Discussion; How Far Should Santuary Go in SPS?
I'm asking this question just for discussion because there are several issues in this story that may come up at some point for SPS students.
Kent School District is not allowing any international trips for student groups over the worry that any undocumented students on such a trip might be held up at the border upon return. I heard a report on this on KUOW yesterday and the Kent superintendent stated that they had heard - anecdotally from some undocumented students - that the students did have this fear.
On one side, it's a major disappointment for many students; the flip side is that it's a potentially life-changing issue for a few students.
From the Seattle Times:
I will admit to mixed feelings. Right upfront, I'll state a hard truth that every single person on this planet - no matter how much they wish it not so - Life isn't fair. Never has been, never will be. But school districts have to consider equity issues. That they can do.
The issue of having allowed students and families to work for months on a trip, only to say at the last minute that they can't go was very poor timing by the Kent School Board.
Two, was there equity in leaving kids behind in previous years when they couldn't afford it? I'm surprised the Kent School Board didn't addressed that (but maybe they didn't know it was happening). Is that happening in Seattle Schools? And, is that equitable?
Three, the KUOW discussion brought up a couple of thoughts. You wouldn't say that a student couldn't go on a school trip on a basis like disability or race because those beyond anyone's control.
Being an undocumented student is certainly beyond the control of the student but it was a parent's choice. I could see some students feeling punished for that choice - no matter how hard a choice - that someone else made.
Thoughts?
Kent School District is not allowing any international trips for student groups over the worry that any undocumented students on such a trip might be held up at the border upon return. I heard a report on this on KUOW yesterday and the Kent superintendent stated that they had heard - anecdotally from some undocumented students - that the students did have this fear.
On one side, it's a major disappointment for many students; the flip side is that it's a potentially life-changing issue for a few students.
From the Seattle Times:
The decision, announced at what was described as an emotional board meeting Wednesday night, resulted in the immediate cancellation of two Kentlake High School trips scheduled for this school year: an education exchange to Osaka, Japan, and a band trip to Victoria, B.C., that has been a school tradition for 18 years.Regionally:
“You cannot go on a field trip with 60 kids and come back with 59,” he said
(Chris Loftis, the district’s executive director of communications).
But when School Board member Russ Hanscom called the local U.S. Customs and Border Protection office earlier this year, he was told there was a very high chance a student would be detained at the border if he or she lacked adequate documentation, Loftis, the district official, said.
A Seattle Public Schools spokesman said he didn’t know of any cancellations in that district. Bellevue School District hasn’t canceled any trips either, its spokeswoman said.Outcomes:
School Board President Karen DeBruler said everyone on the board understood what was at stake: months of planning and fundraising, and the excitement that goes along with what is often a memorable and inspiring experience for students.Issues on each side:
“It’s not fair for them not to go,” she said in an interview Friday. “But things are changing on a very unprecedented basis.” Allowing some students to go would mean that the students who couldn’t go would be “exposed as being undocumented,” she said.
Loftis said the board based its decision, in part, on a 1982 Supreme Court case, Plyer v. Doe, which states that “denying undocumented school-age children a free and public education is unconstitutional.” Because of that, the Kent School District, with students who hail from more than 100 countries and who speak more than 135 languages, does not ask for or track students’ immigration status.
A number of students oppose the board’s decision, saying the trips aren’t required, and there are always some students who can’t go, sometimes because they can’t afford the fees.
Junior Jordyn Mastroff said that students and families have already done much of the work required to organize the band trip, which is the only opportunity each year for the band to play in front of large audiences.
Mastroff questioned whether it was fair to have left students with financial issues behind in the past, yet adopt an all-or-nothing policy now.
“I do not want to know if someone is undocumented or not,” she said. “But their feelings should not influence the decision of letting 250 other students go that have been going to this for years.”Discussion:
I will admit to mixed feelings. Right upfront, I'll state a hard truth that every single person on this planet - no matter how much they wish it not so - Life isn't fair. Never has been, never will be. But school districts have to consider equity issues. That they can do.
The issue of having allowed students and families to work for months on a trip, only to say at the last minute that they can't go was very poor timing by the Kent School Board.
Two, was there equity in leaving kids behind in previous years when they couldn't afford it? I'm surprised the Kent School Board didn't addressed that (but maybe they didn't know it was happening). Is that happening in Seattle Schools? And, is that equitable?
Three, the KUOW discussion brought up a couple of thoughts. You wouldn't say that a student couldn't go on a school trip on a basis like disability or race because those beyond anyone's control.
