Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum Textbooks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves revised curricula and new textbooks after public objections over content and process
Summary
The Delaware Valley School District board approved revised curricula and new textbooks for 2025–26, while members of the public raised concerns about specific book content and asked for greater community involvement in the selection process.
The Delaware Valley School District board approved revised curricula and new textbooks for the 2025–26 school year during its June 17 meeting, after public comments raised concerns about content in one proposed history text and about the curriculum-review process.
Why it matters: Textbook and curriculum choices shape classroom instruction and community expectations. Public commenters asked the district to clarify how books are selected and whether parents get meaningful input before final decisions.
Public comment: A Westbourne resident identified as Lauren (no last name provided) urged the board not to approve a particular American history text, saying the book contains “incorrect statistics” and passages she found objectionable. Lauren said a number of cited studies in the text (she referenced Alfred Kinsey’s research) are presented inaccurately and that the district should not adopt that edition. The public comment period timekeeper limited the speaker to the allotted public-comment time.
Board response and action: District staff told the board that curricula and textbook adoptions follow the district’s TPAC (teacher/textbook adoption committee) process, in which teachers and administrators evaluate materials against state standards. Superintendent Dr. Blum (transcript spelling varies) and board members said administrators, teachers and committee volunteers review proposed materials; the board approved a motion asking staff to report back on whether specific items flagged by speakers are actually taught in classroom lessons and to provide that information before the fall term.
Votes: The board approved the revised curricula and the selection of new textbooks by voice vote with no objections recorded at the meeting.
Process concerns: Multiple speakers and a director urged the board to consider a policy requiring earlier public access or distribution of contract and curricular documents; one director said she would draft policy language proposing a minimum two‑week review window for any contract or curriculum item that requires board approval so members can perform detailed line-by-line review prior to votes.
Next steps: Administration agreed to check whether the passages cited by public commenters are part of taught curriculum and to return with clarification to the board within 30–60 days.
