Cassie Fredregill vs. Little Falls Superintendent
This afternoon, I was contacted by a woman named Cassie Fredregill. Cassie is the mother of a 10-year-old daughter named Cheyenne. Earlier this week, a friend sent me an e-mail that was initially distributed by Cassie.
Cassie's email opened by saying "My name is Cassie Fredregill, a local resident of Little Falls. As my 10-year-old daughter came home from school one day, she told me that there was going to be a class on sexting. As any concerned parent, I reached out to her teacher to confirm what my daughter told me and asked what this class was going to be about." The thought of a 10-year-old getting taught about sexting is utterly repulsive.
During my conversation with Cassie, she told me that she reached out to the school to gather facts. In her email, she wrote "The teacher responded and told me to reach out to the school social worker who would be the one teaching this class. As I followed her instructions to retrieve this sexting class information from the school social worker, I was left with no answers. About two weeks later after my first inquiry on this matter the school principal responded with a picture of the class agenda from the year 2021. On this agenda it showed that two videos would be shown and asked to review them as well."
Cassie wondered why she hadn't received paperwork that permitted her to opt her daughter out of the class. Cassie continued with her email, saying "As I came to the lf highschool to review these videos, I noticed right away that these videos didn’t even belong to the school district but to the hospital in town. When I asked the superintendent about the curriculum, he stated that he would get back to me on that." Next, Cassie sent this text to the school after not receiving a reply on her request for information about this class:this letter to Cassie. Based on Cassie's communications with the school, the superintendent's letter is unjustified. The letter sounds both defensive and intimidating. The worst was yet to come, though. Finally, Cassie got this communication:
As things only progressed in chaos and hostilities from the school including the staff and teachers retaliation against my children in the school, I reached out to the superintendent as to how this became a thing he stated that because I asked my daughters teacher about the class that I was questioning the teacher’s integrity! Not to mention that as my daughter received her parent teacher conference paperwork was staples an orange paper stating I wasn’t allowed to attend my own child’s parent teacher conference.That's outrageous! A mother finds out from her 10-year-old daughter that the students are getting taught sexting and she's the villain? (I don't think so. In fact, I'm certain she isn't!) Notice, too, that they didn't deny that the class is being taught. That should be a major red flag. Then, rather than the superintentendent acting like the adult to calm things down, he escalates the situation. Apparently, the superintendent is intent on accusing Cassie of questioning the teacher's integrity.
Since when is a parent asking for information about a controversial class proof that the parernt is questioning a teacher's integrity? In my opinion, this superintendent is long on accusations and short on calm bedside manner.
What's with these schools teaching these sex classes (Little Falls) or displaying pornographic books in high school English classrooms (Sartell)? Are these one-off situations or is this becoming part of the Biden Education Department's agenda? I suspect it's the latter, not the former.
Finally, the Little Falls School Board is meeting Monday night. Here are the details:
Post a Comment