Being an undocumented student is certainly beyond the control of the student but it was a parent's choice. I could see some students feeling punished for that choice - no matter how hard a choice - that someone else made.
Thoughts?
Comments
PO
I'm sure Kent SD had considered all this.
This is a great example of why this country elected Trump.
Fed up
You could ride a chartered bus into Canada and lie on the entrance forms, but that's a crime that Canada takes very seriously.
PO
I don't think the Kent school board made the right choice here. These are experiences that many of us could provide for our children independently but for others, this is their only opportunity. How many of those kids will ever get to see Japan?
Canadian border patrol are the ones enforcing their laws
Kent is taking the steps to avoid being sued for discrimination by the ACLU or undocumented students.
I wasn't commenting on Kent's decision, I was pointing out that your might not have your facts correct.
PO
If a student somehow slips through and makes it into another country only to be detained while there or when reentering the US it would be front page news across the nation...then would come the ACLU and Kent SD would be a target. It's a no win situation.
PO
The students all get the travel form and if they can't pay (see poor students) or can't provide the necessary documentation (undocumented students), then the student wouldn't apply to go on the trip.
My real point in the thread was to ask what people thought about these issues, not argue if they are possible.
Even pre-Trump, to get past US border control from a foreign country, you would need either a US passport, green card, or valid visa. An illegal immigrant couldn't have flown to Japan and back even under Obama. That's silly.
Trump has supposedly gotten more aggressive about finding undocumented people inside the country and deporting them. But nothing has changed about undocumented people entering at official border crossings. When could they ever do that?
PO
And I'm pretty sure people refused entry into Canada were stopped again re-entering the U.S. and would be liable to being detained or deported if they weren't in the U.S. legally. That's not new either.
But really? Does the band need to go to Canada in order to have a good musical experience? Aren't there competitions and exciting newbplaces to visit within our country? I doubt that students from most other US states feel they need to take a field trip to Canada, so I'm sure there are options. Or if it's so important that kids have an opportunity to visit Canada, organize an optional, extracurricular field trip, so that a few students aren't excluded from their class performances--and so that kids NOT in band have the option of that educational experience, too.
Public school field trips should be accessible to all. There's no entitlement to international travel. I bet there are a lot of schools that don't even have any/many domestic field trips--or decent music programs. It's sad to suddenly lose the Canada trip they'd been planning, but hopefully the students will see the bigger picture. The parents, too, since they set the tone... if parents are whining that it's not fair, that's a bad sign.
O Canada
She was not chosen, which was very disappointing, especially as she had worked to be able to afford the trip, and it seemed a big part of the class.
Why would they have it set up like that?
If it is considered valuable, everyone should have an opportunity.
When Kent Schools changed their race and equity policy they made a political decision. Is this their statement in favor of the costly practice of sanctuary or are they afraid of being sued? A little of both? We can argue all day about the amount of revenue generated by illegal workers vs the much larger outlay of tax dollars to pay for the increasing costs of education, healthcare and incarceration generated by illegal populations. What matters is how we define fair. It's unfair to deny a trip to students who can travel only because some of their classmates are taking a risk by attempting to cross an international border. It's not the fault of the students. That's on their parents and past presidents who refused to enforce immigration law.
I grew up on the southern border. Our community routinely welcomed immigrants from Mexico. Whether they were sponsored by churches or relatives, they came to make a life for themselves and especially their children. No one from this generation settled for anything less than citizenship. None were rich. All were working class. They did everything necessary to ensure that their children had a secure future.
Westside
Do we have to set up all these ways to exclude people? No.
I applaud Kent's decision - it is far better to cancel the trip than have someone sobbing at the border.
And let me say, you can be a lawful resident of this country - even a citizen - and be detained based upon your religion or ethnic background while trying to reenter. If you don't know that, you haven't been reading much news.
-- Math Counts
-NP
Your law-and-order approach sounds good on paper. The reality is that, for years,
many "legals" have partaken in the often low-wage services of the "illegals"-- whether
it be a restaurant, hotel, home health aide, house cleaner and, prolifically, the cheaper costs of the food we eat.
The perimeters of the strike zone enforcement are being changed in the eighth inning. In the meantime, children have been born and are currently in our schools.
It's not a black or white issue. Changes need to be made, but not without admitting that all of us have benefitted from the prior approach and usually were/are not concerned about enforcement in that real time.
Anyone who has not partaken in the low wages of an undocumented worker can take the trips, which would be no one.
