JROTC defending its line

a lot of the reasons for doing away with jrotc in sf are not correct. they seem to view them under the "old system", back in the 60s and not with the "new system." enrollment seems low because of the removal of the pe credit and making it an elective without any credit(s), not like others with credit(s).

The school board is really taking it to the punk kids who want to take JROTC. How dare they question the Progressive School Board's decision to not allow non-progressive thoughts creep into the schools? Next, the school board will be forced suspend all kids who dare to pass around petitions to keep JROTC - but they do all of this for the kids own good, because the school board knows what is best. DUH!

The SF school boards decision to do away with JROTC disgusts me. How can they justify taking away a class that focuses on leadership, citizenship, responsibility, honor,....the list goes on. I took AFJROTC for 4 years (1983-1988) and have absolutely no regrets. It actually made me a better person and prepared me to be a productive member of the workforce. I do not see the harm in offering this class. Has the school board really taken a good look at the JROTC curriculum? I have a feeling they haven't. Anyone in their right mind would not cut such an honorable program. The school boards decision is purely egotistical. I am ashamed to have this school board advocating for the youth of San Francisco. They do not know what they are doing.

Gawd enough with those sneaky bastards. Of course it will pass today because they gave less than 24 hours notice. Stupid Jane Kim is there to be the swing vote while the other 2 that voted against it is miraculously out of town. Parents (those who are attys especially) should really consider suing the school district for their shady dealings. This is undermining the will of the people. SHAME ON YOU MAR, KIM, YEE AND SANCHEZ!

WAKE UP BOARD OF EDUCATION! The kids and parents like and want to keep the program.. Try to start focusing your attention on keeping programs instead of taking away from our public institution just because your own political agenda disagrees..... NORMAN YEE, MARK SANCHEZ, ERIC MAR YOU HAVE ALL BEEN WARNED! YOU ALL SEEK RE-ELECTION THIS YEAR AND WE WILL KICK ALL OF YOU TO THE OUT HOUSES WHERE YOU BELONG...

Again, the SF school board chooses to deny high school students access to information that they deem not politically correct. " We know what is best for them to learn, and they shouldn't be exposed to alternative thought". This is how things were run in Afghanistan under the Taliban, except the SF Board hasn't advocated death (to Moderates and Conservatives)...yet.

Without a doubt, you top the list of card carrying, left wing wackos, I have had the displeasure of listening to. You and your agenda are the reasons the very fabric of this country is being torn apart by. JROTC teaches good citizenship as defined by American principles and values NOT yours ! Take it from someone who has been teaching it for the past 14 years !!!

Once upon a time in this country the left wanted important reforms, now with nothing to really to fight for anymore these leftists playing as adults find idiotic non sense like this to get there self-righteous hackles up.

Dear Gerry, You make many good points. Leaders is taught by state credentialed teachers. The subject is Leadership and the core classes are mapped to the California English/Reading standards. The entire 4 year curriculum (the only comprehensive alternative to JROTC) is in the Program of Instruction on the Teach Peace Foundation website. The funding for the pilot is paid 100% by the foundation. This includes the many extra hours as you correctly note and we even assign a full time member of our design team. Long-term, taxpayers just passed a 20 year parcel tax creating approximately $28 million to help fund new programs like Leaders. We have a very specific and thoughtful proposal to integrate the Leaders class. We also offer an after school program called Leaders Club. Community service and service learning are built into the program. We agree with you that the SFUSD should pilot solutions that are inclusive and meet the needs of the many. Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

Dear Gerry, You make many good points. Leaders is taught by state credentialed teachers. The subject is Leadership and it the core classes are mapped to the California English/Reading standards. The entire 4 year curriculum (the only comprehensive alternative to JROTC) is in the Program of Instruction on the Teach Peace Foundation website. The funding for the pilot is paid 100% by the foundation. This includes the many extra hours as you correctly note and we even assign a full time member of our design team. Long-term, taxpayers just passed a 20 year parcel tax creating approximately $28 million to help fund new programs like Leaders. We have a very specific and thoughtful proposal to integrate the Leaders class. We also offer an after school program called Leaders Club. Community service and serve learning are built into the program. We agree with you that the SFUSD should be pilot solutions that are inclusive and meet the needs of the many. Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

I strongly disagree with Mark Sanchez because he doesn't understand what the JROTC program is all about. First of all, JROTC does not abide by "don't Ask Don't Tell" and it does not recruit any students into the Army. JROTC has helped me grow as a person and I have gained a significant amount of confidence. JROTC also has numerous after school activities that keep the students busy instead of the students spending the time participating in gang activities. JROTC has become something of a second family to me and all my other classmates. Taking away this program is a mistake because a replacement program would only be a shadow of what the JROTC prgram really is.

