WCPS’s Abominable New Procedures for Reviewing Library Materials

Since I last wrote about my client’s efforts to have library materials reviewed by Washington County Public Schools, we have learned that in June, 2022, WCPS adopted a comprehensive new procedure for reviewing library materials that have already found their way into public school libraries.

The Associate Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction was kind enough to send me the brand-new School Library Media Collection Development Procedures adopted June, 2022 (the “2022 Procedures”). I asked whether the new policy was approved by the Board of Education, and was advised that the Procedures “are operational and do not require Board of Education approval. Much like the student services manual, staff update these procedures.” After reviewing the Board Curriculum and Instruction Committee Meeting Minutes from July 5, 2022, it appears the 2022 Procedures were created by WCPS’s Supervisor of Library Media/Technology.

SO… WHAT’S… LIKE… THE NEW PROCEDURE… MAN?

Well, in a nutshell, the new procedure is a restrictive three step process with tight deadlines, and in which the elected Board of Education has absolutely no say, whatsoever.

First, a complaint for reconsideration of library materials can only be brought by: (a) “community member” who “must reside within the school where the book is located” (presumably, they mean the school district, and not literally “within the school”), (b) a parent/guardian of a child attending the school where the book is located, (c) an employee working at the school where the book is located, or (d) a student attending the school where the book is located. A general community member has no right to complain about a book in a school unless they happen to live in a school district where that specific book is located.

In Step One, a complaining party “should state in writing their concerns to that school's library media specialist or school principal.” After that, a meeting is scheduled, and the school’s library media specialist and the principal “will review the collection development plan and resource selection process.” “If the material is placed appropriately and does not exceed the age/grade band of the school building, then the complaint is resolved and considered final.” (Commentary: This seems cut-and-dry, but actually gives total deference to the initial selection process. The point of the review process is to give concerned constituents a way to weed out material that somehow met the selection criteria but is still nonetheless objectionable. Therefore, it does little good to the complaining party to "consider” the complaint “resolved” and “final” by simply verifying that the initial selection criteria was met.)

"If the material is questionable based on the Criteria for Selection the complainant will have the ability to file the WCPS Library Request for Reconsideration of Material Form.” (Commentary: Again, the language used here seems to suggest that if the material meets the initial selection criteria, then no party has a right to complain or to advance the review process any further. However, reading the 3-step process as a whole, it does look like it is designed to allow for a complaining party to go ahead and file this step-two request form, even though the the policy technically says “the complaint is resolved and considered final.” Otherwise, the entire review procedure is truly a farce.)

Step Two is the District Level Reconsideration Process, at which one arrives by filing the Request for Reconsideration of Material Form (hard copy only, and one for each book) “to the school principal within ten school days. If a completed reconsideration form is not submitted within ten school days after the School-Based Review meeting, the matter is considered closed.”

The District Level Reconsideration Committee will be a 5 member panel (which may or may not include the complaining parent and/or an actual student from the school where the challenged book is located). The Committee will review the materials and schedule a meeting “within 60 school days” (so, within like 3 to 6 months, depending on when the appeal is filed), and then after the meeting, “[t]he committee will discuss and vote by the simple majority to retain, relocate, or remove the resource.”

“If a complainant is not satisfied with the District-Level Reconsideration decision regarding a resource and the resource outside the appropriate age/grade bands of the building, they may take their request for reconsideration to the Executive Leadership Committee within ten school days.”

You have now arrived at Step Three, which is the Executive Leadership Reconsideration Process. The Executive Leadership Committee is made up of the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction and two Superintendent Designees. This Committee then has 60 school days to make a final decision, which “applies systemically to all WCPS schools” and “will stand for five years before new requests for reconsideration of those items will be entertained.”

After I reviewed these procedures, I received confirmation from the Associate Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction that “you are correct that the Board of Education is not involved in the approval or reconsideration process for library materials.”

Soooooo…….

So, if I were going to design a process that made it as user-unfriendly as possible for a concerned parent or community member to successfully challenge any library material, no matter how egregious, this would be the model.

The process is opaque, and uses language that makes it appear that the decision is final at step one, even though it appears to contemplate appeals to steps 2 and 3.

Moreover, the complaining/appealing party is given short 10-day deadlines to file their next levels of appeal, while the school is given 6 times as long to hold a meeting, each time. A concerned parent can easily spend nearly an entire school year navigating this process.

It seems to me that the school administration and several members of the Board are content to keep any material in the school libraries once it has cleared the initial selection criteria, and they comfort themselves by pointing to their policy that allows parents to identify specific titles that they don’t want their children to have access to. While this is certainly helpful, it isn’t a practical solution for the vast majority of parents who cannot be reasonably expected to hawkishly police every piece of library media that comes available in the school system, and it does absolutely nothing to address the larger issue.

The larger issue is, as was expressed by the four dissenting justices of the Supreme Court in its Pico decision, that the materials selected and retained by the school board are a reflection of the values of the community:

Whatever role the government might play as a conduit of information, schools in particular ought not be made a slavish courier of the material of third parties. The plurality pays homage to the ancient verity that in the administration of the public schools " `there is a legitimate and substantial community interest in promoting respect for authority and traditional values be they social, moral, or political.' " Ante, at 864. If, as we have held, schools may legitimately be used as vehicles for "inculcating fundamental values necessary to the maintenance of a democratic political system," Ambach v. Norwick, 441 U. S. 68, 77 (1979), school authorities must have broad discretion to fulfill that obligation. Presumably all activity within a primary or secondary school involves the conveyance of information and at least an implied approval of the worth of that information. How are "fundamental values" to be inculcated except by having school boards make content-based decisions about the appropriateness of retaining materials in the school library and curriculum. In order to fulfill its function, an elected school board must express its views on the subjects which are taught to its students. In doing so those elected officials express the views of their community; they may err, of course, and the voters may remove them.

I am disappointed that our elected Board of Education has, to date, utterly abdicated its responsibility to review and weed out materials that have been brought to its attention as being inappropriate and not reflective of this community’s values. It will do no good for the Board to sit back and pretend that it lacks the power to pull inappropriate materials from its shelves, but, rather, to delegate that authority to unelected staff. The School Board is the extension of The People, and The People get to vote for board members that they believe will instill proper values into our children and ultimately the future of our community.

The closing page (below) of my letter from almost a year ago is as appropriate today as it was back then — even moreso, since Election Day is just a few days hence as of this writing.