The determination of what materials belong in school libraries–books, magazines, film, video–might best be resolved in a democratic process. After all, if a Supreme Court justice cannot determine what is or isn’t pornographic, then, as anti-abortionists would prefer, let the people decide.
School students elect officers for student government, leaders of clubs, and often homecoming kings, queens, other gender leaders, and positions. Most students are required to study civics or history as requirements for the receipt of their diplomas. Many or most witness parental commentary about electoral activities and campaigns in the world beyond school boundaries. Thus, either by direct participation, course of study, or simple exposure, school students have a base of experience in the dynamics of political choice-making.
Since local public school board members are elected under laws and charged with the responsibility for the librarians and, ultimately, the content of school libraries, it is appropriate to enfranchise the beneficiaries–students–to participate in the election of school board members. This proposal has the advantage of including directly the preferences of the very customers in the educational system and short-circuiting in loco parentis decision making. A corollary benefit would be that this process would encourage student-parent discussion and articulation within the educational sphere. The inability to define pornography or identify other objectionable material would now have a more popular basis, less ambiguous or subject to whim or personal taste.
Should the legislative amendment to modify the voting age for local school boards prove insurmountable due to the current political climate, there is at least one other possibility that may be within the existing authority of school boards: library material to be acquired or to which objections are raised might be offered on ballot lists for voting by students. Here again, popular choice by students mitigates arbitrary decision making or interventions drawing boisterous argument at board meetings.
To those who would oppose such participatory decision making in the belief that students are not sufficiently mature to assume such responsibility, the response calls attention to the classic definition of education–to draw out. Today’s youth are far more experienced than assumptions about their competence. Such view also diminishes the effects of curricular and real life experiences. Finally, those parental units concerned about possible availability or exposure to threatening materials in the school library need to take cognizance of what is available via a few clicks of a keyboard on a computer device or smartphone.
To those who would oppose such participatory decision making in the belief that students are not sufficiently mature to assume such responsibility, the response calls attention to the classic definition of education–to draw out. Today’s youth are far more experienced than assumptions about their competence. Such view also diminishes the effects of curricular and real life experiences. Finally, those parental units concerned about possible availability or exposure to threatening materials in the school library need to take cognizance of what is available via a few clicks of a keyboard on a computer device or smartphone.
Concerned parents could, as an alternative, demand imposition of significant user fees on students checking out illicit material. Additionally, such checkouts could be required to be accompanied by a statement indicating the academic necessity for reading or researching a particular item. These procedural steps may be difficult to apply to dictionary or encyclopedic material containing terms such as fellatio or anal intercourse. But, then, why might students be curious about such esoterica?
There are no physical walls or vaccines to prevent the intrusion or infection from such materials. Civil society, however, may adopt more acceptable preventive strategies that inform a more mature and healthy cultural avoidance. The present posturing is failing and demanding of an alternative.
Join the discussion!