School board reviews handling of controversial issues
The results of the 2022 school board elections, in which voters thwarted an attempted right-wing takeover of local schools, can already be seen in the trustees’ discussions and decisions.
In November, a right-wing slate of candidates seeking control of the Albany County School Board was soundly defeated at the polls. Seven conservatives had banded together to oppose “critical race theory” and to remove library books they deemed inappropriate. But voters refused to seat any of them.
Instead, they chose another slate of seven candidates — all of whom had opposed the attempted right-wing takeover and rejected the right-wing vision for Albany County schools. The winning slate did not bill itself as “progressive” or “Democratic.” Rather, the winning candidates ran on a campaign of consistency, with the promise of a level-headed approach.
During the first regular meeting of the newly defined board, the results of the election were already being felt.
The Albany County School Board advanced three measures detailing how the school district should handle the teaching of controversial ideas and complaints about classroom materials or library books.
To be clear, policies on all of these issues already exist. And the measures advanced by the school board this month are just the latest development in a policy review process that began before the election.
But the language of the revamped policies more closely reflects the interests of the elected slate than those of the failed right-wing slate — and all three measures notably passed their first reading without controversy or lengthy debate.
For example, Policy 3005 — which details how teachers should approach controversial topics — takes this line from the old policy:
It shall be (the) policy of the District to provide for study of controversial issues within the scope of the district curriculum. In order that students may have an opportunity to study such issues in a class atmosphere, void of partisanship and bias.
And replaces it with this line:
It shall be (the) policy of the District to provide for study of controversial issues within the scope of the district curriculum. In order that students may have an opportunity to study such issues in a class atmosphere, the topic will be studied through an academic lens.
It’s doubtful whether this line would have been advanced by the right-wing slate if that slate had won the election.
Right-wing candidate Elliott Arthur, who served as the slate’s unofficial leader, spoke forcefully about his belief that the district has allowed “ideologies harmful to impressionable young minds to permeate what passes for education” and called for the removal of “ideological nonsense” from school curricula.
Arthur and others were often vague about what “ideological nonsense” needed to be removed from classrooms. But it’s clear that classroom material being free of “bias” was a more pertinent concern for right-wing school board critics than whether teachers were using an “academic lens.”
That doesn’t mean the policies are done deals. Several school board members voiced interest in gathering public input.
Trustee Nate Martin said during the board’s Dec. 14 meeting that it was insufficient to make a note of the proposed policies on the district website and hope people see it. Trustee Janice Marshall agreed.
“They have been hot topics and we want to make sure we’re hearing from people,” she said.
Trustee Emily Siegel Stanton suggested the curriculum committee hold public listening sessions.
“I have a sense that the more community engagement we get as these policies move into place, the less conflict we’ll have as we might need to enact them,” she said.
Superintendent John Goldhardt said he was open to the idea, but added it will be important to emphasize that the board ultimately decides the policy.
“We just want to make sure it’s a positive, productive experience,” he told the board.
Assistant Superintendent Debbie Fisher runs the curriculum committee and worked with high school and middle school social studies teachers to draft the policy change proposals below.
All three policies passed their first reading. Each needs to pass three readings before it can be officially adopted.
The school board’s next regular meeting is scheduled for Jan. 11.
Policy 3005 — Teaching of Controversial Issues
In addition to endorsing the use of an academic lens, Policy 3005 updates instances of “s/he” to “they” and updates instances of “her/his” to “their.” The policy redefines a controversial issue as a “current topic” instead of a “current problem.” And it takes this line:
Teachers have the obligation to deal with such issues in a professional manner. The issues should grow naturally out of the regular classroom learning situations, should be appropriate to the subject taught, and should be on the maturity level of the students.
And changes it to read:
Teachers have the obligation to deal with such issues in a professional manner. The issues should grow naturally out of the regular classroom learning situations, should be appropriate to the subject taught, and align with content standards for the course/grade level, and may include topics that arise spontaneously.
Finally, the policy adds: “Parent/Student are responsible for communicating with the teacher if an alternative assignment is needed.”
Policy 3006 — Handling Communications, Suggestions, and Complaints from the Public and from District Personnel Regarding Instructional Material
Policy 3006 outlines the procedure the district follows whenever a parent or employee takes issue with any instructional material being used in classrooms. That process starts at the “lowest administrative level” but if that fails to resolve the issue, the complaint can be taken up the chain of the command.
If that happens, the district will convene a “study committee” of professional staff and community members, who will meet, keep minutes and report their activities to the Wyoming Board of Education. The relevant principal would then “meet with the complainant to explain the committee’s written findings.”
The revised Policy 3006 does not change much about this process, but it introduces a new, official citizen’s complaint form that a parent or employee would have to submit to advance their complaint beyond the “lowest administrative level.”
The form asks the complainant a series of questions, such as:
“Do you represent yourself? Or an organization?”
“Have you examined the entire resource? If not, what sections did you review?”
“What concerns you about the resource?”
“Are there resource(s) you suggest to provide additional information and/or other viewpoints on this topic?”
“What action are you requesting the committee consider?”
Finally, the policy eliminates language about a similar process for library books; those considerations now constitute the new Policy 3015.
Policy 3015 — Handling Communications, Suggestions, and Complaints from the Public and from District Personnel Regarding Library/Media Center Material
Policy 3015 outlines a nearly identical process for parents or district personnel who want to lodge complaints about library books. That process for challenging library books — or any materials available in a school’s media center — involves the same citizen’s complaint form referenced above.
Thanks for this important reporting. I appreciate your coverage of ACSD1 schools.