classrooms such as culturally relevant teaching and social emotional learning (SEL); here is just one example of new ‘science’ curriculum adopted by MPS last spring.
When you really take a look at the Portrait of a Graduate in most, if not all districts which have adopted this framework, there is no indication that we want our graduates to be academically sound in the basics needed in order to participate in society. School boards voted to adopt this framework to develop their strategic plan, and can vote to redirect the district using a different framework; one in which academics and solid, critical thinking is the foundation.
Curriculum adoption is another area in which your school board members are of critical importance. Many curriculum options available today are infused with elements incorporating ideas which are contrary to conservative American values. Rather than using quality literature, which incorporate timeless values, stories are selected that allow students to “see themselves” in the literature. Often the material brings in concepts regarding racism, “white privilege,” oppressed/oppressor, sex, sexuality, sexual orientation, or gender confusion issues. Many examples straddle the edge of pornography and reading the text or displaying the pictures would be deemed offensive and would not be allowed at a school board meeting. Forcing these themes and concepts upon children results in confusion and anxiety. This is clearly evident as we look at the “mental health crisis” within students across Arizona. A strong conservative school board is able to push back against district leadership, and remove that which is not beneficial for our students’ learning.
Policy development is another critical piece in the quality running of a school district over which your school board members have control. Drafting clear, quality policy, and procedures which are not contrary to federal or state law is critical to improving the education students are receiving as they attend our public schools. This is a statutory mandate for school board members, and should not ever be relegated to hired district leadership.
In MPS, there has been much controversy the last few years regarding this very issue as the community became aware of Transgender Guidelines, and the Checklist associated with the guidelines. Notice, these are guidelines, not policy; no MPS Governing Board has developed or voted on policy regarding gender dysphoria, yet the district has had guidelines in place since 2015. This fact went under the radar for several years, and only became visible because of the social contagion surrounding this topic since 2020. As a result of these guidelines, which in our humble opinion, violate ARS 1-602, and the First Amendment, teachers feel free to introduce concepts of sex and sexuality with minor students, planting seeds of confusion within young minds, which is not acceptable. Voting for a school board which will possess members who uphold parental rights, and the rights of all students will be the only way to reverse this trend, and protect all our students.
Finally, the school board is responsible for hiring the Superintendent, whose responsibility it is on a daily basis, to ensure the will of the elected board members is enacted with fidelity. This is critical, as the elected board members who represent the will of their voters, can do all things right and in alignment with their community, but if the district leadership undermines that, the degradation of our educational system continues. The Board must hire an ethical person of integrity who aligns with the values of the community, as represented by the elected members of the board.
Your vote for school board members may be the most important vote you cast this election season. Being a non-partisan race, it is important to engage with those people who are running and to investigate and research the candidates, so that you are casting an informed vote that represents your values. The future of public education, which still educates a majority of American children, depends upon it.
Sharon Benson and Ed Steele are candidates for Mesa Public School Board.
by Tamra Farah | Aug 22, 2024 | Opinion
By Tamra Farah |
The author of this opinion piece would like to clarify that the title refers to individuals like Aaron Dunton and does not apply to any other individuals named in this article. In addition, the reference to sexually grooming kids concerns encouraging LGBTQIA gender identity considerations. Further, the mention of sexualizing kids refers specifically to encouraging kids to access the specific library books indicated and not to anything else.
Concerns over sexual grooming in Arizona schools and inappropriate educational agendas have intensified. The use of grooming materials and activities by teachers, the Arizona Education Association (AEA) agenda, and the damning Department of Education’s Enforcement Action report on sexual misconduct in schools are telling.
Not in Our Schools recently outlined concerns over reported misconduct and the promotion of LGBTQ and social justice agendas in Arizona schools. There are also concerns about the growing influence of LGBTQ and social justice agendas in Mesa Public Schools (MPS) through the actions of teachers and organizations like GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network).
