I thought it would be worth highlighting some of the correspondence I posted yesterday over in the “Other Views” category (at the bottom of the right column).
- David Shenk, a WHS graduate who writes for The Atlantic magazine, posted an article about his hometown and the role that a single book can play in creating a student’s future. By coincidence he was in Wyoming for the student “Read-in” on 9/30 over in the Linden Fountain park. In his article, he also points out that the very process of injecting the politics of controversy into classroom content decisions can create a chilling effect. An effect that is, independent the final decision on any particular title, a “profound retreat from the highest educational standards”.
- Julian Reif, another WHS graduate (2000 Valedictorian) who is currently pursuing his PhD in Economics at University of Chicago, initiated an email correspondence with the Board. Julian cuts quickly to the heart of the matter and exemplifies a clarity of thinking on the topic that should make his WHS teachers proud. Among his many powerful points is this:
“Education is not about regressing to some politically correct mean. It is about learning tolerance, being exposed to new ideas, and yes, even sometimes reading books authored by controversial writers who exhibit a racial, ethnic, or gender bias. I have changed many of my views since I was 18, but not this one. I never imagined that nine years later I would be trying to explain it to an institution so responsible for helping me form this viewpoint.”
- The National Coalition Against Censorship has taken an equally strong stand against the new guidelines proposed by the Board as resolution to the Perks complaint. In their letter to Dr. Kist-Kline and School Board President Levy, the NCAC highlights what they to believe the constitutional issues associated with the Board’s decision to include an assessment of “controversy” in their guidelines.
All three are worth the read.