Court Ruling Raises Bar for Challenging Removal of Books
A federal appeals court has tossed out legal precedents, including one of its own, to make it more difficult for library patrons to challenge book removal decisions.
In its 10-7 decision on May 23, the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, in New Orleans, ruled that a public library’s decision to remove books may not be challenged under the First Amendment based on library users’ right to receive information.
The decision would appear to apply equally to public libraries and school libraries in the three states in the 5th Circuit: Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.
The court’s 100-page decision in Little v. Llano County expressly overruled its own 1995 precedent that suggested students could challenge the removal of books in their schools.
“Removing a library book does not deny anyone the chance to read it,” says the majority opinion by Judge Stuart Kyle Duncan, an appointee of President Donald Trump. “The book has not been ‘banned.’ … People who want the book can buy it or borrow it from somewhere else.”
The majority also rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1982 decision in Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District v. Pico, which stemmed from a New York state school district’s removal of books from school libraries including Black Boy by Richard Wright, Soul On Ice by Eldridge Cleaver, and Go Ask Alice by an anonymous author.
“For decades, the Supreme Court’s judgment in Pico—faithfully applied by our court in Campbell—has prevented undue federal court intervention in the operation of libraries,” said the dissent by Judge Stephen A. Higginson, an appointee of President Barack Obama. “Nonetheless, our court today discards the durable Pico decision as essentially meaningless.”
The focus in the Llano County case was on 17 books challenged in 2021 by local residents, partly motivated by Texas state Rep. Matt Krause, a Republican who had issued to school superintendents a lengthy list of books he deemed objectionable because of their focus on sexual or racial issues that might cause students distress “by virtue of their race or sex.”
The library director testified that the ultimate decision to remove the books was based on normal weeding principles, but a federal judge disagreed and ordered them returned to shelves.
Federal Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Against Creators Of Popular Programs Aimed at Early Readers
Faced with deciding the merits of reading instruction, which has perplexed educators for decades, a federal judge has chosen to steer clear of the murky landscape of literacy curricula.
“The court cannot find defendants’ research inadequate … without delving into the merits of defendants’ approaches to literacy education,” wrote U.S. District Judge Richard G. Stearns, who last month dismissed the first-of-its-kind suit against three influential reading professors and their curricula.
The case, brought by parents in Massachusetts, centers on two sets of reading programs, one by Lucy Calkins, an education professor at Teachers College, Columbia University, and the other by reading researchers Irene Fountas and Gay Su Pinnell of Lesley and Ohio State universities, respectively.
The parents argued that the creators, publishers, and promoters of the curricula violated consumer protection law by making false claims about the research supporting their programs.
Publishers said that the programs were backed by research even though, the plaintiffs claimed, they omitted or diminished the role of phonics instruction, which decades of reading research has demonstrated is a key component of teaching young children how to decode print.
Because the plaintiffs acknowledge that the authors of these programs have cited some research in support of their programs, “the allegation of misrepresentation is best understood as arising from some purported inadequacy in that research,” Stearns said.
For decades, the three authors were leaders in the early-reading field. But as the “science of reading” movement has gained steam, many reading researchers and some teacher professional organizations have critiqued some of the methods used in the Calkins and Fountas and Pinnell programs.
The materials instructed teachers to present students with multiple options for figuring out tricky words, including using phonics.
The plaintiffs claimed the curricula “sought to diminish and even exclude systematic and daily phonics instruction,” leading to poor academic outcomes for students.
New Standards for Oklahoma Students Promote Misinformation About the 2020 Election
Conspiracy theories about the 2020 presidential election are now seeping into state standards—at least Oklahoma’s.
Under the direction of schools chief Ryan Walters, that topic will be added to new social studies standards next school year.
A prior version of the standard for studying the 2020 election merely said, “Examine issues related to the election of 2020 and its outcome.” The new version is more expansive: “Identify discrepancies in 2020 elections results by looking at graphs and other information, including the sudden halting of ballot-counting in select cities in key battleground states, the security risks of mail-in balloting, sudden batch dumps, an unforeseen record number of voters, and the unprecedented contradiction of ‘bellwether county’ trends.”
