Wednesday, May 18, 2011

A Champion for Children

On Thursday May 12, 2011 Wendy Ahlman was kicked off the Freedom Academy school board.  Wendy has been a fearless advocate and champion for the rights and dignity of children.  She endured a litany of lies, slander, and libel.  She endured public humiliation defaming her character with a sign posted at the entrance of Freedom Academy bearing her name as her children walked through the doorway.  Posted like a “Wanted” sign visible to everyone that crossed the threshold--maligning her in front of family, peers, friends, parents, and business associates.  The sign called her several unflattering names which we shall not repeat, but here are photos of the posting with defaming words blurred out.



Wendy fought the good fight. She deflected a barrage of false charges, asserting her innocence in each and every instance.  But calumny won out.  Indeed, the die was cast long ago by her detractors.  Yet she continues to believe in the predominate goodness of a majority of teachers, the selfless sacrifice of parents, and mostly the boundless potential of children if given the right environment to flourish.  

Wendy ran on the following platform ( excerpt: www.wendyahlman.blogspot.com )  

"Obviously, a good education is key to every child’s confidence, success, and happiness. Moreover, the best education employs a holistic approach which nourishes mind, body, and spirit. Beyond academics, it must instill social integration, emotional nurturing, self-esteem and personal enterprise. The key is to develop an environment where these qualities can flourish. Herein we come to an educational concept called, the Least Restrictive Environment. This does not suggest a lack of rules or structure, just the opposite. It creates a consistent, comfortable zone free from aggression, apprehension and pecking orders. Nevertheless, too much rigidity swings the pendulum the another way. Students begin to fear the institution, regulations, and enforcers. When children are nervous they do not absorb new information well. My goal as a board member would be to bring balance to the school and provide an environment centered on education rather than institution. For example, there are many positive aspects that uniforms bring to a school. They eliminate many distractions, labels, and social schisms. Taking it too far, however, can create the opposite effect. Diversity is beautiful. Indeed, forced conformity never engenders social cohesion. Hence, relaxing dress codes to common sense levels will not erode academic excellence. Neither would having two free dress days a month unravel self-discipline or moral fiber. We must recognize that it is important for children to feel a sense of uniqueness to develop self-respect as well as tolerance for others."   

And so it is, that Wendy was removed from the board by the same people that fashion policies which govern your children, shape their minds, and instill their social identity.  Are we to believe that the oligarchy at Freedom Academy respects your child’s special gifts, needs, individuality, and spirit?  Yet they removed a board member for her “personal style”--I kid you not, that is a quote.  No charges of impropriety were proven.  Two prolonged meetings filled with defamatory accusations and they hang their hat on “personal style”?.  

Indeed, the official statement of her ousting regurgitates the same inane language posted on the door.  This essentially proves their bias and modus operandi, “So let it be written, so let it be done.”  Crush decent.  Squelch new ideas.  Punish individuality.  Destroy all who threaten the incumbent powers and policy.  Again, not a single new relevant fact was produced by this witch hunt.  Therefore, what else could they say except that they did not like her “personal style” (or the fact that she has some, in my opinion).  

Wendy was allowed to serve only 6 months of her 2 year term.  She remained true to her principles and promise.  From the time that she took office parents, teachers, and even board members flooded her email and telephone with their concerns.  Wendy had no idea that things had gotten so bad.  

Some might say that she is the first martyr of the movement, but that would be inaccurate.  Instead, place in your mind on those that inspired Wendy.  Imagine children crying themselves to sleep.  Imagine children having a meltdown before school because they can’t find their belt.  Imagine knots tightening in their tiny stomachs as they walk from class to class worried that their pant legs might be pulled up to reveal that their only pair of clean socks were too short.  Imagine the sensation of heat rushing to a child’s cheeks as their faces blush, being asked to stand up in class, in front of their peers, to be singled out as violators.  Imagine a kindergartner taking scissors to their own hair, a student taking a black sharpie to their tennis shoes, or a child removing articles of underclothing in the school bathroom due to fear of the uniform police.  Let these images sear into your mind, feel the empathic aching within your heart, and listen to your conscience chime.  That voice, that clear unmistakable whisper that pierces to the core--echoing, “Suffer the little children to come unto me.”  Then you too will know what you must do.  Without regard for personal gain.  Without regard for reputation.  Without regard for consequential discomfort, persecution, or the treachery of others whether they be friends or foes.  

Wendy has been a shining example of unwavering compassion to our children.  I couldn’t be more proud.  

by: The Lesser Half 

Monday, May 9, 2011

Civil Liberties

When the founding fathers framed the constitution of the United States, they realized that democracies were equivalent to mob rule.  So instead they chose to craft a republic, and a constitution which would protect the inalienable rights of all individuals.  