Some Mesa teachers reportedly use their roles to promote LGBTQ-related content and activities in the face of new district policies restricting teacher involvement in non-academic clubs. Activities cited by Not in Our Schools also reveal that Mrs. Tami Staas engages in “grooming” students for sexual behaviors and gender transitioning without parental knowledge, using platforms like Synergy to hide information from parents. Mrs. Staas is said to introduce pronouns and LGBTQ+ symbols in her classroom, causing concern among parents.
Not in Our Schools also reports that the AEA prioritizes social agendas over academic achievement and influences school board elections to further these goals. Allegations are made about the AEA’s involvement in supporting abortion access and pushing for laws that promote gender transitioning in schools. Parents must be cautious about the school system and the influence of organizations like the AEA, and should thoroughly research candidates before voting in the upcoming school board elections.
Another concern involves the social-emotional learning (SEL) framework, which is used to push LGBTQ agendas. Programs like “Everybody Matters” indoctrinate students into LGBTQ lifestyles, further eroding parents’ influence in the education system. Additionally, the involvement of organizations like GLSEN and the Arizona School Board Association (ASBA) promotes LGBTQ content and obscures it from parents. Finally, the Mesa Public Schools Governing Board has been called out for supporting programs that weaken family structures and increase LGBTQ influence in schools.
Not only are teachers identified as using sexualizing materials in school, but just a few years ago a flurry of news called out Aaron Dunton, a former teacher at Higley High School in Gilbert, Arizona, who was arrested after a months-long investigation revealed his alleged inappropriate relationship with a 14-year-old student. Dunton resigned after the allegations surfaced, having taught at the school since July 2021. During the investigation, another victim accused Dunton of inappropriate incidents in 2019 when he was a teacher at Power Ranch Elementary. The second victim was 11 years old at the time. Dunton was facing multiple charges, including aggravated assault, witness tampering, and contributing to delinquency and dependency, until the Maricopa County District Attorney dropped the charges. Speculation is that there was no law to convict Dunton at the time. Now, there is hope that the anti-grooming law will be implemented soon.
Dunton is just one teacher among many seeking to mistreat students sexually. The Arizona Department of Education 2023 Enforcement Action Report indicates an 184% increase in sexual teacher discipline-related cases from 2012 to 2023. Those are cases that were recognized and resulted in the discipline of perpetrators. Imagine how many more teachers, coaches, and other school officials may go unrecognized as sexual predators of students.
Some consider HB2310, referred to as the Child Enticement Bill or the anti-grooming bill introduced by Representative Travis Grantham, as a tool to prosecute sexual predators like Dunton. HB2310, which will go into effect next month, strengthens protections for children against enticement and grooming. Going into effect next month, the bill makes it a fourth or fifth-degree felony to intentionally lure, solicit, or entice a minor into committing illegal sexual acts or actions that could lead to sexual exploitation or abuse. It also includes provisions for offenses committed through electronic communications. The legislation increases penalties for these crimes, providing better legal protection for children in Arizona.
Beyond respect for this prosecutorial law, the governing boards in Arizona school districts and the Arizona Department of Education are responsible for ensuring guardrails and accountability in schools to protect children. But it doesn’t stop there. Parents are vital in guiding their children to make safe and responsible decisions at school and online. Parents can encourage their children to protect themselves and others, understand harmful behaviors, and report incidents to parents and school officials immediately.
Here are suggested steps parents can advise their kids to take at school:
1. Understand Consent and Boundaries: Encourage your child to be aware of the power they have not to consent and the legal consequences of inappropriate sexual conduct by an adult. Ensure your kids understand that boundaries matter in physical and digital communication. Reinforce this by having regular conversations about consent and why respecting their personal space and boundaries is essential.
2. Be Mindful of Online Behavior: Advise your child to think critically about how they interact online, particularly with social media or text messaging. Teach them never to share personal or explicit content with others and to be cautious when interacting with people they do not know well. They should also understand that even consensual acts, such as sharing inappropriate images, can have severe legal consequences. Parents can support this by discussing the real risks of digital communication and the importance of privacy.
