Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools (CMS) Policy Watch

Proposed Policy: Anti-bullying Policy
Scheduled School Board Vote and Public Hearing: March 11, 2008 (First reading was Feb. 12)
Recommended by: Equity Committee and Policy Committee

CMS parents, the Board of Education and CMS Administration almost certainly agree that, “Bullying is bad and shouldn’t be tolerated at CMS.”  So what is the big controversy about having an anti-bullying policy? . . . . The complicated wording of the proposed policy dilutes, detracts from, and will likely cast a cloud over the very important effort to eliminate bullying.  Please ask the CMS Board of Education to simplify the current policy, still allowing Dr. Peter Gorman to lead CMS to a bully-free environment.

Please call and/or email your CMS Board representative right away! (Email and phone numbers below).

• NOTE: The CMS Board can either vote NO on the proposed policy, decide to POSTPONE the vote scheduled for Tuesday, March 11 so that simpler and less contentious alternatives can be considered, or vote to AMEND the policy to make it simpler, clearer, less controversial and more effective. .

  

What are parents saying?

Simplify the policy!

Don't cast a spotlight on differences!

CMS leaders should keep their eye on the ball: Stop bullying at CMS schools!

No child should be bullied for any reason!

Teach the simple and the positive ("Be kind.") not the complicated ("You are different than me.").

Keep adult-led discussions about sexuality, sexual conduct and marital/parental status out of elementary schools!

 

NEW INFORMATION FOR PARENTS OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CHILDREN. Please read!

 Many parents have now contacted CMS Board members and CMS staff with the basic question (paraphrased):

"At what age, will there be training, adult-led discussions or other programs that mention or allude to sexuality, sexual conduct or marital/parental status?"

The answers reveal both good news AND bad news for parents who believe that it is their right and responsibility to introduce such topics to their children.

The good news is that some CMS board members have committed that they will NOT allow discussions of sexuality, sexual conduct or marital/parental status in elementary schools.

The bad news is that some CMS board members (and CMS staff) have made the following qualifiers:

• Training, adult-led discussions and other programs will be "age appropriate."
• Culture is changing so much that children are growing up faster and faster.
• The CMS Board cannot "cross the line" and get into the "management" of CMS. The CMS Board will not get into the details of the implementation of the anti-bullying policy.

What does the proposed anti-bullying policy say?

• CMS will not tolerate bullying or harassment (or retaliation against a child who reports bullying or harassment).
• Neither bullying nor harassment are defined in the policy. Instead, the policy lists several reasons for bullying including race, color, religion, marital/parental status, sexual orientation and gender identity/expression.
• The proposed policy requires the CMS Superintendent to “implement the policy by all appropriate means” including publication of the policy to students, annual training for students and the CMS “community” about techniques to support enforcement of the policy, and collection of data about harassment and bullying.
• The proposed policy requires the CMS Superintendent to “establish training and other programs to . . . foster an environment of understanding and respect for all individuals.”
• Click here http://documents.cms.k12.nc.us/dsweb/Get/Document-18360/JICK+AntiBullying+PubHrg+031108.pdf for a copy of the proposed policy.

Why are some CMS parents concerned about the proposed policy (as it is currently worded)?

• Bullying is bad, irrespective of the reason for it. The message to children (at home and school) should be simple: “Be kind. Don’t bully. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.  If not, you will be disciplined.” The message to teachers from the CMS Board and Superintendent should be simple: “Be vigilant, consistent and use common sense.  Deal proactively with bullying situations. CMS leadership will stand with you in this effort and give you whatever support and resources you need.”
• Injecting the reasons for bullying into “training and other programs” about bullying is unnecessary and potentially counterproductive. Why give a child reasons for bullying someone?  Most young children don’t think about many of the reasons listed in the policy at all, much less as a reason to pick on another child.  Why confuse young children about race, sex and gender issues and the other reasons listed in the policy?
• Parents, not CMS administrators or third parties, should determine the timing and the messenger for discussions and printed materials on sexual orientation, gender expression/identity, and marital/parental status.
• Most CMS parents have no “agenda.”  Their goal is simply to teach their own value system to their own children in their own homes, emphasizing the virtues of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.
• The debate about social values should take place among adults or between parents and children in their own homes. Keep the social values debate out of the classroom and hallways, especially at elementary schools.

Are there ways to address these concerns AND create a safe bullying-free environment? YES!

