|Action||Amendments Regarding Use of Controversial or Sensitive Instructional Materials|
|Comment Period||Ends 1/15/2014|
It is my understanding that the intent of this proposal (it is not a final draft of a regulation) is to allow parents and students reasonable advance notice so materials could be reviewed to determine if they are appropriate for that student. This is not about censorship or blocking teachers from doing their job. In order to collaborate with the teacher, a parent must be aware of the lesson plan.
Wording the regulation properly is preferable so as to avoid/minimize any undue burden on teachers without negating Parental Rights.
There is so much history re CCSS, but Alyson Williams articulates concerns of many parents in her article "Children for Sale." one of the links: http://redappleproject.com/2013/02/cscope-common-core-under-the-microscope/
We are thankful for our teachers, but it is primarily the right of the parent to determine when his/her child is ready for certain material. While there might be some high schoolers who can handle the material, there are others who cannot. While I only read excerpts from The Bluest Eye, the question that came to me was "How would a child who had been sexually abused handle this?" At least in the sections I read, it presents from the pedophile rapist's point of view. What affect would that have on a child who has not processed past sexual abuse and is perhaps suffering from PTSD or a child who is currently undergoing abuse?
Perhaps it is possible to accomplish the educational goals while allowing parents/students to opt out of reading books that include graphic sexual abuse by pedophile rapists that have to potential to psychologically abuse vulnerable students. Opt-in instead of opt-out might be the way to go.