Contrary to what newcomers are led to believe, Gilford schools stink

To The Daily Sun,

I'd like to add a few thoughts and additional points to the ongoing fiasco that continues to be symbolic of a Gilford education, or, more to the reality, the LACK thereof. For those of us that have long followed the antics and tactics of the school board led by their beloved superintendent, none of what is happening comes as any surprise. The local educational-industrial complex has turned the rejection of parental and citizen concerns into an art form rivaled by few. They have a deep history of ignoring their constituency and going to great lengths to hide the truth regarding a variety of matters and covering their rear-ends at any and all cost. And of course, the greatest cover up of all has been the ugly truth that — contrary to what many hapless newcomers were led to believe — the schools in this town, to be blunt, stink. My wife and I quickly learned this back in the 90s, when we were forced to remove our two children before too much damage could be done. Sadly, not all parents have this option, and that is why some of us continue the fight.

Children grow quickly, and the chance to provide them with a sound education — built on a solid foundation of the basics — is short. It has long been my observation that the Gilford system blows this opportunity at practically every turn. Case in point — the use of pulp fiction in a 9th grade "honors" English class. Who in their right mind thought it would be a good idea to give a book to 14-year-old children that features sympathetic characters engaging in graphically-described sexual situations, using alcohol, and, ultimately, as a response to bullying, engaging in the mass murder of students and a teacher in a small-town school? What were they thinking? Yes, I KNOW that the material and circumstances might not be unknown to today's youth. So what? In fact, if that IS the case, then why must the school participate in the further inclusion and insertion of such matters into their lives? Why not instead make an attempt to inject some DECENCY into this sea of degeneration? In fact, why not actually expose the children to some REAL literature they might not otherwise have a chance to discover on their own? After all, isn't that why we send children to school? Apparently, not in Gilford.

In addition to discovering that 14-year-olds are assigned racy novels as part of their classwork, last week's board meeting unveiled the results of the annual "Youth Risk Behavior Survey" conducted by the Gilford Drug and Alcohol Task Force, and, guess what? It's not a pretty picture. Drug use. Alcohol use. Suicidal consideration. It's all there, and in alarming numbers. Rightfully, the presenters described what they learned as, "Startling," "Sad," Heart-wrenching," and, "Painful." Who could disagree? But then, they added more, which, against the backdrop of the events surrounding the aforementioned book, might, were none of this so serious, be considered laughable. In fact, I told them so — that they beclown themselves by their own words when compared to their actions. You see, after having a parent arrested for needing more than two lousy minutes to fathom why a school would deliver objectionable materials to 14-year-old children, the same board lamented that "they are working to get this out of the community." Said school board representative Rae Mello Andrews: We're trying to "promote positive things in the community." Really? By promoting filth? What's next — fighting fires with gas? Cleaning the streets by spreading sand? Purifying the lake by urinating in it? Good grief!

Doug Lambert

Gilford