Dieringer parents and educators clash over inclusion and FLASH curriculum at board meeting

At the public‑comment period of the Dieringer School District board meeting, several educators and parents expressed sharply different views on inclusionary practices and the district's FLASH family‑life and sexual‑health curriculum.

"Inclusion isn't a political concept. It is a practical one," said Susan Taylor, an early‑childhood educator, arguing the district's inclusionary practices allow students with speech delays, language differences and complex learning needs to participate and learn. Barry Boen, a school social worker, told the board that representation and belonging improve student outcomes and urged the district not to treat inclusion as an "agenda."

Several parents said they supported strong academics but want closer review of curriculum content and age‑appropriateness. Cassandra Polski urged the board to "reject the notion of holding the school funding hostage" in response to last month's threats to withdraw financial support over curriculum disputes. Nick Brunell, who said he filed a formal complaint about FLASH, asked the board to confirm the curriculum's medical and scientific accuracy and consider whether some topics should be shifted between grade levels. "I just want the content to be accurate," he said.

Eric Treadsker, a parent, said some conservative families feel excluded in district conversations and asked the board to ensure all community voices are respected. "I believe that in many school districts, including here, conservative and religious families are cast aside," he said.

Superintendent Paula Dawson has briefed the board on the district's review process and said the FLASH materials recently underwent a district and OSPI (state office) review; the superintendent stated there are no planned changes to the materials as currently taught and that a parent information night is scheduled for April 21 at Dieringer Heights for 4th‑ and 5th‑grade families. Commenters asked the board to continue making review materials and rationales public and to clarify which parts of the curriculum are taught at each grade.

Board members said they are listening and plan additional community engagement: the district will conduct community listening sessions and continue the curriculum review and compliance checks with state guidance. The board did not take formal action on FLASH at the meeting; public comment was followed by the evening's regular business and approved action items.

The public‑comment exchange underscores continuing tensions in the community over curriculum content and parent expectations; the board signaled it will continue review and community outreach in coming weeks.