3. Report Suspicious Behavior: Make sure your child knows that if they encounter inappropriate behavior, such as an adult or peer asking them to send inappropriate images or engage in risky sexual acts, they should report it immediately to a trusted adult at school, such as a counselor or teacher, or use an anonymous reporting tool if available. Reinforce that reporting these incidents is crucial for their safety and protecting others from potential harm.
4. Stay Informed About Friendships and Relationships: Parents should encourage their children to surround themselves with friends who respect boundaries and engage in safe, responsible behavior. Advise them to avoid risky situations or peer pressure and to feel confident in saying “no” to uncomfortable requests, whether in person or online. By fostering open communication with your child, you can help them navigate complex social situations and ensure they understand their rights and responsibilities in relationships.
5. Learn About the Law: Encourage your child to become familiar with the legal consequences outlined in the amended Arizona statutes, particularly regarding age differences in relationships and digital safety. Understanding the law can empower them to make responsible choices. Parents can help by discussing the specific legal consequences of child enticement, age proximity laws, and what qualifies as inappropriate behavior.
6. Practice Digital Safety: Advise your child never to share personal passwords, account details, or private information online. Reinforce that they should never engage with unknown people online, especially if the conversation turns inappropriate or uncomfortable.
By teaching children about consent, online safety, reporting suspicious behavior, and advocating for themselves, parents can help them align their actions with appropriate behavior and relationships and create a secure school environment that is in accordance with Arizona’s laws to protect minors.
Tamra Farah has twenty years of experience in public policy and politics, focusing on protecting individual liberty and promoting limited government. She has worked at the senior director and advisor level for Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, Moms for America, and pregnancy centers. Tamra currently directs SMART Families Network at Arizona Women of Action.
by Mike Bengert | May 30, 2024 | Opinion
By Mike Bengert |
In a recent opinion piece, Scottsdale Unified School District (SUSD) Superintendent Scott Menzel highlights what he considers a long list of accomplishments. According to Superintendent Menzel, the “2023-2024 school year has been marked by significant progress and achievements as we continue to implement initiatives aligned with our Strategic Plan to improve academic achievement and outcomes and prepare students for real-world opportunities in an ever-evolving landscape.”
Let’s delve into the statistics.
Nearly 1,800 seniors graduated from SUSD on May 23rd. During the May 14th Governing Board meeting, 11 seniors were recognized for their academic excellence. In his column, Dr. Menzel highlighted that 51 graduates had received math and science diplomas. While these acknowledged students have rightfully earned praise for their hard work and accomplishments, including receiving various scholarships, what about the remaining 1,800 graduates? How have they fared after receiving a purportedly “world-class, future-focused” education from SUSD?
According to the Arizona Department of Education’s comprehensive school report card system, the overall performance isn’t encouraging. In 2023, when these graduating seniors were juniors, their proficiency levels were assessed, yielding the following results:
- Only 63% demonstrated proficiency in English Language Arts (ELA), leaving 37% (or 666) lacking proficiency.
- Math proficiency was even lower at 55%, indicating that 45% (or 810) were not proficient.
- Science proficiency was the lowest, with a mere 25% demonstrating proficiency, leaving 75% (or 1,350) lacking in this area.
On average, only 48% (or 858 students) of the 1,800 graduates were proficient across all three academic subjects.
Given these outcomes, it seems apt to reconsider the SUSD slogan “Because kids,” as it appears the district may not adequately prioritize the needs of all students. Perhaps it should be restated as “Because some kids.” A school district’s quality should be judged by how well it supports its lowest-performing students.
Yet, despite this concerning academic record, three outgoing members of the current governing board decided, without public input or feedback from district stakeholders, to extend Superintendent Menzel’s contract by two years and grant him a 4% raise.
Dr. Menzel’s emphasis on using class time for destructive “Social Emotional Learning,” “Diversity, Equity & Inclusion,” and gender identity at the expense of teaching academics appears to be falling short for SUSD students, parents, and taxpayers. It’s perhaps unsurprising that parents are increasingly withdrawing their children from SUSD, and staff turnover, including principals, is at an all-time high.