Dave, This is very interesting, but there are still several issues; who teaches (state credentials), what is the subject (credentials and curriculum), where is the funding coming from, how do you integrate a leadership academy into the seven diverse high schools and where are the before and after school components (who is paying for the extra hours, current JROTC teachers do hundreds of hours of before and after school plus community service events gratis) just to name a few. We should be exploring solutions that are inclusive and meet the needs of the many. As with any contentious issue the ultimate answer is usually a compromise. Keeping the JROTC program and modifying the curriculum as required including components of the Leaders program is a compromise that could work. Teachers, credentials, curriculum, infrastructure and funding are no longer an issue. In a democratic society with diverse and sometimes conflicting needs answers are seldom “black and white”.

Dear Gerry, You make several good points. Please note that the Leaders program is not called Teach Peace but is created by the Teach Peace Foundation. Leaders is a 4 year 720 hour program offering all the leadership instruction that JROTC offers and more wihtout the military focus. I speak from the perspective of first hand knowledge of the program and service as an Army officer. Leaders is a comprehensive alternative and this program corrects all the concerns documented in the 2006 School Board Resolution 65-23A1. Leaders enables San Francisco leaders and citizens to give students something better rather than take something away. If the San Francisco Unified School District were only to choose the internal Ethics and Career Technical pathways programs, then JROTC instructor Col. Bullard's message in the article that JROTC is more comprehensive continues to be true. If Leaders is selected in addition to the internal SFUSD program, Col. Bullard's statement will no longer be accurat

We agree to disagree. If you have not visited a high school JROTC program you don’t have a complete picture of the program in San Francisco. You need to talk with students, teachers and administrators about JROTC, as well as look at the curriculum that is taught. If you only talk to people that think like you do you miss half of the conversation. I have looked at the material presented as an alternative by “Teach Peace” and with a few exceptions it is verbatim the curriculum that is presented in the current JROTC program. I don’t support violent games; I do support non violent conflict resolution, acceptance of others and compromise in lieu of conflict among many other ideas.

Militarism in high school is not only wrong it is against internationally acceptable practices. The ACLU "Soliders of Misfortune" and AFSC "Making Soldiers in Public Schools" explain why we hurt our children by letting them participate in JROTC. I recently learned that JROTC violates the UN protection of children guidelines of no military training under age 16). Sure some children enjoy JROTC but some children enjoy alcohol and we do not this activity until age 21. Just go to Army.com and learn how the computer program called America's Army teaches 13 year old children how to be "first person shooter" in a realistic combat environment. Teaching children how to kill with computer programs and how to fire weapons (weapons training is part of many JROTC programs around the country) is wrong. The SFUSD leadership appears to be playing a game of delaying action on what is right with JROTC extensions and internal programs that have nothing to do with eliminating militarism in our schools.

Dear Beth, Thank you for writing the article. Please note though that there are three IMPORTANT mistakes in the article. 1. The alternative program is called Leaders. You can access information about the Leaders program (e.g., the Instructor Manual and other key program resources) at the Leaders section of the Teach Peace website. 2. The organization that created Leaders is an educational non-profit that designed Leaders following the 2006 San Francisco School Board resolution calling for a JROTC replacement alternative. The Leaders program was inspired by the San Francisco's School Board and it is part of a national effort to provide a superior alternative to JROTC in our schools. 3. Leaders is being offered at a lower cost than any of the alternatives. Unlike the internal SFUSD options, Leaders is the best alternative for the students and the only program that meets all the School Board requirements. David Dionisi, Leaders Design Team

Enrollment dipped because students, parents and counselors were confused about the status of JROTC and the credits students would receive; see the SF Board of Ed minutes for the confusing wording in the resolutions and subsequent amendments, once this was cleared up students returned to the JROTC program. The decided to make a political statement about the current U.S. administration and its national policy ignored the needs and wants of the students of SFUSD. No one ever discusses the tens of thousands of students who, over the years, have benefited from leadership training and personnel discipline while having never served a single day in the military or the at risk students that stay in school and graduate because of the one on one mentoring they receive or 7 men of color that serve as roll models in a district where student and teacher demographics don’t match. We have many challanges in the district we don't need to fix some thing that is not broken. "Students First".

The article incorrectly notes that the program the JROTC Task Force is considering is not called Teach Peace but is called Leaders. This program was inspired by the School Board 2006 Resolution calling for the creation of a superior alternative to JROTC. I and many people in San Francisco and around the country applaud the courage of Mark Sanchez, Eric Mar, and the other members of the School Board who are working to provide students with leadership education beyond the context of military leadership. Mary Wind, President of the Teach Peace Foundation

Mark Sanchez is an embarassment to the City of San Francisco. He is a political gadfly looking for his opportunity for a seat on the Bored of Stupervisors, and has made his mark by making a political statments at the expense of a program overwhelmingly supported by minority at-risk youth an their parents, who may not be "progressive". Deny access to information not deemed "politically correct". I predict a run for the board seat vacated by a termed-out Chris Daly in the future. HACK!