A 22/23 Temperature Check

By now you are probably aware that books have been removed from Florida’s public school libraries and classrooms. Though we may disagree on the reasons why and the exact number of removals and restrictions (otherwise known as school book bans), all sides, including the Governor’s office, acknowledge that students do not have the same level of access to information that they had prior to the 2022/2023 school year.

Governor Ron DeSantis and the Florida GOP leaders responsible for the 2022 legislation that prompted this new prohibition on certain topics and "age inappropriate" content are quick to conclude the removals and restrictions are based on the moral standards shared by all Floridians, specifically Florida’s parents. Their take is that the state has a duty to limit educational content to the least common denominator in any one community, and parents have the right to supplement their child’s education by providing access to additional information at home.

On a first read, you might think, “that sounds fair” until you dig into how this new legislation has been paired with a leadership style based on threats and fear-mongering to encourage self-censorship. What we are seeing locally, at the district level, are breaks with or amendments to district policies that were designed to ensure all students have access to their Florida constitutionally protected right to obtain a high-quality public education.

More specifically, we are concerned with the promises made in the guiding principles outlined in Florida statute 1000.02:

(2) The guiding principles for Florida’s Early Learning-20 education system are:

(a) A coordinated, seamless system for early learning through graduate school education.

(b) A system that is student-centered in every facet.

(c) A system that maximizes education access and allows the opportunity for a high quality education for all Floridians.

(d) A system that safeguards equity and supports academic excellence.

(e) A system that provides for local operational flexibility while promoting accountability for student achievement and improvement.

Equity. It’s become a dirty word under this administration, but it was, is, and should continue to be a principle we hold our districts accountable to meeting for every student. Horace Mann wrote that education “is the great equalizer of the conditions of men—the balance-wheel of the social machinery.” We cannot offer students a viewpoint limited library set not by community standards, but by the reigning state political party and pretend we are creating a content-rich environment that will fuel all of tomorrow’s critical thinkers. 

What about the students that do not have supportive or attentive parents who will assist with getting them the access they seek?

What about the students that lack the resources needed to procure a book from the public library or online bookstore? Borrowing a book usually requires proof of residency. Procuring a book online requires a digital device and internet access. Buying a book requires “fun” money. We cannot assume all students have these things. 

An equitable, student-centered system that maximizes education access must consider these questions. And where there are schools within a district that have more vulnerable populations, local operational flexibility means rejecting the idea of a district-wide ban of any one particular book.

This statute above is not new, and it comes before the sections in Florida’s education laws that prescribe power and authority to the state and local counties for a reason. Everyone is beholden to these principles. So, what the hell are these districts doing and why have they been allowed to do it?

Revising Policy 

Immediately following the passing of the 2022 legislation, our 67 districts scheduled revisions to their library policies to ensure the FLDOE will find them in compliance with the new laws. Most already had in place a procedure to allow citizens to request reconsideration of library materials and a review process that involved a multi-member committee meeting in the sunshine to review the challenged work in its entirety. They also already had a collection development process and used an online cataloging system that students and parents could access, so it was a quick update to make that available to the general public. The real challenge to updating policy was writing in the authority to quickly remove library books that may or may not break with the new, fuzzy standards. 

Clay County was one of the first districts to shift to a process that would automatically remove a challenged book from student access until it completed its journey through review and appeal. The district also eliminated the need for a school level review and went right to the district-level review committee followed by a School Board decision upon appeal. These changes proved disastrous when one man with a particular understanding of the new laws filed objections to over 300 books because they contained content that covered topics like LGBTQ+ people, police violence, racism, immigration, sexual assault, and (in his opinion) gender bias against males. 

The books were kept off shelves for months. In some instances, District leaders pressured media specialists to mark certain titles “Weeded/Deselected” instead of taking them through a formal review. It took another revision to the policy in April of this year to “fast track” some of the more frivolous challenges back to the shelf. Unfortunately, this update also gave three leaders within the district the ability to permanently remove any of the challenged books without community input or opportunity to appeal. They are also choosing to keep books off shelves or out of committee review that they believe may become “unlawful” once 2023 legislation goes into effect.  

Another change, equally troubling, occurred in Indian River and Brevard school districts. An “informal” review process at the school level can be initiated by any citizen with little to no documentation, and the authority on whether or not the book is removed belongs to the Principal, not the certified media specialist that is professionally trained in collection development. This is how Indian River removed Anne Frank’s Diary: The Graphic Adaptation from its school libraries without the public being able to express their support of the book. To further add insult to injury, Brevard Schools removed the media specialists from the voting membership on the formal district-level review committee (because like Clay, they removed the school-level committee review). The five people allowed to vote on a district-level committee review are the five people appointed to the committee by one of the district’s five School Board Members. 

