By Linda Conner Lambeck

WESTPORT–If the policy the school board adopts next month to evaluate school library materials and the process for challenging them seems familiar, it may be because the state is said to have used Westport practice as its template when it enacted the “Freedom to Read” legislation last year.

“This policy was written based on Westport policy,” said Board Vice Chair Dorie Hordon, who chairs the board’s policy committee, at a board meeting last week.

Policy 6160, in accordance with Public Act 25-168, would ensure that all district library materials are evaluated and made accessible with protections against discrimination. It also protects any school library media specialist or staff member with immunity against challenges.

Likewise, Policy 6141 would cover district instructional material selection in the same manner. The district’s current challenged material policy, 1312.1, would be repealed in the process.

The board is expected to vote on the measures at its May 21 meeting.

Processes outlined in the new policies are similar to what was used when three Staples library books were unsuccessfully challenged in 2023 with several distinct differences.

A school board member would be on the review committee for any challenged books but the board would no longer have the final say over decisions made by the committee.

That, Hordon said, bothers her a little.

“State law is diminishing local control,” Hordon said. “I feel Hartford is slowly taking away local control and voice.”

Board Chair Lee Goldstein agreed but called the new committee more community based.

In the 2023 challenge, a committee reviewed the books and voted to retain them. The superintendent upheld that decision. The parent then appealed to the school board but then withdrew the challenge before it could be heard. The three books: “This Book is Gay,” “Gender Queer” and “Flamer” remain in the library.

Who can challenge material has also changed under the new policy, allowing only someone with a vested interest, such as a current student, parent or staff member to initiate a challenge.

The legislation also tightens reasons for book removal. It is not good enough for someone to merely disagree with the content or find it offensive. Decisions must be based on professional, neutral standards rather than the viewpoint of the objector.

In general, material can only be excluded for “legitimate pedagogical purposes”, or in layman’s terms, educationally justifiable reasons such as it is age inappropriate or presents a safety hazard.

The idea is to prohibit bans based on partisan content or moral, political or religious views and ensure that students have access to a diverse range of ideas without undue censorship. 

The proposed local policy would also encourage objectors to informally try to work out their grievance with staff before filing a formal complaint.

That written complaint would be submitted to the school principal who would refer it to a review committee. In addition to the principal and a board member, the committee would include the schools superintendent or designee, a grade-level appropriate teacher, a librarian, two parents and, if the challenge is of a high school book, a high school student. The committee has up to 60 days to read the challenged material, evaluate it against the policy and render a decision.

If the decision is appealed, the school board can only determine if the proper process was followed, not weigh in on the material itself.

Assistant Superintendent John Bayers said an effort was made to stick as closely to the state law as written and not expand upon it. 

“That can get messy,” Bayers said.

Natalie Carrignan is the Director of Technology. She directly supervises all of the library media specialists in the district. She said that, while Westport had an existing policy on which to base the new one, many other school districts do not.

Board Member Andy Frankel said the new state requirement seems very restrictive.

“There have to be judgement calls,” Frankel said.

Goldstein said she hopes the form that must be filled out to challenge material will make people think about what they object to, and specifically why they oppose it.

The board was promised further discussion of the issue at its next policy committee meeting before it comes back for a vote later this month.

Even if the board votes against the policy, Bayers told the board that faculty would have to comply with the state law.

Title IX Changes

Separately, the board is to act on a revision of its Title IX policy, trying to navigate conflicting direction from state and federal sources when it comes to prohibiting sex discrimination and sexual harassment.

Bayers pointed out that the federal guidance and state law that feed into the changes still allow language broad enough to recognize everyone.

The U.S. Department of Education recently prohibited protections based on “gender identity” and defines sex strictly as biological male or female. 

New Connecticut law, meanwhile, calls on local and regional school boards to submit an annual Title IX compliance report to the state that names the district’s Title IX coordinator, details of training provided to staff, school policy, and resources used for complaints.

State law still encourages schools to allow transgender students to participate in activities and use facilities consistent with their gender identity. Connecticut law also says kids can continue to use the bathroom of the gender with which they identify.

At Staples, that can include single user bathrooms.

As for complaints, situations that no longer qualify for protection under Title IX, may instead be a violation of bullying or harassment policies, the board was told.

Linda Conner Lambeck

^{_{Linda Conner Lambeck covers education for Westport Journal. She was a reporter for more than four decades at the Connecticut Post and other Hearst publications. She has covered education throughout Fairfield and New Haven counties. She is a proud member of the Education Writers Association.}}