Report by Paula Antolini, May 9, 2022, 2:05PM EDT
Why would Dr. Christine Carver, Superintendent of Bethel Public Schools, feel the need to defend “Social Emotional Learning” and call the “implementation” of the social-emotional curriculum in public schools “misinformation in the news and social media”?
Why would she say, “None of this is new” when it certainly IS new, and why parents are upset about it.
Carver issued a message on May 6, 2022, in the school newsletter, to “Parents, Guardians, Staff, and Community Members,” discussing the “Social Emotional Curriculum” and the “effects of the pandemic on our student’s mental health, and anxiety and depression.”
So, the school officials take NO responsibility at all for the present student “mental health” condition, that they claim the students have, which they say includes suicide (as quoted by Dr. Carver recently). This rating is likely through information obtained by various events and surveys obtained without parental permission for most. This is after they required students to wear masks all day, and required teachers to get vaccinated or lose their jobs, along with force feeding them a Social Emotional Learning” (SEL) curriculum that parents never agreed to, or were not allowed to participate in, regarding the decision-making process? And now the school Superintendent is calling news and social media comments “misinformation”?
Carver said the school is “ethically and legally obligated to ensure that our school environment promotes a positive climate” and that they are “obligated to provide support for students with more complex needs.” She cited “Section 504 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA.” It sounds like she is a defense attorney building a case. What brought this on? Could it possibly be the uproar from parents who disagree and who are outraged with what appears to be a liberal agenda that has been infiltrated into the schools?
Other topics covered were “mean” behavioral issues, and Carver said, “We have data to support increased mean behavior amongst students, increased amounts of students seeking in-school counseling support, and increased suicidal ideation.” She blamed this partially on “isolation and increased use of technology for social interactions.” She said, “In our recent parent survey, many parents also identified emotional well-being and mean behavior as an area of concern.” They extremely promote use of technology in the schools and now they are blaming “mean behavior” and “suicides” on the use technology?
Where is this “data” from? Could it be the student surveys given to the students recently, that they were required to take, or a recent event where parents were not allowed to attend, and could not obtain the event content, and cell phones were not allowed in the auditorium by students? Read more here: “The Bethel ‘Rally for Parents Rights and Inclusion’ Against BPS Highlighted the ‘Devolution of CT Education’ and Breach of Student Privacy Laws“.
And regarding the “parent survey,” how are those questions worded? Is it leading questions with multiple choice answers? Also, one event was indicated as possibly emotionally disturbing to students, so much so that they had counselors circulating the room behind closed doors. What schools would put a child through this and not have a parent present, or permission for the child to attend? Only later in the week did the schools officials change their policy, after numerous complaints from parents, and school officials suddenly required permission slips for the 2nd survey given to 8th graders.
*****
We are currently waiting for our FOIA request to Dr. Carver to be answered, that we submitted on April 11th, regarding obtaining information about possible inappropriate and possibly illegal actions of the school administration. It is now May 9th and a note was sent to Dr. Carver, asking why this FOIA is taking so long to be released. This FOIA request includes the The “Attitudes and Behaviors” survey administered to Bethel students, and also correspondence, meeting minutes, opting out, etc., all having to do with possible privacy issues of students and age-inappropriate questions and more. Carver’s one-sentence reply was, “We are working on it.” This seems to be a habit of the BPS officials lately, of delaying documents just long enough to have the news story get “old.”
*****
Regarding the “Social Emotional Curriculum” Carver said, “There has been a lot of misinformation in the news and social media about the implementation of the social-emotional curriculum in public schools.” She claims, “public schools have always implemented these types of programs to create a positive climate/learning environment. None of this is new.” Define “positive learning environment.” Everything seems to be a new catch phrase to make it seem as if it is not Critical Race Theory (CRT), but it appears to be just that. No they are not “teaching” CRT, as Carver claims, but it sure appears that they are using the CRT theory under “SEL.” One look at the present curriculum says it all.
Maybe school officials need to look at their own “curriculum” regarding “Sex Health Education” taught to students as young as age 11. Read our article from March 28, 2022 here: “Is Sex Health Education Being Taught in BPS to 11-15 Year Olds Too Explicit? Did Parents Ever Agree to Curriculum? View Details.”
Then there is the legislation, HB 6619 “AN ACT CONCERNING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A KINDERGARTEN TO EIGHT GRADE MODEL CURRICULUM” effective July 1, 2022, which, in part, dictates:
“Section 1. (NEW) (Effective July 1, 2021) (a) Not later than January 1, 2023, the Department of Education, in collaboration with the State Education Resource Center, shall develop a model curriculum for grades kindergarten to grade eight, inclusive, that may be used by local and regional boards of education.“
and also:
“… include and integrate throughout such model curriculum at least the following… lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and other sexual orientations and gender identities studies.“
Are you aware of exactly what is being taught to your children at an inappropriately young age, or at all? If not, I suggest you attend Board of Education meetings and ask, or contact Dr. Carver.