Ignoring Policy 

Those familiar with our state’s political leanings may recognize that Clay, Brevard, and Indian River are Republican strongholds and home to leadership within the conservative special interest groups No Left Turn in Education and Moms for Liberty. So, what’s happening in our purple or even blue areas? Surely, they aren’t succumbing to the pressures to conservatively censor our more liberal communities, right?

Wrong.

In Orange County, district leaders continue to direct media specialists to remove certain titles as part of their weeding process instead of keeping the books on the shelf until a formal challenge process is completed with a committee making a determination to remove or restrict access.

And digging into the limited leadership review documents offered for books that were not challenged by the public, it is revealed that the same committee that initially voted to retain high school access for the book Gender Queer was asked to no longer consider the book as a whole. Instead the group examined individual pieces for “pornography” qualifiers. The administrators expressed discomfort with the task and ended up making a recommendation that leaned towards protecting media specialists from possible loss of certification and felony charges instead of considering the value of the book for gender non-binary students and their allies as they had done once before.

In neighboring Osceola County, which leaned more conservative in the last election but did not elect the Moms for Liberty backed School Board candidates, leadership is again ignoring policy. Though a completed objection form must be turned in to initiate the challenge process, the District is removing books after rejecting committee decisions to retain or without taking all of the books through the formal committee review process. 

Weeding and Deselection

We mentioned that some districts like Clay and Orange put pressure on (or gave orders to) their media specialists to “weed” or “deselect” certain books. But, why is the misclassification of book removals important? First, let’s talk about what this terminology typically means for our media specialists.

Weeding is the professional library practice of culling a collection to make room for new books. The process involves looking at circulation data over the last five years, examining titles in the collection that might include outdated information, and making decisions on whether or not to replace worn or damaged books. Weeding a book still leaves open the opportunity to repurchase the title if reader interest calls for it, or if a new edition is released to bring the title up-to-date. 

Deselection is a term that describes a professional librarian or media specialist making an informed decision not to carry a particular title any longer. Reasons a book might be deselected are usually centered around the content and what the community accessing the library would consider appropriate. This process of collection examination is based on professional expertise and data - not the whims of a particular group within the community asserting their beliefs onto others.

The concern with district leaders coercing the removal of titles from a collection in this way is twofold. 

First, the state does not ask for decisions to weed or deselect books to be reported (as required by law) as permanent removals. This means the FLDOE data on book removals will not properly account for the books that have been removed to comply with laws like HB 1467, HB 7, and HB 1557. As we saw in the February 2023 data collected by the FLDOE, Clay reported only one book removal during the 2022/2023 school year even though the District “weeded/deselected” over 40 titles between July and October of 2022 after formal objections were made. Clay is not the only district choosing to keep these removals out of their required reporting, and we have emails from the FLDOE directing local leaders not to report this data.

Second, the process to weed or deselect books largely happens without public involvement. In most cases, the public is never informed that the book is under review before the decision is made to remove it from the collection. At a time when fear and self-censorship is high, our educators need to be reassured that the general public supports diverse and inclusive literature on their school library shelves. 

What Next?

We are halfway into May and see no signs of this censorship movement slowing. 

Last week the FLDOE announced with pride that they encouraged the continued censorship and whitewashing of our Social Studies textbooks while leaving our 67 districts without approved options for African American Studies courses or advanced high school level courses that cover the Holocaust and other genocides in more detail. The press release notes that these revisions and rejections were necessary and in accordance with HB 7, Florida’s Stop W.O.K.E. Act. 

Additionally, news broke that a Hernando County teacher is under official FLDOE investigation after showing the Disney film Strange World to a room full of fifth grade students with signed parental permission slips to watch PG rated films. The film has a gay teen character that briefly expresses he has a crush on a male friend. His family is supportive and there might be a combined 3-5 minutes of dialogue about it, but the character’s sexual orientation is not a main focal point of the movie. Nevertheless, the teacher may lose her certification for violating the Parental Rights in Education (HB 1557) provision found under the “Principles of Professional Conduct” rule.

While we await the signing of HB 1069, the 2023 legislation that will prohibit any depiction or description of sexual conduct in our library materials outside of what’s protected by state standards, we are doing our best to quell the call for early self and soft censorship. We are organizing in our districts and asking parents that care about protecting access to information to start prioritizing this issue. Our educators and district leaders need to know where we stand and that these fear-based decisions are not the student-centered decisions we are promised under Florida law.