Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Equal Access Curriculum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenter cites Illinois rule and urges Board to ensure equal course access between Hinsdale Central and South
Summary
At the May 8 meeting, Veil Kalinski told the Board that District 86 must provide equal educational opportunities to all students under Illinois rules and referenced an ISBE legal opinion and Illinois Administrative Code.
Veil Kalinski told the Board of Education of Hinsdale Township High School District 86 on May 8 that the district is failing to provide equal educational opportunities between Hinsdale Central and Hinsdale South and urged the board to act.
"Hinsdale South students want and deserve access to equal education opportunities," Kalinski said during public comments at the Committee of the Whole meeting at Hinsdale Central Library. He cited Illinois Administrative Code Title 23, Section 1.24(a), which he said requires that "all students within a school district must be provided equal opportunities in all education programs and services provided by the system."
Kalinski said he supplied the board a copy of an Illinois State Board of Education legal staff opinion and referenced Section 10‑20.12 of the Illinois School Code in arguing that "all means all" and that course offerings must be provided to students fairly and nondiscriminatorily regardless of which high school they attend.
"Staffing to provide courses in District 86 is determined using a framework of prejudice against Hinsdale South students, the school with significantly lower enrollment," Kalinski said, adding that the district lists courses in the program of studies but does not always provide them at both campuses.
Kalinski asked the newly seated board to "take action to provide all the District 86 courses to all the District 86 students in a fair and nondiscriminatory manner." His remarks were part of the public‑comment period; the board did not vote on the request at the meeting.
Background: Kalinski argued that the law does not distinguish between core and elective courses when determining equal access. He also told the board that the administration, under Superintendent Locke, had not been transparent in annual staffing presentations, and that community members had to use public‑records requests to identify disparities.
Next steps: Kalinski made a formal appeal to the board; the district may respond through staff reports or future agenda items if the board asks administration to investigate or propose changes.
