FCPS Superintendent Endorses Biased Posters in High School

On Friday, March 21, the Superintendent of Fairfax County Public Schools, Michelle Reid, rendered her verdict on a set of controversial, politically-oriented posters that had recently been set up in the hallways of West Springfield High School.  Her decision:  The display is proper and commendable.  The students and teachers who were involved, and the school principal, acted appropriately.  There is no merit whatsoever to the outcry by some that the posters are an offensive, one-sided expression of left-leaning, “progressive” opinions.  The text of the Superintendent’s decision is HERE.

The controversy began when the journalist-mother of a West Springfield student published an article revealing that students in a “Women’s History” class had created posters in an “A Is for Apple” format in celebration of Women’s History month.  Instead of celebrating the historical accomplishments of women, the thrust of the display was to express political messages about today’s world, including “A Is for Abortion” (showing a coat hanger and an image of a positive pregnancy test) , “F Is for Feminism,” “H Is for Hope” (with a photo of Kamala Harris), “J Is for Justice” (with a picture of Lady Liberty with a clenched fist and depictions of the Palestinian and Transgender flags), “L Is for Liberty” (with a picture featuring Kamala Harris, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Michelle Obama), “Q Is for Queer,” and “T Is for Transgender Women.”  These and other similar posters were not balanced with any that mentioned conservative women or conservative values.  There was no “A Is for Adoption,” or “A Is for Astronaut Women,” or “L Is for Liberty” featuring photos of Winsome Sears or Pamela Bondi,” or “P Is for Preserve Private Places for Girls,” or any other messages that the political left would disfavor.

The journalist’s article pointed out and objected to the glaring bias of the so-called history display.  Her article was followed by one in Fairfax Schools Monitor (HERE), by letters from concerned citizens, and by publicity in national news media.  Some objectors pointed out that the teacher of the Women’s History class is an ideologue (e.g., the sponsor of the Young Democratic Socialists club and the Young Democrats club at the high school) who uses her class to instill and reinforce leftist propaganda.  Others, including the article in Fairfax Schools Monitor, pointed out that the posters violate the school system’s Controversial Issues Regulation (3280.4), whose purpose is to ensure objectivity, balance and political neutrality in messages in the schools.

None of this fazed the Superintendent in the least.  In her decision she characterizes the posters as “thoughtful,” “creative,” and a good example of “critical thinking”: “I see this student display as an example of student work that explores ideas and perspectives in a thoughtful manner.”  She concludes by saying: “I trust that this matter has been appropriately handled by school-based staff — who have my full confidence.”

Notably, the Superintendent’s message does not do any of the following:

• There is no recognition that community members might have legitimate concerns.  A natural reading of the Superintendent’s decision supports the conclusion that she thinks objectors oppose “critical thinking” and “thoughtful dialogue.”
• There is no discussion of the content of the women’s history course, and no indication that the Superintendent has looked into it to determine that it teaches legitimate history, rather than being a platform for inculcating young minds with activist ideas about today’s world.  Nor is there an indication that the Superintendent has taken seriously the claims that the teacher of this class is a leftist ideologue.  The Superintendent’s message seems to have given the teacher her “full confidence” without any real investigation of her conduct.
• There is no mention of the FCPS Controversial Issues Regulation, despite its important applicability to the issues presented.  Under the regulation, an issue is deemed to be controversial whenever there are “substantial differences of opinion about it … and when these differences of opinion are accompanied by intense feelings and strong emotions on the part of individuals or groups.”  When an issue is controversial, teachers and school administrators are required to ensure that the topic is addressed “as impartially and objectively as possible,” offering “multiple perspectives.”  And “whenever there is doubt about the controversial nature of any particular topic, teachers, students, or student groups must consult with the principal,” who is then required to determine whether the material complies with the regulation.  The Superintendent was alerted to this issue, but she ignores it in her comments.  Did she decide that posters promoting abortion, Democrat politicians, Palestinian causes, etc. aren’t controversial?  Did she find that the West Springfield principal was consulted and that she determined that the posters were balanced, neutral and offered “multiple perspectives”?  Obviously not.  She simply ignores the regulation.

An unstated premise of the Superintendent’s comments is that students should be permitted to express their opinions.  No one disputes this.  But when classrooms and school property is used for political expression, countervailing policies come into play.  The Controversial Issues Regulation properly recognizes that teachers and administrators have an obligation to prevent displays like the so-called women’s history posters from being biased.

The Superintendent obviously has no interest in enforcing FCPS policy in this instance.  But would her reaction be the same if a group of conservative students used the school hallways to promote their views about abortion, gun rights, private locker rooms for girls, Republican vs. Democrat politicians, etc.?  Would those opinions be recognized as “thoughtful,” “creative” and examples of a “critical thinking” that should be supported with the “full confidence” of FCPS leadership?

The outcome of the “investigation” in this matter was predictable, but sad and disappointing.

If you believe this article is informative and useful, please share it with others and urge them to subscribe to receive notices of future postings on this site.