Information, please!
Keeping Blue Valley Parents in the Dark
The Blue Valley Board of Education has been asked to provide some basic information about their Communication Arts (English) curriculum by parents and patrons of the system. They have been presented with these questions by multiple people in multiple ways for many months (since September 2003). Click the question to read the answers provided by the Blue Valley school district as of September 2004.
What books are currently approved (by the district) for each Communication Arts class?
Where is the documentation
that identifies how the currently selected novels relate to the official course objectives?Does Blue Valley intend to respect and enforce selection policy
4600 which states that the books shall be "age appropriate?" If so, how will "age appropriateness" be determined?How will parents know (prior to the required reading assignment), that a book contains highly controversial or repulsive content?
What is the official Blue Valley alternative policy should a parent not want their child to be required to read a particular book?
Exactly what legal ruling did the Board use to justify their vote to retain This Boy's Life in the freshman curriculum? Click here for more information.
September 2004 Update
Q1: What books are currently approved (by the district) for each Communication Arts class?
A1: Click here for a complete list of "district approved books" for the Blue Valley school system. (Note that the books on this list changed significantly from Spring 2004 to Fall 2004, and continue to change throughout the school year.) Unfortunately, some Blue Valley Communication Arts teachers continue to assign books that are not on the approved list such as Friday Night Lights and Boy's Life. In addition, MANY other non-district-approved books are promoted within classrooms as reading "choices" (students are given a choice of 2 or more books from which they must read). Therefore, click here for a complete list of all of the books that we have seen referenced on Blue Valley Communication Arts syllabi over the past 18 months. The books with a 6/2004 value in the Date column are the ones that are currently "officially" approved by the district.
Q2: Where is the documentation that identifies how the currently selected novels relate to the official course objectives?
A2: Rationales for each book on the district approved list are available at each Blue Valley High School library. Note, however, that these "rationales" DO NOT adhere to the current selection policy in that they do not assure parents that the books are absent of gratuitous sex, violence, and profanity -- a promise made by the Blue Valley Board of Education at the September 2004 meeting via the adoption of the new selection policy.
Q3: Does Blue Valley intend to respect and enforce selection policy 4600 which states that the books shall be "age appropriate?" If so, how will "age appropriateness" be determined?
A3: To date, there has never been any written documentation to explain how the district makes their "age appropriate" determinations although this criterion has been part of the official selection policy for many years. Even more concerning, is the fact that the current rationales contain no information about the amount, type, or explicitness of the sex, violence, profanity, or other adult topics that are described in novels used as required reading assignments. Yes, the current selection policy states that books used as required reading will be absent of this extremely offensive material, but NO, the school has never made any effort to document how they follow or enforce this policy.
A4: Nothing that is provided by the school gives parents this important information. Currently, the school provides two basic pieces of information about the books used as required reading assignments: the book titles and teacher-written book rationales.
The book titles for each class are often shared as reading assignments via class Web sites. Book titles are also provided as hand-outs at back-to-school night. The other major source of school-provided information is in teacher-written book rationales (located in the school libraries). Unfortunately, neither of these sources of information gives parents any clue as to the extent of sex, profanity, suicides, or other adult topics found in the required reading assignments. Therefore, the information parents most want and need to know about these books in order to actively engage in the education of their children on these important topics is currently still hidden from the parents.
A5: Blue Valley has developed an "official" alternative policy for those parents who want their children to read a particular title. Click here to read the alternative policy as well as a list of issues to consider if you plan to ask for an alternative for your child.
Q6: Exactly what legal ruling did the Board use to justify their vote to retain This Boy's Life in the freshman curriculum?
A6: Even though their own internal policy 4610 states that the BOE does have the right to remove a book from the curriculum, the Blue Valley BOE undermined their own policy and authority during the February 2004 meeting by referencing a nonspecific legal ruling that questioned their ability to vote to remove a book from the curriculum. They used this legal opinion as a primary reason to justify their vote to retain This Boy's Life in the Blue Valley required curriculum.
At the September 9, 2004, Sunflower Republican Women's Club meeting, Board member Cheryl Spalding again referenced this ruling as a primary reason for the 7-0 vote to retain This Boy's Life in the required curriculum. She stated that had the Board removed the book, this ruling would simply require them to "put it back in."
In September, we learned that the legal ruling that the Blue Valley BOE used to justify their position was a ruling that affected the Olathe school district. Over 10 years ago, the Olathe school district removed a controversial book (Annie on my Mind) from their public school library. Olathe was eventually required to return the book to their library shelves. The court ruling relied heavily on the fact that the Olathe school system did not follow their own policies for the selection and removal of learning resources.
Unfortunately, the Blue Valley BOE used this ruling as the reason why they could not remove This Boy's Life as a required reading textbook even though there were two distinct and important differences in the cases: 1) the Olathe case revolved around a book in a library and the Blue Valley case centered on a book used as a required reading assignment, and 2) the Olathe case revolved around the actions of school officials not acting within official school policies whereas in Blue Valley, the Board WAS following the process of challenge policy 4610 that clearly stated they had the ability to remove a textbook.
The bottom line, however, is that the Blue Valley BOE used this ruling as a primary justification for their vote, in effect nullifying the promises of policy 4610 for those parents who may, in the future, challenge required reading assignments.
The Supreme Court themselves has debated this issue in Board of Education v. Pico, and provided the ruling that local Boards of Education DO have the authority to remove materials in school libraries and classrooms that are “pervasively vulgar” or “educational unsuitable.”
In Board of Education v. Pico, the U.S. Supreme Court recognizes the legitimate authority that school boards have in removing materials from the educational settings of school libraries and classrooms that are “pervasively vulgar” or “educational unsuitable.” The Court maintains that the school board actions should reflect “community interest in promoting respect for authority and traditional values be they social, moral, or political.” Also, in Butler v. Michigan, "The First Amendment protects not only the dissemination but also the receipt of information and ideas" and "Public debate must not only be unfettered; it must be informed."