The new standard raised red flags even among Walters’ fellow Republicans, including the governor and legislative leaders. They were concerned that several last-minute changes, including the language about the 2020 election, were added just hours before the state school board voted on them.
A group of parents and educators have filed a lawsuit asking a judge to reject the standards, arguing they were not reviewed properly and “represent a distorted view of social studies that intentionally favors an outdated and blatantly biased perspective.”
Leaders in the Republican-led legislature introduced a resolution to reject the standards, but there wasn’t enough GOP support to pass it.
After a group of parents, educators, and other Oklahoma school officials worked to develop the new social studies standards, Walters assembled an executive committee consisting mostly of out-of-state pundits from conservative think-tanks to revise them. He said he wanted to focus more on American exceptionalism and incorporate the Bible as an instructional resource.
National experts on education standards have also expressed alarm.
David Griffith, a research director at the conservative-leaning Thomas B. Fordham Institute, called the new standards an “unfortunate” departure from Oklahoma’s traditionally strong social studies standards. “It is just inappropriate to promote conspiracy theories about the election in standards,” he said.
High School Students Lack Clarity on What to Do Next
They don’t know where they’re going or what they’re going to do.
That’s the overarching takeaway from a new report from YouScience, an education technology company that surveyed high school graduates nationwide from the classes of 2021 through 2024 and analyzed trends across six graduating classes from 2019 to 2024.
“Kids are saying, ‘I don’t feel ready for the next part of my life,’ and that’s a big problem,” said Edson Barton, the co-founder and CEO of YouScience. “I believe that our education system in the United States is the very best in the world. … But we have this notion that academics should drive everything, and it really shouldn’t; there should be a focus on career, on what you can become.”
The report, while indicating a rise in uncertainty among high school graduates about their future plans, also sheds light on how they think the high school experience could better prepare them to launch into the “real world” with greater confidence and direction.
But as this new survey shows, important signs of post-graduation success are trending downward. A strong majority of recent graduates (72%) surveyed agreed to feeling only moderately, slightly, or not at all prepared for next steps.
Respondents shared specifics on how their high school experience could have better prepared them for what’s next. Half said more work-based opportunities would have been helpful; 45% wanted more career counseling or guidance; and 41% said schools should have helped them better understand their aptitudes.
Graduates also pointed out other regrets, including too few real-world learning experiences in the classroom and a failure to explore different career options sooner.
A stronger emphasis on exposure to career and technical education could help give students more direction, research shows.
Regardless of what pathway a high school student is on, they need guidance—tough to get with the ratio of counseors to students.
Okla. House Rejects Rule for Parents to Prove Status
Oklahoma’s state legislature has put its foot down on a plan by the conservative state schools chief to make parents prove citizenship when enrolling their children in school.
At Ryan Walters’ behest, the state board of education approved the administrative rule change in January, representing one of the earliest state-level actions taken to undermine the 1982 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Plyler v. Doe since President Donald Trump’s election win. The landmark decision, which established undocumented students’ constitutional right to a free, public education, remains binding federal law.
Lawmakers in several other states, including New Jersey, Tennessee, and Texas, have also made attempts in recent months to undermine Plyler.
Collecting immigration status information at enrollment and charging tuition to undocumented families would defy federal law, according to legal experts.
Walters, a Republican, claimed the rule would not prohibit student enrollment but would assist districts in knowing how to allocate resources to serve students. Critics say such information is not necessary and could discourage families from enrolling their children in local schools.
In February, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, also a Republican, announced he would block the rule from taking effect, calling it a political move.
But the rule never made it to Stitt’s desk. The state’s House of Representatives rejected it.
“We are pursuing other options after this amendment was struck down by the House committee,” Walters said, without providing additional details on those other options.
“I know that at the end of the day, it’s essential that we get the criminal element out of our country,” Stitt said. “We can do all that without targeting kids or putting them on lists, especially just in an attempt to get headlines.”
