An Assessment of the Corren Settlement Agreement

Having had a chance to read a copy of the “Settlement Agreement” between Murray Corren and Peter Corren on the one hand (“complainants”) and the British Columbia Ministry of Education (“Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia as represented by the Ministry of Education”), we give our analysis of that agreement.

Alternative Delivery Policy

The first point in the Settlement Agreement is an agreement regarding the “Alternative Delivery Policy.” This part of the settlement ensures that parents who might have objections to the revisions of curriculum envisioned will not, for most subjects, be able to opt for the “Alternative Delivery Policy” which may exist for Health and Career Education K-7, Health and Career Education 8 and 9, and Planning 10. The agreement with the Correns guarantees that the option of an “Alternative Delivery” will not be available except in those subjects.

What is meant by an “Alternative Delivery Policy”? For an explanation we may turn to something called Policy Document: Opting for Alternative Delivery—Health and Career Education 8 and 9 and Planning 10 [Reference: http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/irp/ ]. This document says, under the sub-heading Policy>

The health component of Health and Career Education 8 and 9 and Planning 10 addresses topics which some students and their parents or guardians may feel more comfortable addressing at home. In some cases, students, with their parents’ or guardians’ consent and in consultation with their school, may choose not to participate in classes when these topics are discussed and, instead, address the topics in an agreed upon alternative manner.

It is expected that students will complete the related learning outcomes and demonstrate their knowledge of the health topic(s) they have chosen to learn in an alternative manner.

This option is only available for topics that are part of the health component of Health and Career Education 8 and 9 or Planning 10. This option is not intended for any other curriculum.”

Under “Procedures” the Ministry document explains:

School boards are expected to have policies for alternative delivery of these topics in place.

School boards are encouraged to develop a variety of ways for topics that students and their parents or guardians may feel more comfortable addressing at home to be covered through alternative delivery. They may also invite parents or guardians to propose alternatives for delivery of content, which are suitable to their needs.

There are several options that school boards can provide for students who request the opportunity to complete topics that they may feel more comfortable addressing at home outside of regular classroom instruction. Examples include:

home instruction using a school-determined package of materials or other agreed upon materials Distributed Learning (formerly distance education/distance electronic learning) self-directed studies

It should be noted that even under “Alternative Delivery” the options of the parents might be limited, depending on the exact policy developed by a local school board. However, had the “Alternative Delivery Policy” been extended to the many subjects other than those named which will be affected by the revisions referred to in the “Settlement Agreement” with the Correns, there might have been some acceptable ‘out’ provided for parents who objected to the proposed revisions. This door has been locked before it could be opened. For every other subject, when the course is revised, the following statement will be added to its “Integrated Resource Package” (which is equivalent to a “Program of Studies”): “The Opting for Alternative Delivery Policy does not apply to this IRP.”

It is worth noting that a letter regarding the agreed “Opting for Delivery Policy,” to be sent out to School Board Chairs and school district superintendents, with copies to various bodies, will first be provided in draft form to the Correns for their review. Only then will the finalized letter be sent out: this to be done before September 15, 2006.

The role of the Correns

The extraordinary role given to the Correns also appears in the terms of the “Settlement Agreement” regarding the “Internal Review Process.” The Ministry will draft internal review guidelines to use in reviewing draft IRPs to ensure, ostensibly, ”... every draft IRP incorporates consideration of equality and respect for all learners. “To that end [the Settlement Agreement says], the Guidelines will provide a framework for the Ministry to review each draft IRP from the perspective of inclusion and respect for diversity with respect to sexual orientation and other grounds of discrimination, and an over-arching concern for social justice.” Not only will the Ministry consult with the Complainants (the Correns) in preparing the Guidelines, but also it will provide them with a draft of the Guidelines for their comment before finalizing the Guidelines for implementation on or before September 30, 2006.

Not only are the Correns given an extraordinary role, so are any organizations and groups which they name as having ” ...expertise in sexual orientation, homophobia and other issues of inclusion and diversity in the curriculum.” The Ministry promises to ”...solicit feedback directly from these organizations and groups regarding the IRP Response Draft(s), when each Response Draft is posted on the Ministry’s website.” The Complainants are also given a special role in reviewing the schedule for revision of the IRPs.

At this point it is worthwhile to pause and consider what sort of revisions to the curriculum the Correns and their allies will likely be demanding. “Demanding” is the right word, because later on in the Settlement Agreement it is made clear that anything the Correns consider noncompliance with the Settlement may be appealed to a mediator appointed by the Human Rights Tribunal and in the event of that mediation being unsuccessful, to the Supreme Court of British Columbia.

