EventsxDirectoryxCalendarxPersonal Websites of GLBT OklahomansxAIDS & Health InfoxSearchxChatxMessage BoardxAdvertise

Support GayOKC.com! Donate here!		 Quigley - Response from the Principal


Get on the list!
Enter your email address here to join GayOKC.com's
mailing list!

What do you think?
CLICK HERE
to post your opinion on GayOKC.com's Message Board!

 x

The following is an email from Joe Quigley, sent Monday, April 29
(Posted 4-30-02)

I got a response today from the principal of NWClassen to the memo I sent regarding the posting of the “Faggot” narrative and my reasons for it.
   Here is the memo I sent:

TO:       MR. WELDON DAVIS, PRINCIPAL
FROM: MR. JOSEPH M. QUIGLEY, TEACHER
DATE: 04/24/02
RE:      POSTED NARRATIVE

     As you have stated on more than one occaision, things would be a lot better if the district had a non-discrimination policy that clearly spells out the inclusion of Gay and Lesbian Students.
    I am confident that you would agree with me that even though something might appear to be obvious, sometimes our job as educators is to explain the obvious so that there is no doubt and no confusion. We have done this with those derogatory words that are applied to many groups so that the students know without a doubt that those words are unacceptible and are not to be used, and if they choose to use these words they know there are consequences that they must face.
     However, we fall short in that process when it comes to words like “faggot”, so that students are not necessarily aware that this word, and other pejoratives applied to Gay and Lesbian people, is not appropriate.
     There have been those occasions when I have been  walking toward the bus stop at 23 and May, students from NWClassen have hurled that word at me from an automobile as they passed at 35 to 40 miles an hour. I cannot say who said it at that speed, only that it has been hurled.
     There have been students in the hallways who have taken advantage of the number of people in the halls at passing time who freely vocalize that word toward me or others so that, in spite of saying the word, their identity can be protected by the crowd.
     This same inability to identify the name caller is presented when a student runs down the hall passing my room which is within feet of a corner. If I had to get to the door to apprehend the student, he or she would have had ample time to turn the corner, or run down the stairs. If I were near the door, the name would not be hurled.
     In all these instances, I cannot report more than the fact that the name was thrown out,  but could not say by whom, a situation that eliminates the possibility of correction, punishment, or education.
    And so it was on that Friday when the student chose to direct that word at me as I walked home, and knowing that because of the location and lack of witnesses the school would not be in a position to address the issue beyond a “he said.he said” stand-off.
     In light of this, and after a weekend of reflection I chose to claim ownership of the word, disempower it and show it for what it was, a word used by bullies and cowards. I chose to stand up to the word.
     In retrospect perhaps I should have come to you explaining a situation that you would be powerless to address, asking permission to hang the disempowering narrative. But, in the process of owning and disempowering this word how effective would it have been if permission were to be denied, and the word retain its power?
     I feel it is necessary to point out that when I received your directive to remove it by a particular time and date, it was removed by that time, on that date.
     It concerns me at this point, that even though the directive was properly followed and the incident has now been brought to your attention, the alleged violation of a selectively applied policy is all that is being addressed.
     If a restrictive policy on the posting of any type of material in the classroom can be added to the Faculty Handbook in spite of its being unique to NWClassen, perhaps a nondiscrimination statement inclusive of Gay and Lesbian Students, even though unique to NWClassen, could be added as well.

And, this is the response (the numbers are mine for explanation purposes):

"TO:       Mr. Joseph M. Quigley, Teacher
 FROM: Mr. Weldon Davis, Principal
 Date:   April 29. 2002
 RE:      Posted Narrative Reply

    Thank you for your memo. The issue you raised should be taken to the Oklahoma City School District’s Administration for consideration and it was my understanding this was the direction that would be followed concerning this issue. You certainly have other avenues to use to correct any problem that might exist; the teachers’ union, community groups and civic and political leaders could help take your concerns to the School Board (1). Northwest Classen is not an island in the district and will follow policies set forth by the elected board members.(2)
     I thank uou also for your taking the materials down on my request. I feel certain that the posting of materials will not occur again without prior approval. Hopefully this issue will not need to be addressed again with you or any other faculty or staff member(3)."

(1)  In the list of those who would be helpful in bringing the concern to the school board, the one thing obviously missing is the inclusion of an enlightened administrator who could speak first hand of the need for an inclusive and district wide policy. This is an active role he could take in light of the actions of the last 2.75 years.
(2) If one carefully reads the poster policy and examiness how it has been unequally and selectively applied, one has to arrive at one conclusion:
     It is perfectly acceptible that NWClassen (as an island) has a unique policy because that policy is usable to limit or completely censor any positive information about things Gay and Lesbian, but it is not permissible to have an unequal and unique policy that would protect and educate all students to the benefit of Gay and Lesbian students.
     So, unequal, negative treatment is permissible even if it calls for a unique policy to allow it, but a unique policy that would be a positive step just cannot be allowed.
(3) How would just holding me to a policy remove the need to address this policy to the rest of the faculty. They do not have to follow it, and as they are not held to it, obviuously they will continue to ignore it whether that be due to ignorance or the willful choosing to ignore it.
     The only way the principal could guarantee that the policy is going to be honored is to hold everyone to it. As it is, I might not repeat the offense, but others will continue to intil told otherwise. 

So that is where we stand.
The principal sees a need for a district wide policy, but won’t go beyond lip service. And, NWClassen can be unique in its exclusion, but God forbid it be known for its inclusion of Gay and Lesbian kids beyond a theoretical acknowledgment of their existence.
They are there, but the Gay and Lesbian kids must remain in the closet.

 

Previous postings from Joe Quigley:

 

CLICK HERE TO RETURN TO FRONT PAGE

 

GayOKC.com COPYRIGHT © 1998 - 2002 ROBERT D. ABIERA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. (NO, THIS IS NOT JOE QUIGLEY'S PERSONAL WEBSITE!)