Bellbrook-Sugarcreek public, teachers and students press board to revisit library access policy

Dozens of residents, students and teachers addressed the Bellbrook-Sugarcreek Local Board of Education about board policy 5780 and its implementation, urging the board to revise the policy and the district's opt-in process.

The Sugar Creek Education Association, the teachers' union, asked the board to align district policy with the Ohio Revised Code and to exempt board-approved curriculum from the opt-in requirement. "The SEA formally request that the Bellbrook Sugar Creek School Board consider revisiting board policy 5780," union president Mark Carrera told the board.

Teachers and students said the opt-in requirement has had immediate effects in classrooms. "I respectfully request that the board take action to revisit the current policy 5780 as a whole and return to an opt out system that has always existed in addition to explicitly exempting district approved curriculum from this policy," said Julie Giles, a tenth-grade English teacher and 20-year district veteran. Giles said a board-approved anchor text for an opening unit, The Poet X by Elizabeth Acevedo, is now unavailable to about a third of a class because permission forms were not returned.

Students and community members described other impacts and concerns. Senior Nora Scarborough said the policy's definitions are vague and can sweep in canonical literature: "The policy defines gender ideology ... The Taming of the Shrew by Shakespeare talks about a biological man dressing as a woman within the first scene. This policy would limit kids access to Shakespeare." Sharon Hawks, representing Right to Read Ohio, cautioned against moving books to restricted sections or requiring permission and cited court rulings that protect student access to library materials.

Teachers and union leaders said implementation has imposed administrative burdens on librarians and ELA teachers. Carrera said the opt-in requirement forced staff to create alternate assignments when families did not respond and left librarians vetting thousands of titles for broad language in the policy. Julie Giles said the result was fractured classroom communities and extra work: students reading the class novel participate in discussions while others complete separate assignments.

Board members and administrators answered questions from teachers and the public about implementation details. Board members said the policy intent was to give parents information about materials containing graphic or sexual content; they described continuing work with administration to clarify definitions, implementation and communication to families. Superintendent and curriculum staff indicated they were meeting with teachers to resolve operational questions. The board did not take a final policy vote during the meeting.

Speakers urged clearer, less burdensome processes and recommended exempting curriculum items that were already vetted by the board from the opt-in requirement. Several speakers also said the policy risks alienating families and teachers and could impair future levy support if it remains divisive.

The board agreed to continue implementation discussions with administrators and said it would consider adjustments to reduce the administrative burden and preserve student access to board-approved courses.