If you share my frustration with the Governing Board’s apparent rubber-stamping of Dr. Menzel’s failing agenda and believe our children deserve better, I urge you to vote for change this November.
Mike Bengert is a husband, father, grandfather, and Scottsdale resident advocating for quality education in SUSD for over 30 years.
by Tamra Farah | May 25, 2024 | Opinion
By Tamra Farah |
Progressive educators have dressed up nonacademic social training in different outfits for decades. Still, the goal remains: to use public education to dictate the next generation’s norms and behaviors. This may seem innocent enough, but it’s not.
Early 20th-century education reformers like Edward Thorndike of Columbia Teachers College and John Dewey, the father of American progressive education, set out to refashion public education to diminish individuality and family influence in children. They aimed to replace these influences with a collectivist mindset prepared for the workforce. By doing so, they could capture the minds and hearts of children in the classroom and substitute “the state for the home and faith.”
Their socialist behaviorist model was effectively the first version of what we now know as social-emotional learning (SEL), which was most recently repackaged as the Whole Child educational framework.
But I’m getting ahead of myself.
In the 1960s, Dr. James Comer of the Yale School of Medicine’s Child Study Center set out to prove the effectiveness of behavior versus academic focus for student success. He tested his theory in 650 low-income schools, admitting thirty years later that it was a failure. Still, his method served as the foundation for today’s SEL in schools.
In the 1980s, Psychology Professor Roger Weissberg aimed to help students “develop positive self-concepts” and hone skills in “self-monitoring” and “values such as personal responsibility and respect for self and others.” These seem like loaded phrases subject to interpretation, but his approach was acceptable enough to keep the behaviorist model train running on its tracks.
By the 1990s, National Center for Education and the Economy (NCEE) president Marc Tucker helped pass the Goals 2000 Educate America Act during the Clinton administration, echoing Thorndike’s goals to advance a socialist workforce development mindset in K-12 education. This was followed by the controversial Outcomes Based Education (OBE) model, which debuted when my kids were school age.
Thankfully, parental backlash in the 1990s squashed OBE, yet it morphed and reappeared through CASEL, the Collaborative to Advance Social and Emotional Learning. CASEL took time to stake its claim by hosting conferences and sponsoring research, presumably to build a support base. CASEL’s champion, Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond of Stanford Graduate School of Education, was a known progressive who advocated for educational equity. The push for so-called equity, versus the much-respected American concept of equal opportunity, hit schools long before COVID.
CASEL’s goals for students include providing “the process through which children and adults understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships, and make responsible decisions.” This sounds innocuous until you realize their specific definitions for each element may be a far cry from what you might think.
For example, CASEL definitively overplays the role of schools in a child’s life when it asserts that “schools have an important role to play in raising healthy children by fostering not only their cognitive development but also their social and emotional development.” (Emphasis is mine.) This is a tremendous assumption of power over your children in the classroom and is tantamount to brainwashing, not promoting basic good behavior.
CASEL defends its emphasis on social and emotional learning via research that leaves something to be desired. First, there are no recent U.S.-based studies; instead, they cite a 2006 study that asked a national sample of 148,189 sixth through twelfth-grade students if they thought they had social competencies such as empathy, decision-making, and conflict-resolution skills. The results? Only 29% indicated that their school provided a caring, encouraging environment. And how accurate are the results when parents were not consulted on the answers, given the relative immaturity of kids to answer these questions competently?
The latest version of SEL, dubbed Whole Child, stems from The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. It includes expansive elements in its list of critical areas for schools to deliver to students: mental health, cognitive development, social-emotional development, identity development, academic development, and physical health. This resembles a giant leap toward Thorndike and Dewey’s early progressive education agenda.
According to research from the Massachusetts-based think tank Pioneer, Thorndike equated “learning with training” and believed in learning by conditioning. Like Pavlov’s dogs, children could be conditioned to exhibit the desired behaviors by a system of positive or negative consequences linked to actions. John Dewey, the dean of American progressive education, was equally enthusiastic about manipulating the psychological aspects of learning to manipulate the child.