The extent of the revisions the Correns will be demanding was indicated years ago in a presentation one of the activists made to the Coquitlam School Trustees. In asking for a program to address the supposed needs of “sexual minority” students, he complained, “Nowhere in the curriculum are the many and significant contributions of lesbian and gay people, living and dead, acknowledged. Our school libraries are devoid of resources that positively affirm the achievements of gay and lesbian people in the arts, in literature, science, medicine, social sciences, politics, and in every other sphere of endeavor.”

What the Correns are seeking in the school curriculum, we may conclude, is a positive affirmation of the achievements of homosexuals in every area of human endeavour. Hence the proposed revisions will affect every course in the curriculum.

Social Justice 12

A second part of the settlement with the Correns promises a new Grade Twelve course on social justice issues (a “Social Justice IRP”). “The purpose of this IRP [the Settlement states] will be to explore, from legal, political, ethical and economic perspectives, the concept of a just and equitable society in which there is full participation of all peoples. One topic of study within the Social Justice IRP will address issues of sexual orientation/gender identity.” Again, the Complainants are given a special consultative role. It is also agreed that “Prior to release of the Social Justice 12 Response Draft for public review and response, the Respondent [the Ministry] will provide the Complainants with a draft of the sexual orientation/gender identity portion for their review, and will make revisions as appropriate in light of the comments received. The Complainants may consult experts, on a confidential basis, to assist them in providing such comment.”

We should note the fact that this consultation with the Correns is to take place before the draft course is released to the general public. A pilot version of the new course is to be completed on or before June 30, 2007, and full implementation is to take place in September, 2008.

It is true that Social Justice 12 is to be an elective course, and so perhaps only a small minority of students is likely to take it, and presumably Independent Schools will not have to offer it. Surely, though, we should be concerned about the propagandizing of any sector of the student body. And, judging by what pro-homosexuality activists have produced so far, a course produced to conform to these activists’ desires is indeed likely to be propagandizing in nature.

The main concern of parents, surely, is the proposed revision of all courses to conform to the demands of the pro-homosexuality lobby. There is something seriously wrong if parents do not respond in a body to register their protests with the British Columbia Ministry of Education over the unprecedented step it has taken in allowing an unprecedented role for two activists in shaping the educational environment of all British Columbia students in public schools, and—we believe—in all schools using the provincial curriculum.

Some years ago, the following picture during a talk to a pro-life, pro-family group. Unfortunately, the imaginary journey through a school seems to be coming true in an all-too-literal fashion. The imaginary journey went as follows:

Please allow me to walk you through a day in an imaginary school. ... . Imagine for a moment, John and Jane, two high-school students who attend school in the future brave new world of social engineering … ...A day at Margaret Sangers High School might start out with English class, where the class is introduced to Earl Birney’s poem “David,” in which an injured mountain climber is ‘mercifully’ pushed over a cliff by his companion. The lesson is the perfect setting for a representative of the local right-to-die association to come in and give ‘relevance’ to the poem. The next period might be Career and Personal Planning, where students look at the options for reproductive or non-reproductive choices. Abstinence may be mentioned, but in a very cursory manner. The main emphasis will be on the avoidance of the results of pre-marital sex: the condom, the pill, and—in this land of free choice—abortion. The third period of the morning is science. Here the student is exposed to the marvels that have resulted from experiments on human embryos, and the hope for the bettering of the human race: the hope, in effect, of creating a Superman—or rather Superperson. p. After lunch, our students of the future attend a mathematics class. Here the familiar lesson in pure mathematics is preceded by a short introduction telling of the brilliant work done by a homosexual mathematician. (Teachers had not thought it necessary to mention his sexual orientation prior to the introduction of the new, humanistically inclusive mathematics program.) Finally, we may imagine John and Jane in social studies class, at the end of the day, where the students are in their second week of a unit on the history of homosexual rights. Today the lesson is on the right to adoption, and the splendid environment that may be provided by homosexual couples for their adopted children.

It may be unlikely that a single day would see students encounter so many radical topics, but it is entirely likely that students would, in the not-so-distant future, encounter such things throughout the couse of a year. The point is that education is threatened by the attempts of activists on many fronts to shape the education of the young. The present apparently successful coup by Corren and Corren is one that, if allowed to stand, will affect the education of all students in the province, and set an unfortunate, even tragic, example for the rest of Canada.

We urge all those who care about the children and youth of British Columbia to write to the Premier, the Minister of Education, the Attorney General, and your local Member of the Legislature. We would appreciate your letting us know that you have taken action. If you don’t mind, please send us a copy of your letter; and if you receive an answer, a copy of the reply you receive.