Add The California Post on Google San Francisco Unified’s superintendent was among the woke school brass quizzed by a congressional committee this week.
The city’s top school official dodged question after question about the district’s dubious curriculum in an embarrassing appearance before the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
If the district’s policies were on the up and up, one would think she’d give straightforward answers.
San Francisco Unified’s superintendent was among the woke school brass quizzed by a congressional committee this week. Shutterstock / New Africa Instead, she all but took the Fifth.
Did Su support curriculum that allegedly compared parents who rejected schools’ COVID mandates to white families in the 1960s who left desegregated schools? The educator wouldn’t say.
Did Su agree with alleged district guidance that equated refusing to call a transgender student by preferred pronouns with physical assault? She would not answer.
Did Su think that biological males should be allowed in girls’ locker rooms? The schools chief deflected.
Granted, these policies, if aptly characterized, are looney.
And Su’s district is among those the Department of Justice is investigating for perhaps avoiding parental notification and opt-out laws.
Is that why she won’t answer simple queries?
Or is she unwilling to defend, even on principle, the very policies she and her colleagues impose on impressionable students?
Why does SF Unified appear consumed with far-left ideology rather than giving kids the tools they need to succeed in college, jobs and civic life?
California Post News: Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, X, YouTube, WhatsApp, LinkedInCalifornia Post Sports Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, XCalifornia Post Opinion California Post Newsletters: Sign up here!California Post App: Download here!Home delivery: Sign up here!Page Six Hollywood: Sign up here!
Do lessons that may encourage kids to question their own gender and sexuality serve any constructive purpose for the children themselves?
Why are just 53% of the district’s students proficient in language arts and why do even fewer –– 46% –– show proficiency in math, per data from October?
And why are a whopping 30% of the San Francisco public school students queer or questioning and 6% transgender or “gender questioning,” per a district report?
(One of the presenters of that report is listed as using the pronouns “She/Ella/Meow.” If we don’t call this person Ella or Meow, does Su think that’s akin to physical violence?)
To be clear: There is nothing at all wrong with identifying as queer or trans, and all students, regardless of background, deserve love, guidance and support.
Every classroom hour spent steeping kids in ideology is an hour not spent teaching them science, or Shakespeare, or how to balance a budget.
And if this (or any) district is circumventing parental notification rules relating to transgender or other sensitive instruction, that is all kinds of wrong.
But we got no real answers from Su, whose display before Congress helps explain why many so parents have lost faith in US public schools.
They can seem more like indoctrination factories for adult agendas rather than true learning centers for bright young minds.