Remember, Dewey favored the “educational potential of social behaviorism used in totalitarian societies” since those societies “required a collective and cooperative mentality.”
Pioneer’s conclusion? “Carried to its logical conclusion, SEL can replace parental influence with the ultimate nanny state.” Progressives have dressed up the nonacademic paradigm of social-emotional style learning in different outfits for decades. They have planned to substitute “the state for the home and faith” and replace individual liberty with a collectivist mindset readied for the “workforce.”
Social Emotional Learning, in its “transformative” form, promotes “justice-oriented civic engagement” to make your kids into activists or “social justice warriors.” Black Lives Matter has often invited schools over the last few years to engage in that process.
A hallmark of SEL’s manipulative approach is the use of student surveys. The surveys are sent to kids’ email inboxes, often asking questions of students that require parental consent according to federal law. SEL puts teachers in a mindset to pry into the lives of students and families. Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita said social and emotional learning programs shift “the role of teachers from educators to therapists.”
SEL is also big business. According to Education Week, nationwide sales of social and emotional learning materials shot up 45% in a year and a half to $765 million in 2021. Soon after, Attorney General Merrick Garland asked the FBI to investigate parents protesting social and emotional learning issues at SB meetings. It just so happens that Garland’s son-in-law co-founded Panorama Education, a company raking in millions selling social and emotional learning materials to school districts.
Don’t be fooled by social-emotional learning as your child’s education framework. It is not founded on academics and pushes your kids toward an activist mindset that may not align with your family’s values. The Scottsdale Unified School District’s governing board recently approved a new social-emotional learning curriculum called Second Step. For help discovering SEL’s impact on your kids at school, contact education@azwomenofaction.com for information and steps you can take.
Tamra Farah has a twenty-year career in public policy and politics. Her role as director and senior advisor at Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, and Arizona Women of Action and her expertise in PR and communications demonstrate her ability to create engagement and transformation in her efforts. Tamra has appeared on Fox News, America’s Voice, Newsmax, and Victory Channel and quoted in major publications like The New York Times and Washington Post.
by Elizabeth Troutman | Mar 2, 2024 | Education, News
By Elizabeth Troutman |
More than 900 Arizona schools declined to answer if they teach Critical Race Theory.
State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne released figures showing that 900 schools would not answer five academic focus questions related to matters such as ensuring schools do not inappropriately expose students to explicit content and avoiding instruction that promotes racial division such as Critical Race Theory.
Of Arizona’s 2,467 district and charter schools, as of Feb. 29, 1,565 have affirmed that they are following these guidelines, but 902 have not.
Other questions attempt to ensure that any sexual content is developmentally appropriate, administrators fully support teacher discipline, and schools avoid excessive distractions such as Social Emotional Learning.
Social Emotional Learning claims to equip children with the ability to manage emotions, feel empathy for others, and maintain positive relationships, but it integrates Critical Race Theory in the education system.
“It is scandalous to see that more than 900 schools have declined to be transparent with parents who entrust their children to be educated by these schools,” Horne said. “Parents have the right to be fully informed about what their neighborhood schools value and how instructional time is used.”
The media claims public schools don’t teach CRT, Horne said. The superintendent said this is false, as the Balsz Elementary District on the east side of Phoenix explicitly and publicly teaches CRT.
“The fact that more than 900 districts and charter schools did not answer the question proves that the problem is widespread and distractions from academics are contributing to low test scores,” he said.
“Every instructional minute is precious, and every minute should be devoted to academics, not unnecessary distractions, lessons that divide people by race, or exposing students to subject matter that is not developmentally appropriate,” Horne continued.
The schools that declined to answer the questions will have that information on their school report card provided on the department’s website. If schools eventually choose to respond, their report card will be updated with that information.
Early next week, the department will finish compiling and releasing information on whether schools are following state law that requires instruction on the Holocaust and other genocides.
“Schools have a responsibility to teach to the state standards and graduating students who are academically proficient,” Horne said. “This is simple common sense and easily achievable by every school in the state.”
Elizabeth Troutman is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send her news tips using this link.
