Sheridan County librarian expresses concern on proposed School District 1 library resource policies

SHERIDAN — The Sheridan County School District 1 board plans to continue workshopping library and curriculum resource policies it passed on first reading Tuesday after members of the public, including a school librarian, brought forth concerns about them.

The policies the board passed — which still require approval on second and final readings at future public meetings before being officially enacted — revise the complaint and reconsideration process for both curriculum resources and library materials. Curriculum resources are used by instructors in classrooms, while library materials are available for students to read and check out on their own time.

Cindy Hagen, librarian for the Big Horn high school and middle school, said she had concerns specifically regarding the policies that would govern library resources.

The main policy regarding library books — titled KLBA (Reconsideration of Library Resources) — would allow stakeholders to challenge library materials on the basis of religion, ideology or profanity/obscenity. Per the policy, it would also ban content portraying “explicit sexual nudity (depictions of sexual organs regardless of state of arousal), obscene and/or graphic references to sexual activities … rape, incest, and/or promotion of drug or alcohol abuse” from any SCSD1 library or classroom.

Hagen said the policy could keep the school district from maintaining a diverse collection of library materials that have “literary, artistic, political and scientific merit.”

Hagen — who said her comments represented her personal concerns and did not reflect the opinions of her supervisors or the school district — said the language in the proposed policy that outlines what constitutes profanity and obscenity is subjective, as opposed to a legal definition. Hagen cited a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court case, California v. Miller, when the court defined obscene material as that which takes “a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex or excretion … and … is utterly without redeeming social importance."

Hagen said because the policy bans all depictions of sexual organs, it would remove materials from the district related to biology, anatomy and human health; the Bible; significant works of poetry; Greek and Roman mythology; and classic novel “The Catcher in the Rye.”

It would also ban certain historical works of art and design, including works by Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci.

“I could list many more specific items and references that will be removed from classrooms and libraries if the policy goes forward with the current wording,” Hagen said. “I understand the desire to have a checklist to follow to determine an item’s suitability, however … complexities exist in individual materials that require individual considerations … In addition, materials chosen for the classroom and library are chosen by staff with expertise and education in their subject matter. Materials are reviewed by administration. Curriculum and library material lists are available for review. What does a ban of all materials defined by a checklist of subjective words serve?”

SCSD1 Board Chair Clint Krumm agreed the board should work to carefully reconsider the language of the policy to ensure necessary educational resources would not be removed from the district. He said the board is not required to bring forth the policies for a second reading vote at its April 9 meeting, and the board may take extra time to revise the policies further during future work sessions.

“The vote tonight means that we still want to continue on with this process. [The policy] is certainly not a finished product yet, but it’s getting closer,” Krumm said. “I recognize that we don't want graphic stuff in schools. So how do we define the language so that we can keep anatomy books, but keep the filth out? The language [of the policy] is important, anatomy is important, science is important. That needs to stay in schools.”

Hagen said she understood the intention of the policy but implored the board to make the wording of it more objective.

“I share your commitment to ensuring our children's educational content is appropriate and safe … While the intention behind the proposed wording may be to protect students, these types of subjective bans have unintended negative consequences. They limit educational opportunities, lead to legal and ethical challenges and create a divisive community atmosphere. They’re problematic to enforce without significant resources,” Hagen said. “A more effective approach involves focusing on established practices, utilization of legal definitions, trust in our highly educated and dedicated staff, a clear opt-out policy and a balanced reconsideration committee.”

The proposed KLBA policy would create an “opt-out” system, in which parents could request that their own child not read specific books or resources in the library if they feel their initial complaint to building staff was not resolved. The librarian or media specialist would honor the request of the parents.

The policy would also keep a reconsideration committee in place for formal challenges to library resources, which stakeholders could submit if their initial complaint was not resolved.

Community member Kelly Bridges brought concerns to the board that certain aspects of the library and curriculum resource policies were not stringent enough. She also said the reconsideration committee — which under the proposed policy would consist of the superintendent, principal of the school where the request is being made, a library specialist, two teachers and five parents from the District Advisory Committee — should not include the principal or library specialist.

“I think the goal of this … should be to establish a neutral committee, and it seems pretty clear to me that including the principal and the library specialist — who have already approved this resource to be in a school — on that committee is starting off on the wrong foot,” Bridges said. “I think those people are not appropriate. While I believe they should be able to offer testimony … I think those two people being on the committee is biased and inappropriate.”

Under the proposed policies, reconsideration committee meetings would be closed to the public. Bridges said the board should err on the side of transparency and amend the policy to make all meetings open to the public.

The board will continue to revise the library and curriculum material policies at its April work session. An official date, time and location for that work session has not yet been set.

SCSD1 Superintendent Jeff Jones told The Sheridan Press March 5 that now is the time for the district to workshop these policies because it allows the board to be proactive about an issue that’s been the topic of recent nationwide conversation.

“When I started [as superintendent] in July, that was something that I had been watching happen across the country … concerns about parents’ rights and library books and controversial topics. So one of the things that we tried to make a priority right away this school year was to kind of be proactive,” Jones said. “Rather than waiting to react when we have an issue, we’re making sure we look at our current policies in those areas and take care of those with stakeholder input right out of the gate.”

This story was published on March 20, 2024.