Milford School District has approved changes to their curriculum development policy, changing a policy that has been in place since 1984. Changes to the policy have resulted in controversy as the new version includes language related to controversial and sensitive topics.
“Education for effective citizenship is a major goal of the Milford School District. To achieve this goal, students should have an opportunity to examine controversial/sensitive issues within the context of their formal education experiences,” the revised Policy 6111 read when presented to the board. “The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for teaching the curriculum while protecting students’ mental health, and minimizing distractions, which result from adults silencing dissent or explicitly or implicitly imposing their personal beliefs.”
The policy stated that instructional materials must align with curriculum and the content be appropriate to the maturity and development of students. Problems and issues selected for discussion and study must be current, significant and of interest to students. Teachers would be permitted to use visual aids or instructional materials as long as they adhere to policy.
“Students have a responsibility to undertake the study multiple sides of an issue, to listen to other viewpoints with an open mind, and to evaluate issues on an intellectual, rather than an emotional basis,” the policy continued.
The policy allowed district staff to allow equal and unbiased investigation of multiple sides of a topic. This means providing students with learning materials that are relevant to the course of study, as defined in the course objectives and are appropriate to the maturity level and intellectual ability of the students.
“The district staff, as a moderator and a participant, will point out the possibility of errors in statements of students and writers and the possibility of alternative points of view. The district staff will see that facts, evidence and aspects of an issue are impartially presented and that students are helped to evaluate their sources of data as well as their methods for reaching conclusions,” the policy continued. “District staff shall encourage students to examine, analyze, and evaluate all available information so that each may form his/her own opinions. District staff have the right to express their opinions but shall ensure that students understand that it is opinion and not an authoritative answer.”
In addition, the policy instructed staff to not attempt to limit or control the judgment of students, directly or indirectly, and shall not encourage the acceptance of ideas, opinions, or beliefs of a particular group or ideology. Staff was also instructed to not use his/her position to further personal political aims or opinions. Staff were told to seek the advice of an administrator when in doubt about the appropriateness of introducing an issue in class.
“The American and State of Delaware flags, Milford Buccaneers logo, college/university flags, US military flags, and emblems related to the collective bargaining unit (and its membership) may be displayed as classroom, office, and hallway decorations,” the policy continued. “The District Staff will seek the advice of an administrator when in doubt about the appropriateness of a classroom decoration or a visual display related to a lesson. D. Rights and Responsibilities of the Administration.”
As for administration, the policy stated that when staff had doubts about the appropriateness of discussing certain controversial or sensitive issues in the classroom and seeks the advice of an administrator, the administrator should offer guidance. If the administrator and staff member are unable to agree, the matter will be referred to the Director of Teaching & Learning or designee.
“No adult group has the right, without authorization of the administration, to present arguments for or against any issue directly to students or to the class. The staff member, may however, with administration approval, invite representatives of different viewpoints to appear before the class to discuss their opinions,” the policy continued. “As for further content neutrality, administration shall not permit the one-sided presentation of political/ideological decorations, visual aids, or instructional materials, whether for or against any cause or issue.”
Milford School Board Vice-President Matt Bucher read a statement about the policy before motions or votes were taken.
“So, there were some questions tonight, and I anticipate these self-same questions. So, I’ve got some answers as to support systems for marginalized children and teens. We have multiple overlapping programs, millions of dollars’ worth of resources, including dozens of employees for students with emotional issues, social issues, trouble fitting and in any other issue,” Bucher said. “The district is practically its own state service center at this point, delivers services faster, and I would say better than the state service center. Treatment needs to be centered on the child, not the classroom environment. These are private matters for the counselors, the interventionists and the admin we have on staff in concert with the parent or guardian, who is always at risk of being left out of these conversations.”
Bucher continued, stating that he felt what this policy was doing was trying to adult centered behavior, and that he had seen some not child centered behavior. He felt the board needed to center behavior on what the child needs.
“There are activists and operatives that want their niche ideological perspectives, and their favorite social issues affirmed by the government and the community. These are taxpayer funded state facilities,” Bucher said. “Let’s talk about the community. There are some that state the community, quote, unquote, isn’t in favor of reinforcing this long-standing policy, which is not new. It dates from the 70s. We’re just updating it for the new legal environment in their own circle. I’m sure that’s true.”
