For the first time in recent memory the Gorham School Department has received a number of requests from at least one parent that schools remove certain materials from a classroom or library.
Parents have raised questions about their involvement in curriculum decisions and the protocols the School Department has in place to resolve these issues.
At the May School Committee (SC) meeting Eric Lane, supported by a small group of parents, questioned the process Superintendent Heather Perry had used in responding to his objections to curriculum in the past. He also objected to the decision denying his formal request that the school remove two posters from the Gorham Middle School health classroom.
Lane, who has a daughter at GMS, asserted that the district “promotes and pressures students to participate in gender theory” and that it did not respect his religious values. He accused the schools of fostering a “biased, corrupt, and pervertive culture.” He said that “he did not expect the school to promote his values, but they should stop promoting theirs.”
Gorham resident James Means spoke to denounce an email Superintendent Perry sent to teachers that requested their participation in a committee to evaluate the educational value of the posters. In that email she specifically said that she did not want to include students or parents. Means vowed to make the email “extremely public.”
Standing SC policy does not allow it to respond to public comments. Consequently, there was no opportunity for Perry to describe School Department procedures for resolving curriculum issues or to respond to the criticisms Means made of the email she sent to the teachers. Although these are two separate issues, both involve the broader question of parental involvement in curriculum decisions.
Documents show that Superintendent Perry followed the policy for Challenged Materials Procedures (IJJ-RR) approved by the School Committee in 2018.
This policy states that a complaint should first be addressed by the staff providing the materials. If not resolved there it should be referred to the school principal. If not resolved at the principal level, the individual making the complaint can file the “Citizen’s Challenge to Educational Materials.” The superintendent can then refer the request to the K-12 Curriculum Committee for a recommendation.
This procedure was followed. Since the district has no standing K-12 Curriculum Committee, Perry referred Lane’s request to the Teaching and Learning Committee, which does have student and parent members.
In this instance, however, she stated in her email to teachers on the committee that she wanted only teachers make the recommendation. Perry said later that she made this decision “because I did not want to place students or parents in the position of professionals regarding curriculum. Teachers are professional educators.”
Following IJJ-R guidelines, the committee carefully examined the posters and recommended that they stay in place. They concluded that the posters “are factual and do not promote anything.”
They are definitions of terms that “follow the spectrum from ‘straight’ to ‘non-binary’ to ‘gender non-conforming’ and everything in between. The posters are visual support for vocabulary and are inclusive of all views.”
The Superintendent accepted the recommendation of the committee and informed Lane that his request to remove the posters was denied. She added that he could appeal the decision to the School Committee.
According to Policy IJJ-RR the SC would then hold a meeting “for the purpose of receiving testimony from representatives of the various points of view.” The School Committee decision would be final.
Superintendent Perry admitted that parts of her April email to the teachers had been poorly worded. In it she had suggested using as “as many ‘rungs’ of the ladder as possible to slow the process down and to insure that the parent has to ‘work’ a little on their end as well.” She explained that her intent was for everyone to work at following policy.
Following the May 11 meeting she sent Lane a letter of apology for her “poorly chosen words.”