Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Curriculum Selection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board splits over method to pick curriculum review committee, tables procedural policy
Summary
After lengthy debate over whether to use a blind draw or merit‑based anonymized review to select curriculum committee members, trustees agreed to draft candidate questions and table Procedure 2520P for further review; Policy 2520 (committee composition requirements) had been approved.
Trustees engaged in an extended discussion over policy 2520 (selection, adoption, use, and removal of curricular materials) and the accompanying procedure 2520P that describes how committee members are selected. The crux of the debate was whether a blind/random draw risks stacking a committee or whether a merit‑based, anonymized application review better protects students’ interests.
Committee member (S4) argued against a blind draw, saying “I am absolutely not in favor of a blind draw for this type of a committee,” and offered a process in which applicants answer standard questions, trustees remove names and rank responses by merit, and the superintendent compiles anonymized rankings for selection. Other trustees raised concerns about bias, residency requirements, and whether a portion of the committee must be parents under Idaho law. The board agreed to send members homework: draft questions for an applicant questionnaire and return the item next month, and it tabled Procedure 2520P while approving Policy 2520 (composition requirements) as written.
Public commenters and trustees described the committee as a high‑stakes body because it influences curriculum choices; trustees emphasized transparency and fairness in whatever selection process they adopt.