Bucher stated that when he spoke to members of the community, they were often unaware of the push for social issues in public school.
“When I tell them, the man or woman on the street, the parent, the reaction, I can assure you, is always the same, given the trust in this state as of late in its public education system, the level I would think that a policy like this would be welcomed by the union that represents teachers, and for good or ill, is the face of public education in the state,” Bucher said. “The signal is, or would be, look at us. We’re fair. We’re unbiased. We proudly represent all. The fact that they are in opposition to this policy, and even sent the state president down here to speak against it from Wilmington is telling to me. There are some that have said, “Why are you concentrating your attention on this when efficiency scores are low in the state of Delaware, they’re low in the district?” Great question. The answer is, we are not concentrating on them. You are.”
Bucher continued.
By you, I mean the collection of activists and known political operatives, most of which are located beyond the boundaries of our school district. We teach the state standards here. We always have and we always will. So, when people bring up eccentricities like the Lost Cause theory or the Holocaust, we teach the state standards for history and all of those subjects are there. Quite frankly, that’s how you tell me you don’t know about Delaware public education without telling us you don’t know about Delaware public education,” Bucher said. “We will continue to teach the state standards. We will continue to teach the state mandated history programs. Those mandated by legislation by the Department of Education, and if your real complaint is academic achievement, you should welcome a return to academic concentration and avoiding advocacy in the learning spaces.”
Bucher stated that if the complaint was concentration on academics, this policy should get full support. In his opinion, the culprit was the part of education that had been guided by ancillary parties.
“You could blame our great teachers, I would oppose you in that. So when the original policy, the one that has existed for many years, came up for revision, I was the one that ended up moving to kill it. I also moved to kill the revision last year,” Bucher said. “Why? Because I thought these policies were only as good as the intentions of the people who had an interest.”
He made the comment that someone who spoke during public comment asked why this policy had returned.
“I said at the time, it would come back when we had a policy that was crafted with legal considerations in mind for unreasonable people. So we have a policy here that operates on two absolutely concrete principles that no court in Delaware or the Third Circuit Court or the Supreme Court or any other court would have any opposition to and creates precedence for one community, through their elected representatives on the board, has the perfect right to insist that personnel teach the approved curriculum, which, again, I mentioned, complies with the state standards and all applicable regulations state and Federal, and always will,” Bucher said. “Two, the community has a right to expect a neutral learning environment without political or quasi-political, ideological or social advocacy disguised as education or presented as either inherently moral or presented as the only correct answer. So, none of the objections raised in public comment at this session or previous sessions with previous iterations are grounded in fact.”
After Bucher’s statement, Board Member Ashlee Connell made a motion to pass Board Policy 6111. Bucher asked if Connell would agree to amend the motion as he thought there would be more discussion. Connell agreed that she would.
“There’s a couple of changes I would like to make, and I will provide them to it to the board secretary and the executive secretary. I would like to delete under instructional materials the line “problems and issues selected for discussion and study will be current, significant and of interest to students.” I would like to delete Section B in total,” Bucher said. “Section B reads “responsibilities of the student. Students have a responsibility to undertake the study of multiple sides of an issue.” That would be deleted just because of grammar, to listen to other viewpoints with an open mind, and to evaluate issues on the intellectual rather than emotional basis. Again, that’s thought a role, and students have no such responsibility. They should, but I don’t think that we ought to be mandating my policy.”
Bucher continued with recommended edits.
“Where it reads the American and state of Delaware, flags, Milford Buccaneer logo, college, university flags, military flags and emblems related to the collective bargaining unit and membership may be displayed as classroom, office and hallway decorations, please add the following: “Staff shall display no other decoration or symbol of a political, ideological nature, with the following exception, current or historical flags or symbols of nations may be displayed in the context of instruction in history, geography or foreign language,” Bucher said. “So, I Miss Connell, I’m amending your motion with the following additions and subtractions, if it if it’s okay with you.”
Connell agreed, stating she made a motion to accept the policy with Bucher’s recommendations. The motion was seconded by Board Member Butch Elzey and passed unanimously.
