If a student shows up with visible bruises from domestic abuse, should the teacher attempt to "get to" that child, or just focus on the agreed-upon curriculum?
If the chess club coach notices that a student displays aptitude at strategic thinking, would it be fair to invite them to attend chess club? If the student's parent is upset by the child attending chess club, does the school have a duty to inform them, or does the child have freedom of association?
That said, I'm pretty uncomfortable with teachers having visibility into kids' Google searches, unless the kids know that they're under such scrutiny.
If any person notices evidence of domestic abuse or someone's aptitude they are liable to do what they can do support them. The context here is they're trying to get to the child to influence them into their own worldview. Should we trust our public school teachers with that much responsibility? If your answer is yes, then you should ask yourself what would you do if the worldview was the one you hate the most.
If the worldview you "hate the most" is one where LGBTQ kids are safe and loved and accepted, then forgive me if I don't have much sympathy for your position here.
Christianity exposes a binary: those who are not for me are against me.
CRT theorists propose the same binary: those who are not pro-CRT support racism.
It is possible to be against both racism and CRT.
CRT is not scientific. It is ahistorical, based on storytelling and disagrees with basic fundamental statistics. It is a religion with followers and evangelists, demons and devils. It even has a salvation arc, original sin and the "sins of the father" as concepts. Blood guilt is not science.
Let's be very specific. The teachers are teaching kids to be nice to each other. That's what you're objecting to here. Teaching kids to be nice to LGBT people or teaching kids that math is important are both "[influencing kids] into their own worldview." Be very specific about why you object to one and not the other.
Domestic abuse is a crime, and there is a civic duty to report it. I don't know the details but in the most serious cases, it can be illegal not to, and the law protects those who do.
Having an opinion is not a crime neither is being straight, gay or whatever you can think of as long as it is safe, sane and consensual.
And generally, when a kid shows strategic thinking, the school tells the parents about it and the chess club. There may be reasons why parents don't want their kid to play chess, and if it is not part of the curriculum, it is not something for the school to decide, they can make suggestions but parents have the final word.
Also, noticing strategic thinking does not need to involve spying. If the chess coach looked as search histories for recruitment, that would be a problem.
If a student shows up with visible bruises as the result of domestic abuse the teacher is supposed to make a report to CPS and let the professionals handle it (teachers are mandated reporters in the United States).
There's orders of magnitude difference between the chess club coach noticing a student displays aptitude and inviting them to join the club and a teacher _actively searching_ a students computer for "evidence" of them supporting the teachers politics-du-jour.
If the chess club coach notices that a student displays aptitude at strategic thinking, would it be fair to invite them to attend chess club? If the student's parent is upset by the child attending chess club, does the school have a duty to inform them, or does the child have freedom of association?
That said, I'm pretty uncomfortable with teachers having visibility into kids' Google searches, unless the kids know that they're under such scrutiny.