'Current Events' policy sparks new debate at school board meeting

Appropriate classroom discussion was the focus of debate for members of the Upper Moreland School Board Policy committee, which met Feb. 8.

The policy in question was number 119, also known as “Current Events.”

According to the policy’s purpose statement:

“The board believes that the consideration of current events has a legitimate place in the instructional program of the schools.”

The purpose statement goes further to say that students could learn to identify important issues, exploring them fully and fairly, and developing techniques to formulate and evaluate oftentimes opposing positions.

However, new wording under the policy’s Delegation of Responsibility statement became a cause for concern for several board members.

The added paragraph states:

“When considering the use of a specific current event topic or current event resource, professional staff members shall reflect on the potential for the topic or resource to be considered controversial to students or community. If a potential for controversy exists, staff members are directed to discuss the nature of their concern with building administration prior to introducing the topic or resource to students. With a potentially controversial or clearly controversial topic or resource, agreement to the use and scope of the topic or resource must be achieved between the building administrator and teacher prior to any introduction to students.”

[Clarification: in a previous edition of this article, a portion of the policy's "authority" statement was incorrectly cited.]

This would mean that instructors would have to first seek permission from administration before including any current event issues into their lessons.

The current policy does not madate this action.

“The question is," Dr. Robert Milrod, superintendent of schools, said. "Should we safeguard what is discussed in a high school classroom?”

Milrod wanted to give the board an example of a current event that may be uncomfortable or volitile to discuss in a high school classroom: abortion.

He said that this example in particular should call for a teacher to seek administrative approval.

“I would hope that the teachers that we have would be centrist enough to discuss it,” said Donald Warner, school board member. He was speaking from the audience, as he is not a part of the policy committee.

“I think that some parents would want to know why is that even being discussed in the classroom at all,” Milrod replied.

Milrod proceeded to recount past board meetings with angry parents, upset over what was being discussed in the classroom.

He explained that the added paragraph would help protect the school district from liability. 

“My own opinion is that we should be defending free speech,” Dr. David Hakes, board president said, adding that the addition to the policy would be restrictive to the spirit of education. “In a policy, where do you define where the line is?”

At the close of the discussion, Mark Wenick, the Policy Committee’s chairperson, took a school board member poll, and found that a majority of the members wanted the wording taken out or modified.

“We don’t necessarily believe that the teacher needs to review to present to the class,” Wenick said after the meeting.

He explained that, at the policy’s first reading, the committee asked if wording could be added so that the board may have a clear position on how a teacher should act when discussing sensitive topics with students.

“It was added last month because the board wanted steps to guide the instructor on how to handle current events,” Wenick said. “At the same time, we don’t want to stifle the conversation.”

The policies that will be read for the third time and up for approval next month:

• # 110 - Instructional Supplies and Equipment (Programs)
• # 118 – Independent Study (Programs)
• # 119 – Current Events (Programs)
• # 120 – Family Living/Human Development Program (Programs)

The following policies were reviewed for the third time and approved at the committee meeting:

• # 115 – Vocational Education (Programs)
• # 116 – Tutorial Instruction (Programs)
• # 117 – Homebound Instruction (Programs)

---

More from the reporter’s notebook:

Harry Protzman, the district’s facilities manager, went before the school board members of the Facilities and Operation Committee, and he asked them to close Bear Boulevard to public access.

Speaking at the Feb. 8 meeting, Protzman informed the board members of the overuse of Bear Boulevard by non-school affiliated drivers.

Bear Boulevard is located on school district property. It starts a little way up from the main entrance of the high school and administrative buildings off Fitzwatertown Road, and travels behind the high school building out to Reed Street.

Along with the fact that too many non-school-related drivers are using Bear Boulevard as a cut-through, causing a hazard for students,  Protzman said that it’s too dangerous to traverse during inclement weather.

“We need to do something to stop people coming up the road for safety reasons,” Protzman said.

According to Protzman, the road was used during the last snow and ice storms before he had a chance to fully plow a pathway, making his job and fellow facilities workers a dangerous one.

He suggested that gates be put up and closed during certain hours of the late evening to early morning, a task that would cost the district $3,000 for two gates.

“That road has been there for 50 years; it has been allowed to be traversed,” school board vice-president and Facilities and Operation Committee chairperson Donald Warner said, and he suggested that residents may be able to take legal actions against the district to keep it open due to a public use precedence.

The committee seemed to agree about the hazard that so many vehicles traveling the road would create for students, but were hesitant to install gates because of the price tag.

“How about signs that say, ‘No through traffic during school hours?’” suggested Lisa Berlin, school board member.

After further discussion, Warner said that obtaining traffic signs would be the committee’s next step.