• Include a definition of bullying in the policy.  Define bullying in a way that deals with the basic non-controversial problem of bullying and does NOT unnecessarily introduce (or leave the door open to) controversial issues.
• Remove all the reasons for bullying from the policy, thus making it simpler and inclusive of all bullying situations.  This is an easy amendment to the current policy.
• Remove the training, other programs and data collection mandate from the policy.  This is an easy amendment to the current policy.
• Adopt the simpler policy of the North Carolina Board of Education.
• Adopt two somewhat different policies: a simple one for elementary schools (without a list of reasons and without the mandate for training, data collection and other programs) and a more detailed one for middle and high schools.

As a CMS parent, how can you get involved?

• Please ask the CMS Board to clarify and simplify the proposed policy in one or all of the ways set forth above - i.e., add a narrow definition of bullying, remove the reasons for bullying, and remove the mandate for training, data collection and other programs.

• Talk to family, friends, other parents or your PTA about this important topic. Send them a link to this website.
• Send your comments to myconcerns@cmspolicywatch.com. Include your name and telephone number.  Please tell us if you do not want your name and/or comments to be shared with others. We will honor your request.

• Contact your representatives on the CMS Board.  Click here http://www.cms.k12.nc.us/discover/pdf/08-09/BOE08.pdf or see below for some contact information:
  Larry Gavreau - Dist 1 (Hopewell, Mallard Creek, North Meck), 704.948.1930 or gavreau@bellsouth.net
  Vilma Leake - Dist 2 (Olympic, Waddell, Harding, W. Meck, W. Charlotte), 704.971.2058 or v.leake@cms.k12.nc.us
  George Dunlap – Dist 3 (Garringer, Vance, Cato, Berry), 704.597.5980 or gdunlap@bellsouth.net
  Tom Tate – Dist 4 (East Meck, Midwood), 704.502.3093 or tom4tate@bellsouth.net
  Molly Griffin – Dist 5 (Myers Park, South Meck), Board Vice-Chair, Chairman of the Policy Committee, 704.376.5524 or mollygriffin@carolina.rr.com
  Ken Gjertsen – Dist 6 (Ardrey Kell, Butler, Independence, Providence), 704.387.6187 or ken.gjertsen@cms.k12.nc.us
  Trent Merchant – At-large, 704.517.9747 or trent.merchant@cms.k12.nc.us
  Kay McGarry – At-large, 704.366.8971 or kayemcgarry@cms.k12.nc.us
  Coach Joe White – At-large, Board Chair, 704.542.2192, coachjoew@cms.k12.nc.us
       

• Contact your representatives on the Charlotte City Council and the Mecklenburg County Council.

• Attend the public hearing on March 11. (Call 980.343.5139 anytime between now and March 11 at noon if you would like to speak)
• Contact Superintendent Peter Gorman at superintendent@cms.k12.nc.us or 980.343.3000
• Provide comments to CMS via the CMS website. http://www.cms.k12.nc.us/boardeducation/proposed.asp

What questions should my CMS Board representative or the CMS Administration be able to answer?

• The Charlotte Coalition for Social Justice is currently conducting an ACT “inclusiveness” training at Eastway Middle, Independence High and Garinger High. See CMS Training at Eastway Middle (in particular, pages 11 and 12). The program will begin for other schools in April. Is this what the anti-bullying training will look like?
• What will the training look like for sixth graders? Fourth graders? Second graders? Kindergarteners? If the answer given by CMS is "age appropriate", at what age is it appropriate for a child to receive training about sexual orientation, gender identity/expression and marital/parental status? Who decides?
• Will the required “training and other programs” be conducted by third parties outside CMS? By teachers? Principals? Administrators?
• What “other programs” are being contemplated? How will decisions about starting and funding these “other programs” be made?
• Does the required “publication” of the policy mean that students will be given the list of reasons for bullying?
• Will examples of bullying be used in the training? Who will decide the appropriateness of these examples?
• The ACT “inclusiveness” training has apparently been funded in part by the Wesley Mancini Foundation.  Who will fund the “training and other programs” required by the proposed bullying policy?
• How much will be spent on the required “training and other programs” and other implementation of the policy?
• Who will collect data? Third parties? Using student questionnaires? By other means? What use will be made of the data that is collected?

• What does the proposed policy accomplish that the CMS Superintendent cannot already do?

• If inconsistency in enforcement is a problem, how does the proposed policy eliminate the inconsistencies and why wouldn’t a simpler, less controversial policy accomplish the same thing?

Site provided by ATierOne Web Design