We’re going to be considering ‘controversial issues and controversial materials’ as defined by the Archuleta School District in their Policy IMB, and as discussed recently by the Board of Directors of Pagosa Peak Open School (PPOS) — a semi-independent District-authorized, tuition-free charter school located in Aspen Village near Walmart.
Disclosure: I’m a member of the PPOS Board, but this editorial series reflects only my own personal opinions, and not necessarily the opinions of any other PPOS Board members or the Board as a whole.
As mentioned previously in this editorial series, ASD defines the challenge of ‘controversial issues’ like this:
Controversial issues are defined as those problems, subjects or questions about which there are significant differences of opinion, and discussion of which generally create strong feelings among people. Although there may be disagreement over what the facts are and what they mean, subjects usually become controversial issues because of differences in interpretations of the facts or the values people use in applying the facts.
We have a little problem when ‘facts’ are not actually ‘facts’. For example, the ‘fact’ that humans must be categorized as ‘races’ that are somehow qualitatively, and essentially, distinct, is not a ‘fact’. It’s a politically-convenient premise that dates from the 1600s but is still embraced by many people in 2023.
On the other hand, it is indeed a fact that Americans disagree about the existence of ‘institutional racism’.
We also disagree about sexual choices, including the freedom to engage in same-sex relationships, and including the freedom to define one’s own sexual identity.
Once again, it’s a fact that we disagree.
Whether the “Liberty” to make sexual choices is one of the desired “Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” mentioned in the U.S. Constitution, is a a matter of opinion. And a controversial opinion at that, based in many cases on religious beliefs.
We also disagree about the proper role of public education, when it exists in a culture that can’t agree about racism, and can’t agree about sexual choices, and so many other things.
The discussion last week among the members of the PPOS Board, about approving or creating a “Controversial Issues” policy, resulted from a book that included a transgender character, being read in one of the classrooms.
It’s a fact that transgender individuals exist in America, and some PPOS staff and students may have such individuals in their families. The controversy arises when some community members contend that the right to define one’s own gender does not exist, and therefore, public schools should act as if transgender individuals do not exist, or at the very least, should not be mentioned or discussed.
One choice open to the PPOS Board was to adopt ASD’s existing Policy IMB. You can download that policy here. The policy says, in part:
Teachers may use controversial learning materials and discuss controversial issues if they contribute to the attainment of course objectives directly related to Board-adopted academic standards. The educational purpose of teaching about controversial issues or using controversial materials must be student achievement in academic standards rather than reaching conclusions about the validity of a specific point of view.
In teaching about controversial issues, teachers shall work cooperatively with the building principal. Teachers shall obtain approval from the building principal prior to the use of any controversial materials…
…When teaching about controversial issues, teachers may express their personal viewpoints and opinions; however, they also have the obligation to be objective and impartially present the various sides of an issue. Controversial issues are to be presented with good judgment and coordination with the building principal, keeping in mind the maturity of the students.
When controversial issues or controversial materials are used as part of the instructional program, alternative learning activities shall be provided when feasible at the request of a student or the student’s parents/guardians.
A very practical challenge posed by this policy, is the lack of a clear definition of “controversial” that a teacher can refer to, “prior to the use of any controversial materials.” A Pagosa teacher might wonder whether, for example, materials about COVID-19 published by the federal government constitute “controversial materials” — consider the large number of local citizens who appeared at ASD School Board meeting in 2020 and 2021, to protest District COVID policies.
Or we might consider the situation where a Middle School or High School teacher, in a effort to address classroom bullying, asks the principal for permission to develop an assignment dealing with gender identity — and is denied permission.
Or, even more disturbing perhaps: the principal approves the assignment — but the parents of the classroom bully demand that their student be exempt from the assignment?
No school policy is ever going to address all possible situations.
The question facing the PPOS Board last week was whether to adopt the ASD Policy IMB, or to create its own policy.
When creating a policy or making another type of important decision, the PPOS Board sometimes refers to the “Mission” that defines the essential goals of the PPOS community — its raison d’etre:
Developing brave and experienced lifelong learners who contribute to our evolving world.
This Mission could be contrasted with the mission of Archuleta School District:
The mission of Archuleta School District 50 JT is to empower students and staff to achieve personal and academic successes in a safe and appropriate learning environment while providing them with the tools to effectively navigate the 21st century.
From my perspective, one of these missions — the ASD Mission — is focused on “success” for the individual student, in a “safe and appropriate” environment. Policy IMB seems to align with that mission, by encouraging an environment where no one needs to feel challenged or defensive.
The PPOS Mission strives for “brave” and “experienced” learners who contribute to the world.
Spending your time in a “safe and appropriate environment” might suit some families. It might not, however, be the best way to promote bravery, or encourage the quest for experience. In fact, that might be completely the wrong environment.
And of course, you can’t very well teach bravery unless you are, yourself, brave.
Which might mean, being unafraid… of controversy.
