A recent parent “challenge” to a new AP Chemistry textbook at Paso Robles Joint Unified School District (PRJUSD) drew two very different reactions from the candidates running for a pivotal school board seat.
Ahead of a March 14 board meeting, two parents filed challenges to the district’s adoption of the latest edition of Chemistry: the Central Idea, objecting to a smattering of references it makes to the United Nations global sustainability goals.
“I’m very concerned with the chemistry book,” one of the parents, Jessica Barrett, said in her challenge. “Many things included in this [UN] plan are incredibly controversial and political and have no place in a high school chemistry book.”
Another objecting parent at the meeting said: “We are not governed by the UN, nor did you take an allegiance to the UN. You took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the USA.”
While Paso Robles High School’s AP Chemistry teacher, Evan Holtz, wrote a rebuttal noting that the textbook’s UN references merely “focused on real world applications of major chemistry topics,” not all trustees were convinced.
The board voted 3-2 to approve the textbook, with dissenting Trustee Dorian Baker lamenting “the trend towards politicizing our academic subjects,” which she called “very troubling.”
“The only way we can get it to stop is to push back,” Baker said. “Just because we’re feeling pressure to get a new textbook doesn’t mean we have to do it at the expense of academic truth.”
As a special election for an open PRJUSD seat approaches an April 18 finish line, candidates Angela Hollander and Kenney Enney offered contrasting opinions on the curriculum debate. At the core of their disagreement is whether parents are adequately involved in the curriculum adoption process.
“I did have a problem with the way the chem textbook was approved,” Enney told New Times. “My biggest concern wasn’t the UN stuff—although I felt that was propaganda in there—but my biggest concern was that parents were excluded in the process.”
Hollander, on the other hand, told New Times that she supports the textbook review protocol that’s “been in place for years.”
“Those books were reviewed by 25 teachers—it was a big committee,” Hollander said. “I think you have to have some understanding of the subject matter in order to review the textbook. Parents can review it, but I think if one parent doesn’t want their child to read it, then fine, don’t take AP Chemistry.”
Under the district’s current process, a committee of teachers and two parents review proposed new curriculum. Then, a month in advance, the PRJUSD board of trustees announces its intent to adopt a new textbook and opens the book up for a two-week public review period. During that window, any parent or community member can visit the district office, read through the textbook, and provide feedback or lodge a challenge.
According some district residents, including Enney, that status quo process sidelines parents from having a say on the district curriculum.
“I don’t think you should have unelected people [vetting the curriculum], especially in the contentious times we live in,” Enney said. “We should have all seven board members pick a parent to sit on that committee. That committee should report back to the elected officials, not to the superintendent or his staff. … If I as a board member know that I’ve appointed somebody to be my textbook review person, and I trust that person, then I’ll probably go along with [the recommendation].”
Rebutting that idea, Hollander questioned what qualifications a committee of board-appointed parents would have on analyzing school curriculum.
“If you start having committees, what’s your background to review that textbook?” Hollander said. “Some of this stuff is a parent rights thing. Yes, I believe in parents’ rights. I also believe in the children’s right, and I believe in my right for my child to read something even if you don’t want your kid to read it.”
Hollander added that the school district, in addition to its curriculum review process, has “site councils” at every school campus that parents can participate in and raise their voices at.
“We don’t need more committees. We have plenty of opportunities for parents to be involved,” she said. “In site council, you’re looking at the plan for that school. You’re looking at how the money’s being spent, where it’s being spent, you look at the scores.”
When it comes to increasing parental involvement, Hollander said she’s focused on fostering an environment at the district that’s welcoming and inclusive to all families, regardless of background or language barrier.
“I met with a large group of Latino parents this week, and they were just saying … ‘Sometimes, we don’t feel welcomed,'” Hollander said. “And if you’ve been watching our school board meetings, there was a time when they were told, ‘No, you speak English.'”
For Enney, the issue of parent involvement is all-encompassing. He’s calling for more parent oversight on every facet of school district operations, from the curriculum to the budget.
“I think probably the biggest problem this district and all public districts are facing is you really don’t have parental involvement. It’s left up to bureaucrats,” Enney said. “I’d love to see multiple committees with parents. … What I’d push the board to do is start looking at other ways of doing business.” Δ
Assistant Editor Peter Johnson can be reached at pjohnson@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Apr 13-23, 2023.
Teachers are, and always will be, the best source for recommending textbooks that they will have to use in the classroom. These teachers are experts in their fields, far beyond any right-wing parents who are somehow suspect of the United Nations.
In other words, this is not about a textbook, it’s about extremist parents (aided by the kook board candidate who has somehow donned a jacket, unlike previous pictures of him wearing a filthy ball cap and a two-day old beard) trying to push their agenda on an entire school district.