LETTER: Windham School District Policy IGE HB 542

By Michelle Levell

I recently became aware of a problem with a newly adopted Windham School Board policy, Policy IGE. The purpose of this policy is to follow RSA 186:11, IX-c, a new law that allows parents to chose alternative classroom materials for their child in place of objectionable resources, at the parents' expense, at no cost to the schools.

This RSA was created when the legislature overrode Governor Lynch's veto of HB 542 on January 4, 2012. The impetus for HB 542 goes back to a 2010 problem in Bedford that caught national headlines. A family pulled their high school student from Bedford High School over a controversial book assigned in a personal finance class because the school would not permit an alternative. Personal finance is a required course for graduation at Bedford High and this book was required reading in the class. When the parents could not have an alternate book assigned to their son, they petitioned the school board. The Bedford School Board told the family that the student must complete the course as originally outlined, including the objectionable book, if he wanted to graduate. The parents were given no choice -- either have the student read the book, or leave the public school.

HB 542 sought to address this kind of situation and bring a small element of "school choice" to the public school system. Prior to the new law, parents only had the [legal] right to object to a particular unit of sex-education instruction on religious grounds (RSA 186:11, IX-b). Any other parental objections may or may not be honored by the school district at the SAU or school's discretion.

Here is a hypothetical scenario of how this new law and RSA could work. You may be familiar with the "Hunger Games" trilogy. It is a juvenile fiction series that was recently made into a popular movie. It has been assigned to middle-school classrooms across the country; however, some parents do not want their children reading it because the novel has kids killing kids. Under this new RSA, New Hampshire parents are allowed to have their child - not the entire class - read a different book, at the parents' expense, as long as the alternative accomplishes the same learning objectives.

This is a link to the new law and RSA 186:11, IX-c

http://ssl.csg.org/dockets/2013cycle/33Bbills/2033b03nhbjectionablematerialschoolcourses.pdf

Upon reading the new RSA, it is clear exactly how the new law is intended to work. Parents and the school principal or district representative must reach a mutual agreement on alternate classroom material. No one has overriding authority over the other party.

Unfortunately, the WSB created a policy, which I believe, is inconsistent with the new RSA. Policy IGE  gives final authority to the Superintendent; he's allowed to trump the parents. Also, the new policy expressly removes the ability of the parents to petition the school board for appeal. This is alarming because it limits the citizens' ability to access their duly elected and responsible local governing body. The problematic language is as follows:

If the parties cannot agree on acceptable alternative material, either party may appeal to the Superintendent who will have final decision-making authority.

Nothing in this policy shall be construed as giving parents/guardians the right to appeal to the school board.

http://www.windhamsd.org/schbdinfo/policy/WSD_IGE.pdf

As of mid July I have been in communication with Dr. LaBranche and the WSB officers, alerting them to these problems. In response, they have agreed to re-open discussion of Policy IGE at the August 7th WSB meeting. I urge the Windham School Board to remove these two sentences. I believe both must be deleted in order to be consistent with the new law and RSA. I believe that if Policy IGE is not appropriately changed, Windham parents may not be given choices for their child's instruction which are allowed by law, and Windham will be vulnerable to legal action because the policy is inconsistent with RSA 186:11, IX-c. I urge the WSB to respect the new law and remove these two elements of Policy IGE.

Unfortunately, this is not a problem unique to Windham; this issue is also pertinent to the citizens of Pelham. The Pelham School Board adopted an identical policy with the same problematic language.

http://www.pelhamsd.org/index.php/document-directory?task=document.viewdoc&id=238      Pelham should also consider revising their Policy IGE for the same reasons.

I think this is a very critical issue facing families. If you agree, please consider attending the next WSB meeting on Tuesday, August 7th at 7pm or contacting the WSB directly.

--Michelle Levell, Windham