The Texas State Board of Education met on Wednesday to discuss and advance a set of policy frameworks pertaining to the process by which state-sanctioned instructional materials are chosen.
As previously reported by The Dallas Express, the State Board of Education (SBOE) meeting agenda had five items on it, four of which had to do with the development of an Instructional Materials Review and Approval (IMRA) process that would cover what materials are suitable for students, whether such materials constitute “quality” instructional materials, and whether they align enough with the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills.
One issue that came up early was how an IMRA process could be set up to prevent publishers from submitting materials that could run afoul of state law, as the Texas Legislature passed a number of measures over the last few years proscribing the teaching of topics like critical race theory and gender ideology. Additionally, HB 1605 prohibits instructional materials that contain “obscene or harmful content.”
A number of SBOE members raised the issue that staff at the state and local levels could find themselves bogged down in the screening process if publishers do not do their due diligence.
“I think the discussion that we’ve had … is that we would like for publishers in the process, before it gets to us, to make sure that what they’re submitting is applicable with our state laws,” said SBOE member Julie Pickren (R-Pearland).
After some debate about how exactly to word a preemptive measure against such a dynamic, members agreed on the following language:
“On or before the deadline established in the schedule of approval procedures, publishers shall certify that after exercising reasonable efforts, the submitted material complies with suitability standards and all applicable state laws.”
The suitability standards, or rubric, which SBOE members had to devise, serve as a content gateway and are meant to determine whether instructional materials are grade-appropriate.
As previously reported by The Dallas Express, political consultant Aaron Harris claimed SBOE chair Keven Ellis (R-Lufkin) was trying to advance a nonsubstantive suitability rubric.
“Keven and his friends are trying to push a one-page rubric that achieves absolutely nothing … [while] others are wanting a more robust, meaningful rubric. And so we’ll see if the teachers unions and Keven prevail or a … conservative rubric prevails,” Harris told The Dallas Express.
Ellis seemingly addressed the matter during the meeting, claiming he had brought forward a “base document in November” but had also said he intended to present a “more robust document” at Wednesday’s meeting.
He proceeded to go over the draft proposal with the other board members, noting that much of the language and definitions used were drawn directly from Texas statutes and Supreme Court decisions, keeping the rubric in compliance with the law.
The draft suitability rubric prohibits materials specifically designed to align with Common Core, pervasively vulgar or educationally unsuitable material, content that sensationalizes violence, content that undermines parents’ roles in their children’s human sexuality education, obscene material, content that promotes specific political ideologies, and material that teaches that one race or sex is inherently superior or that one race or sex is inherently — whether consciously or unconsciously — racist, sexist, or oppressive, among other proscribed types of content.
Language in the draft rubric also calls for content that promotes citizenship, patriotism, democracy, an understanding of the essential benefits of the free enterprise system, respect for recognized authority, and respect for individual rights. Instructional materials must also present positive aspects of the United States and Texas, their heritage, and their abundant natural resources. Ellis noted, however, that educators and instructional materials are not limited to only discussing the positive aspects of U.S. and Texas history.
“This is not an indicator that would expect any of our history to be whitewashed and only talk about the positive things,” he said.
Some parts of the rubric, however, prompted some deliberation.
In the portion that discusses health and sex education, which would require materials to “present abstinence from sexual activity as a preferred choice of behavior … for unmarried persons of school age,” SBOE members Aaron Kinsey (R-Midland) and L.J. Francis (R-Corpus Christi) proposed adding language that would disallow materials that “describe abortion as a pregnancy option.”
SBOE members ended up settling on replacing the word “describe” with “promote or encourage.”
Another component that calls for excluding instructional materials that condone civil disorder, social strife, or disregard for the law also elicited questions and discussion, with some SBOE members raising examples like the Boston Tea Party or more recent historic examples of boycotts and peaceful civil disobedience en masse. Satisfactory language for this portion of the rubric was ultimately agreed upon.
The Dallas Express reached out to Pickren about the meeting.
“Great day for education in Texas. Significant progress to provide Texas students with high-quality instructional materials that will have academic rigor and reflect Texas values,” she said in a statement.
The final item on SBOE’s agenda on Wednesday had to do with HB 900, also known as the READER Act, which bans sexually explicit materials from school libraries.
“We approved library standards to keep pornographic and obscene materials out of school and classroom libraries while protecting parents’ rights,” Pickren told DX about the action SBOE took.
The Dallas Express will report more on the final item from SBOE’s Wednesday meeting in a future article.
