Times Editorial : Fayette-heit 451
Posted on Saturday, June 4, 2005
related stories
Fayetteville School Library Book debate
Fayetteville resident Laurie Taylor has made a proposal to place certain Fayetteville Public School library books she considers to be inappropriate for students on a restricted access shelf. Fayetteville School District patrons received a chance to voice their opinions on whether to restrict student access to certain school library books at a special town hall meeting. The Fayetteville School board eventually decided by a narrow margin not to restrict access to certain books. The stories below cover the issue from its beginings through the decision by the school board and the aftermath.
- School board spends much of 2005 debating books (01-01-2006)
- Taylor becomes public figure with war against books (01-01-2006)
- Times Editorial : A good sign (10-06-2005)
- Taylor joins UA debate team for discussion of library books (10-06-2005)
- School committee says ‘crude’ book to stay in FHS library (10-05-2005)
- UA debate team addressing school’s recent book issue (10-05-2005)
- Books wonít be restricted (09-16-2005)
- Times Editorial : Back to the books II (09-15-2005)
- The great book debate (09-14-2005)
- Times Editorial : Back to the books (09-13-2005)
Spring’s lingering debate over the appropriateness of sexually explicit material in some libraries of Fayetteville Public Schools reached a conclusion recently with the adoption by the Board of Education of new rules proposed by Superintendent Bobby New that struck a wise balance between competing viewpoints. It wasn’t easy, though. The final vote was 4-3, with some educators and librarians leaving the controversy feeling their professionalism and their commitment to do right by their young charges had been challenged. The end provided a final resolution, but it didn’t salve the wounds felt on both sides of the debate. Parent Laurie Taylor earlier this year filed complaints about three titles — "it’s So Amazing," " It’s Perfectly Normal, "and" The Teenage Guys’ Survival Guide" — citing the sexually explicit images they contain as well as some of the information that, according to Taylor and others, went beyond basic sex education and into political advocacy of ideas all parents certainly don’t agree with.
At first blush, the requests seemed to only promise an embarrassing discussion over sexual topics that nobody really wants to talk about in a public venue, but it wasn’t long before the matter’s serious issues became clear. Taylor’s request put the school district administration in a tough spot: A decision one way could be viewed as censorship and might be perceived as an affront to the librarians who decided the books deserved a place in the libraries. A decision the other way might be perceived as educators snubbing the concerns of parents whose children are trusted to the authority of teachers, librarians and administrators.
After a committee of educators and librarians appointed by New’s administration reviewed the books, the panel came down firmly in support of the existing policies that made it possible that some students might see the explicit books without parental involvement. New, however, developed his own set of proposals for the school board, one that recognized a need for parental involvement for younger students.
New did not suggest banning the books from the school libraries, as some certainly would have celebrated, but he accepted the argument that parents should be involved when their children seek to look at such sexually explicit materials. He backed significant roadblocks to be thrown up that ought to go a long way toward keeping these books out of reach of eyes perhaps too young to fully understand and evaluate the material inside.
It’s worth noting that the board allowed a wide range of public comment on the issue, allowing those present to air their feelings in a discussion that took almost three hours. A score of parents, educators and librarians put forth their views, including a head-scratching what’s-he-doing-here performance by state Sen. Jim Holt that rambled without focus for his allotted three minutes.
It’s not surprising that claims of censorship got tossed into this cauldron, but they’re not valid. The school district makes decisions all the time about which books are appropriate for their young audiences and its librarians have selected thousands of books without being questioned. If a librarian decides not to order a book, is that censorship? If a superior overrides a decision by a librarian on a book choice, is that censorship? Of course not.
The fact that parents got involved in pressing for a review and decision seemed to irk some within the school system. It seems some of the educators and librarians saw the debate as a challenge to their common sense and professionalism. We did not sense any such ideas, unless the standard for determining such a challenge is simply that a parent raises questions about three out of thousands of book decisions.
Instead, we sense a real respect among parents and school board members for the professional performance of librarians, administrators and teachers. These parents urged just as much that the district respect parental involvement in a subject so sensitive as sex and how kids should be educated about it.
In the end, parents who want their children to look at these books still have access to them through the libraries within the school district that carry them. Parents who don’t will have the capacity to stop their children from seeing them.
The school board is to be commended for its studious and thoughtful consideration of a difficult clash over educational philosophies.
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online