Letter to the SC State Board of Education
On the proposal to draft state regulations on classroom and school libraries.
Time is running out to share concerns about proposed state draft regulations on South Carolina libraries and classroom libraries. Please consider emailing sclreg@ed.sc.gov before Friday, October 20, at 5:00. More information, including suggested talking points and a form letter, are available from SCASL here. Below is the email I sent today:
To whom it may concern,
Thank you for providing the opportunity to offer public comment on the proposal to draft regulations concerning classroom and library materials (September 22 State Registry).
I taught middle and high school level English language arts in South Carolina for sixteen years. In that time, I spent a great deal of my own money and time to create a classroom library. This was not a selection of books students would be required to read, but instead a selection of books and magazines chosen to represent a wide range of topics, genres, interests, and reading levels. Students could check these books out by request, or use them during our district Sustained Silent Reading time, which was built into each day as a part of our literacy plan, in accordance with what were (at the time) research-based best practices1, and a belief that helping students to become lifelong readers requires helping them to select their own reading choices. When I had a concern that the difficulty level or content of a text might not be appropriate for a specific student, I was able to have a conversation with that student; every child, after all, has different needs.
Teachers across the state, each year, create and add to classroom libraries with their own funds. These libraries are generally cultivated around student interests, around the experience of seeing which books stay on the shelves and which ones need to be replaced constantly because they are so popular.
These materials, like the materials in school libraries, were not purchased with state funds, although some were provided by the district and purchased with local funds. While I believe the State Board and the South Carolina Department of Education have important roles to play in the selection of content, as Superintendent Weaver explicitly pointed out during the October 10 Board Meeting, these roles are inherently connected to the use of state funds in purchasing materials. As I shared in my testimony during that meeting, I believe local elected officials, in collaboration with the librarians and teachers they employ, and the parents and taxpayers they serve, should be the ones to create any regulations that implicate materials purchased with local and individual employee funds. There is rarely a one-size-fits-all solution to something as specific as individual student reading selections.
Furthermore, as I expressed during the meeting, I am very concerned, due to the Superintendent's recent rhetoric, including comments expressed during the October 10 meeting, that there is a partisan political element at play in the Superintendent's recent actions. I appreciated board member Delaney K. Frierson’s questions about how to build bridges between SCDE and SCASL, but was quite disturbed by Superintendent Weaver's response which blamed SCASL's "political" rhetoric, and those of its allies, for her decision to unilaterally cut ties with the organization, and to continue to give SCASL the silent treatment. As I shared in my testimony, SCASL responded to Superintendent Weaver's concerns (expressed in a letter containing some factual inaccuracies) with its own formal letter, and never received a response.
I hope that the board as a whole will not promote regulations that further politicize the educational process, especially at a time when every district in the state is having trouble finding and retaining teachers, librarians, and other personnel. While some have suggested that students can simply purchase reading materials "from Amazon," the reality is that many of our South Carolina students do not have access to books, magazines, or periodicals outside of classroom and school libraries. And while I am entirely in support of the right of families to work with their children to select appropriate reading materials, I believe it is a mistake for individual parents, or state government officials, to make those decisions on behalf of all families.
Many families and students want to have access to diverse texts that represent the experiences of people of all races, genders, religions, and identities, and federal law, including Title IV and Title IX, requires that we provide all students with educational opportunities, regardless of race, gender, or gender identity. Allowing students of some backgrounds and identities to see themselves represented in school and classroom libraries, while others— such as LGBTQ+ students— cannot, violates both the spirit and the letter of those federal requirements.
Thank you very much for your consideration, and for your service to the state of South Carolina and its children.
Steve Nuzum
There is currently disagreement about the efficacy of silent reading for specific purposes, but I would still argue that building a culture that values student-selected reading is important. There is research which supports the value of self-selected reading.
Your letter is succinct and to the point. Thank you for your advocacy. Let's hope they listen.
Meanwhile, you are correct about Weaver. Her rhetoric is dangerous to families and students in this state. We deserve better than the Superintendent who cried "woke": https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cw3FMzTpxAG/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==