Board to Discuss New Guidelines for Teaching Religion in Public Schools

SIMI VALLEY — A resolution aimed at clarifying what teachers in Simi Valley public schools can and cannot teach about religion is expected to be considered at a school board meeting tonight, rawing public and school board comments on the controversial issue.

Teachers already instruct students about religion in history, often using their school district-approved texts as guidelines for what is appropriate, administrators said.

The resolution breaks no new ground and is based on existing law, court cases and the U.S. Constitution, said Susan Parks, deputy superintendent for the Simi Valley Unified School District.

“Separation of church and schools has become more of a political issue in recent years,” she said. “But the intent [of the resolution] is to make certain that everyone knows that you can teach about religion in schools. You can’t celebrate anybody’s religious holiday, but you are allowed to study culture and religion.”

The resolution, proposed by conservative school board member Rev. Norman Walker, will come back for a vote before the board at a later date.

“It begins to put us on record saying we’re not hostile to religion in schools,” Walker said.

The resolution was modeled in large part on the California Education Code and a recently adopted policy in Moorpark, officials said. A similar resolution was drafted by a report called the “3R’s,” a joint project of the California Supt. of Schools Assn. and the Freedom Forum First Amendment Center at Vanderbilt University.

The resolution as proposed by Walker states that “religious liberty is an inalienable right” and that schools may not “inhibit religion.”

It recognizes that education in American citizenship includes “instruction about religions and matters of conviction,” and resolves to “encourage district curriculum committees to review and recommend . . . materials related to citizenship, religion and matters of conviction.”

The resolution states that teachers may instruct students on religion and moral convictions, using themselves or others as “living examples” in the community.”

“We’re not talking about proselytizing,” Walker said. “But students ought to be able to express that part of their lives knowing that it is not somehow socially unacceptable.”

And neither is the resolution an attempt to infiltrate schools with religious zealotry, he said.

“We want to put to rest [assertions] that this is a right-wing plot of religious radicals to get a foot in the door,” Walker said.

Ventura County Supt. of Schools Charles Weis agreed that it is important to have guidelines for teaching about religion.

“It’s very difficult to understand the history of America or any other country without understanding the religious underpinning of its leaders,” he said.

But, he said, the phrase “living examples” in the Walker proposal could be troublesome.

“Teachers and administrators are looked up to as role models and we wouldn’t want any single religion to be proselytized in public schools,” he said. Pointing out a good leader who is also a member of a certain religious group could be misconstrued by students to mean that all members of that group are good leaders, he said.

“The key issue is giving teachers guidelines so they provide instruction that is acceptable to people of all religions,” he said.

Simi board member Carla Kurachi objected to the same passage as well as other parts of the resolution. The language is too vague, she said, and should be replaced with something more specific.

“What does that mean?” she asked of the “living examples” language. “Does that mean a teacher can say, ‘I’m a Christian and this is what Jesus Christ has done for me?’ ”

But board President Judy Barry said she supports the resolution as it is written as a means to clarify what is acceptable in the classroom.

“Right now in our schools teachers feel fairly comfortable in studying about Hinduism and Buddhism and the influences they have had in relation to history,” she said. “But there is not that same comfort level with Christianity. This will more clearly define what is OK and not OK.”

The school board is scheduled to discuss the proposal at its meeting beginning at 6:30 tonight at City Hall.