*****
Last, Carver mentions a new school website under the “BPS Social-Emotional Learning” (SEL) heading, entitled, “Family Emotional Intelligence Resources.” that says it “provides extensive information and resources for our families.” It basically includes the same videos the school has been promoting for some time now, one in which the newly appointed “Social Emotional Learning Coach” Tom Salvador, and Director of Student Services, Dr. Christine Sipala, are “interviewed” by two Bethel High School students, Arianna LeCates and Jasmine Islami, using what appears to be pre-planned questions and answers. When Mr. Salvador was asked ‘What is Social Emotional Learning?” he said it was about “life skills.”
There are also links to CT government websites on the new school website. These are, “Social-Emotional Learning (SEL)” and “Professional Support Webinar Series for Families” under the Connecticut State Department of Education. The former defines “Connecticut’s definition of SEL” as “The process through which children and adults achieve emotional intelligence through the competencies of self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making (Public Act 19-166).”
Effective July 1, 2021, Public Act 19-166 “AN ACT CONCERNING SCHOOL CLIMATES” says in part, “(4) direct resources to support state-wide and local initiatives on issues relating to fostering and improving positive school climates and improving access to social and emotional learning in schools, (5) develop an assessment for screening students in grades three to twelve, inclusive, to determine whether such students are at risk for suicide, (6) develop a biennial state-wide school climate survey” and much more. Read the entire text of the bill here.
Obviously SEL appears to have infiltrated our schools for some time now. Years.
Do you, as a parent, remember agreeing to any of this? Or being part of the decision-making process of the Board of Education (BOE)? Or for that matter, were you consulted on any topic regarding the health and welfare of your child mentally and physically, while they are in school, that would give you any control or voice at all? Have you been to Bethel BOE meetings and spoken during Public Comment? If not, why not?
So under the guise of “fostering and improving positive school climates” and “improving access to social and emotional learning in schools” and screenings and surveys, we have possible brainwashing and indoctrination.
Is this acceptable to you? Many parents feel this is the same topic as Critical Race Theory, which states that U.S. social institutions (e.g., the criminal justice system, education system, labor market, housing market, and healthcare system) are laced with racism embedded in laws, regulations, rules, and procedures that lead to differential outcomes by race.
Be sure to attend the “OPEN FORUM” discussion about “Social Emotional Learning” (SEL) in our schools, sponsored and moderated by the Bethel Action Committee (BAC) and Bethel Independent Town Committee (not a town or school-organized event). Event is on May 16th at 7:00 p.m. in the General Purpose Room of the CJH Municipal Center, 1 School Street, Bethel, CT. The event will also be live streamed on the BAC YouTube channel. This is a free event and all are welcome to attend.
*****
View Carver’s letter below:
Parents, Guardians, Staff, and Community Members,
Social-Emotional Curriculum
As we head towards the end of the year, it is wonderful to see all of the normal spring and end of the year activities that showcase our students and help them feel more connected to school. The art shows, athletics events, concerts, dances, club activities, field trips, and other events support the development of social connections that we can all agree have been missing over the past few years.
Local, state, and national data indicate that the effects of the pandemic on our student’s mental health, most notably in the areas of anxiety and depression, have been significant. As a school system, we are ethically and legally obligated to ensure that our school environment promotes a positive climate so our students are ready to learn. We are also ethically and legally (Section 504 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA) obligated to provide support for students with more complex needs. We know that students need to be emotionally ready to learn and achieve academically.
As we are coming out of the pandemic, we have data to support increased mean behavior amongst students, increased amounts of students seeking in-school counseling support, and increased suicidal ideation. We believe that this is partially due to isolation and increased use of technology for social interactions. In our recent parent survey, many parents also identified emotional well-being and mean behavior as an area of concern.
There has been a lot of misinformation in the news and social media about the implementation of the social-emotional curriculum in public schools. To be clear, I have been an educator for 31 years, and public schools have always implemented these types of programs to create a positive climate/learning environment. None of this is new. As examples, these programs address things such as being active listeners, problem-solving, handling conflict, being kind and respectful, managing emotions if you are angry or sad, etc. The district has always made it a priority to partner with parents. To that end, we have created a website that provides extensive information and resources for our families. On that website, there are two videos that you might find informative that provides a detailed description of what social-emotional learning curriculum are and how they are implemented in our schools. If you have any questions about our programs, I would encourage you to reach out to our Social Emotional Coach, Tom Salvador at salvadort@bethel.k12.ct.us.
###