That's how it would work in a black and white world.
FWIW
asdf
A kid can't make shots when the hoop is at 10 feet should they lower the hoop for everyone to 3 feet or else ban hoops? A kid is allergic to peanuts, should a school ban peanuts in all school lunches? What about other allergins? A 17 year old band member has a DUI conviction and can't travel to Canada, should the school cancel all trips to Canada?
Actions have consequences and sometimes those consequences extend to family and friends. I think someone would gladly give up a trip in order to illegally remain in the greatest country on earth. If you keep treading on others you are going to create a backlash.
Jeez
Jeez
Yes, I think people do give up trips in order to remain in this country (I assume you meant the US, although I'm sure not everyone in the world agrees this is the greatest on earth), but I doubt they all do so "gladly." And c'mon, they are treading on others???? Children whose parents brought them here as babies, and who want to go on a high school trip with their class, are "treading on others" if they, what, are disappointed? It's not even them making the policies to ban international trip--it's well-meaning administrators who understand that all the same educational goals can be achieved via a more inclusive trip instead. Backlash because schools can go to NY but not Canada? Backlash because a school might ban peanuts? Maybe backlash because everyone isn't like me and I can't always get my way and that's not fair?
I'm sure in most cases we are clever enough to come up with compromises and rules that work ok for all.
O Canada
Your point is well taken and makes you wonder how long sports can remain "survival of the fittest" in the current PC public school environment.
PO
In other words, this debate has nothing to do with children. It's yet another instance of kids being used as political pawns for someone else's interests.
Do kids need to participate in school related international travel to get a good education? No. Does studying something long and hard enough that it makes sense to do an international trip to perform or compete or use your hard-earned academic skills benefit kids? You betcha. So if some kids want to perform opera in Italy or use their Spanish in a mock trial in Argentina or compete in the World Junior Chess Championship in India... more power to them.
We can't keep every possible thing that every child is allergic to out of schools. And more than that, we demonstrably have zero interest in keeping most of the stuff kids are seriously allergic to out of schools. And we can't keep all children from going anywhere (to compete, or perform, or learn (travel is educational)).
Every child is different. They should all have the opportunity to get a great education. But we absolutely can't treat all children exactly the same. Nor would it benefit them. They all need different things. They unique human beings.
I can't believe we even waste our time talking about this junk when the school library holdings suck as bad as some of them do and our legislators are busy complaining about dandelions and primping for their hometown photoshoots instead of freaking funding basic education for all students.
I do not understand why any public school should provide international field trips. I have always thought that non-school organizations should provide those types of valuable cultural experiences, which are not part of the responsibility of the school, any more than it would be to operate a Little League baseball league or a YMCA.
Irene
Actually, if the children were born in the U.S., then they are U.S. citizens and eligible for a U.S. passport. This is an issue with children born outside the U.S. that are not authorized to be in the U.S.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5 to 4 in Plyler v. Doe in 1982 that unauthorized students have a right to attend school in the U.S. So I would assume that if an international trip were a required or integral part of a public K-12 curriculum, the district could potentially be sued. But that ruling was 35 years ago and students have been going on international trips ever since without issue. These trips are always optional. And with the exception of Canada, a passport has long been required.
Thus the question of why now? For 35 years Kent doesn't bother to change its policy. But 5 months after Trump becomes president, it's now suddenly necessary to change the policy mid-year after money has been raised and trips planned?
Seems pretty hard to justify.
I agree, "all children" within the state are to be educated. That's not just Washington State says, that's what the U.S. Supreme Court said 35 years ago.
The question is, why if that's been the law of the land for 35 years, does Kent need to suddenly ban international trips midway through the school year after plans have been made and money raised?
If these trips were part of a core public school curriculum, clearly there would be an issue, but they are not. If these trips were illegal, you would think someone would have sued sometime during the last 35 years since the Supreme Court ruled, but they have not.
This was just as much an issue when Obama was president, and Clinton was President, as it is now that Trump is president. Trump may have highlighted the issue of unauthorized immigration, but he has done nothing to change the fact that a student without a U.S. passport can't get on an airplane for a school trip to Japan and then expect to return to the U.S. Nothing has changed.
The fact that Kent would change this midyear seems hard to justify.
PO
You can see many of these programing tactics taking place across the US. Somewhere in the Kent's SD decision is a operative working against TRUMP and they don't care who gets hurt along the way. This appears to have BAMN's finger prints all over it.
PO
PO
WTAF