Hence, in our system of government the will of a majority cannot trump civil liberties.  Among the many rights afforded us are freedom of expression, freedom from government imposed religion, freedom from government discrimination against any class of people, etc.  

A charter school is not a private school--it is a public school because it accepts funds derived from taxpayers.  As such, it cannot violated civil liberties.  Herein we come to the legal dilemma facing many charter school’s uniform policies.  Uniform policies cannot thwart freedom of expression, they cannot violated the separation of church and state, they cannot discriminated against the the poor, or any class of people.  

Herein, the brightest legal minds on civil liberties suggest that all public schools (including charter schools) should adopt an “opt out” policy wherein parents can choose to excuse their children from participating in mandatory uniforms.  By doing so schools will protect themselves against civil rights litigations.  

For example, students cannot be hindered from wearing clothing which express belief, or political opinion.  Moreover, many religions observe their own dress codes.  For example, Sikhs do not cut their hair, devout Jews wear yarmulke, Muslims women wear hijab, etc.  Furthermore, children cannot be discriminated against for not having the financial means to afford required uniforms.  (see links below.)

Freedom of Expression in Dress Does Not End at Schoolhouse Gate: Tinker v. Des Moines -- landmark case before the Supreme Court.


Charter Schools are Public Schools Bound by Constitutional Principles Protecting Civil Liberties:  


Students are not Required Unfair Burden to Prove Religious Beliefs In Order to “Opt Out” of School Uniforms: 


Responsibility to offer Financial Assistance when Requiring School Uniforms:  


ACLU's Point of View on School Uniforms:  For a Public School Uniform Policy to be Legal, it Needs an “Opt Out" Provision.


The “Opt Out” provision does not destroy the rights of those that want to participate in wearing uniforms.  Moreover, schools relieve themselves of the problematic duties of enforcing uniform policy, and place it squarely on the shoulders of parents where it belongs.  

Schools that have adopted the “opt out” provision continue to receive the benefit of uniforms, and almost all of their students continue to wear their uniforms voluntarily under parental control.  

If Freedom Academy would adopt a thoughtful “opt out” provision, parents, student’s, teachers and administration would be far happier and many of the problems plaguing the school would disappear overnight.  Otherwise they open themselves up to possible litigation and run the risk of fostering further discontent.  

by: Confuse She Us Said  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011

Nepotism at the Expense of Exceptionalism?

As I left Freedom the other day my children noticed a very fancy car in the parking lot, the kind that makes you think, “Wow, who owns that?” I was soon informed that it was the Director’s son-in-law.  Then almost in perfect sync with my inner dialogue, I wondered what he did for a living, when I was informed that he wrote grants for the school.  

It almost stopped me in my tracks. Needless to say, it  didn’t sit well with me. Nepotism is frowned upon in general, but it borders on criminal when public officials award public funds to relatives in the public sector. I don’t pretend to know the nature of compensation, nor the size of this monetary arrangement, but perhaps somebody should investigate. Regardless, it seems unseemly on its face, especially when Freedom Academy is struggling, cutting classes, slashing the Vice Principal’s salary until he resigns, etc. 

I guess the upside is that it appears some people are making a good living off our financially struggling school. 

by: Hu Yu No



Sunday, May 1, 2011

Perversion of Intent

While most of us parents liked the idea of uniforms at Freedom Academy, what we didn’t sign up for was the disruptive nitpicking enforcement which destroys the benefit of original intent.  Like the Pharisees in Jesus’ day who perverted the law, Freedom Academy’s uniform policy has become over reaching, over zealous, and perverse.  

While this dynamic exists, it does not necessarily insinuate that the intent of the original law was bad.  It is usually elitism that creeps in and destroys original intent.  This is indeed the case at Freedom Academy.  I have heard the school’s Director on several occasions say, “Our uniform policies make us better than other schools--a cut above the rest.”  This is the attitude that makes it all go awry.  

Whether it be self-righteous sanctimony, social pecking orders, or the establishment of status, class, and caste, these malignancies cause individuals, institutions, and societies to serve law more than life.  Herein the idea of perceived school status trumps caring for our children.  We begin to see what they wear, rather than who they are.  Herein teachers, administrators, board members, and PTO’s become entangled in a grotesque apathy of group think.  They protect their man-made standards, rather than the feelings, emotions, hearts, and psyches of young students.  They begin to mold and imprint this ugliness on the minds of children and infect the next generation. Herein a culture becomes corrupt, fractured, and inequitable.  All of this is produced by the subtle leaven of elitism. 


by: A Soap Box in the Wilderness