August 6, 2012 Board of Education Frederick County Public Schools 191 South East Street Frederick, MD 21701 boe@fcps.

org

Dear Members of the Board of Education, It is our understanding that the Board will meet on August 6 to discuss a challenge to the elementary school social studies text Social Studies Alive: Our Community and Beyond. As organizations concerned with the freedom to read, we urge you to respect the judgment of your professional educators and resist the demand to revise curricular materials to accommodate specific viewpoints. By doing so, you will show respect for the First Amendment, the teachers and administrators in your schools, and your students Historical facts may be presented in a number of different ways. As such, every social studies textbook inevitably selects certain topics for discussion and neglects to include others. A text may choose to focus on certain aspects that were particularly salient at the time they were written or which the authors feel may resonate best with their target audience. Textbooks present information drawn from a wealth of sources and data. This resource is used in the classroom along with other materials that may present additional or contrasting views. Far from indoctrinating a single viewpoint, district educators have made it clear that they utilize diverse teaching methods and materials. The task of selecting curricular materials properly belongs to professional educators who are charged with making pedagogically sound decisions. Parents have no right to direct how a public school teaches their child. Parker v. Hurley (1st Cir., 2008). Public schools have an obligation to administer school curricula responsive to the overall educational needs of the community and its children. Leebaert v. Harrington (2d Cir. 2003). Thus, no parent has the right to tell a public school what his or her child will and will not be taught. Id. Any other rule would put schools in the untenable position of having to cater to a curriculum for each student whose parents had genuine moral disagreements with the schools choice of subject matter. Brown v. Hot, Sexy and Safer Productions, Inc. (1st Cir. 1995). See also Swanson v. Guthrie Indep. School Dist. (10th Cir. 1998); Littlefield v. Forney Indep. School (5th Cir. 2001).

Rejecting a book because some object to, or disapprove of, its content violates basic constitutional principles. Government officials, including public school administrators, may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable. Texas v. Johnson (1989); see also Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico (1982) (local school boards may not remove books from school libraries simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books ). Thus, curricular decisions are rarely overturned on First Amendment grounds when schools include material that has educational value, even if it is controversial, whereas rejection of controversial material may make a school district vulnerable to legal challenge. See, e.g., Monteiro v. Tempe Union High School District (9th Cir. 1998) (recognizing the First Amendment right of students to read books selected for their legitimate educational value) Parents may guide their childs education in many ways - by engaging them on what they are reading, by supplementing the education they receive in school, by requesting alternative assignments, by homeschooling their children or sending them to private school. What they cannot do is demands that their views control what all children are taught. This is especially true when parents complaints are based on personal or ideological objections to content. As a practical matter, acceding to any demand to remove material potentially exposes the school to multiple, possibly conflicting demands, from others seeking accommodation for different views and beliefs. Decisions about school materials should be made for sound educational reasons, not because some people do or do not agree with the content. We strongly urge you to support the judgment of your professional educators and defer to their recommendations based on their knowledge of the subject area, textbooks and other materials, the needs of students, and the districts educational goals. To do otherwise would disserve your teachers, your students, and your obligation to respect the First Amendment. If we can be of assistance in this matter, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely,

Joan Bertin Executive Director National Coalition Against Censorship

Chris Finan President American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression

cc: Teresa Alban, Superintendent, FCPS Andrew Nussbaum, Independent Counsel, FCPS Board of Education Jamie R. Cannon, Executive Director of Legal Services, FCPS