District Proposes New “Equity” Policy with Problematic Focus on Race-Based Hiring and Anti-Bullying
Policy 3203 – Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity was presented to the Tahoma School Board by Equity directors Emilie Hard (outgoing) and Tony Davis (incoming) for its first public reading during the May 24th, 2022 School Board meeting. The policy is designed to address perceived shortfalls within the district related to “Equity”. The goal is to give all students the tools needed to obtain a quality education equal to their peers regardless of circumstance and “achievement gap.”
This sounds great at face value, especially when thinking about “Equity” with an emotional mindset. Why wouldn’t we want all students to have an equal chance at success? Unfortunately, once the policy is dissected with an objective lens, it appears to do very little solving of existing issues. Moreover, it may not even be legal.
The policy starts with a declaration of the Tahoma School Districts (TSD) “Philosophy” as it relates to Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity. The philosophy falls in line with the usual equity talking points such as:
“…it is imperative we recognize the institutional barriers including, but not limited to, racism, implicit bias, and privilege that contribute to the disparate educational outcomes within our school system.”
Per the definition given later in the document, “Privilege” in this context is defined as a: systemic favoring, enriching, valuing, validating, and including of certain social identities over others. Individuals cannot "opt out" of systems of privilege. These systems are inherent to the society in which we live.
This proposed policy is vague, unspecific, and makes broad, unsubstantiated claims that often do not even apply to our district. Clearly this has not been critically reviewed by the majority of the board responsible for approving it. As Tahoma Parents, we have reviewed the proposed policy and compared it to existing District policies and State Laws. Two of the most obvious issues in the proposed policy are race-based hiring and a bullying & harassment position that only focuses on bullying among certain groups of students, not all.
Race-Based Hiring Policies
The document continues on, detailing vague and questionable stances that the district should take with virtually zero indication on how such policies should be carried out. For example, under the document’s Foundational Beliefs it states:
“We believe the employees of the District should reflect the diversity of the community we serve. It is essential that all students are provided with role models from diverse backgrounds representing different roles within our schools and the District.”
What does this policy point intend? Does it imply that teacher applicants will be considered based on diversity versus merit? Does this mean that the district will actively judge applicants by the color of their skin over the content of their character?
Another vague bullet point in the policy is: “An equity lens will be developed and used in supporting the goal of ending disparate educational outcomes.” This statement led Director Michael Wiggins (lawyer by trade) to ask follow-up questions:
“My question is, from an equity lens, does it say that, ‘Okay there are disparate outcomes so there has to be a change to that? Can we stand that up against a legitimate rationally related purpose and then wait? I don't have a clear view on that and so I'm struggling….I get a very unclear picture of what this policy allows.”
During his inquiry he praised the committee for their hard work and agreed that achievement gaps needed to be closed, but he was seemingly the only one able to look at the document objectively and not just “rubber stamp” it.
Emilie Hard responded by saying:
“….a policy lays the groundwork, but it's the procedure that really spells out the actions and practices we're going to take, and we're not looking at that tonight. But the procedure for example around staffing, so we know as a school system we've got to do something different with our staffing, we have for the most part a white staff, and just like curriculum and books, students need to have role models, role models that look like them…”
Emilie went on to discuss potential changes to the Human Resources hiring procedures that would focus questions around equity.
Based on the verbal stance taken by the equity committee, it’s clear that the TSD intends to inject race as a qualification for hiring. This practice is illegal in the state of Washington under Initiative 200 (I-200) passed in 1998.
The Washington Supreme Court has interpreted I-200 as prohibiting "reverse discrimination where race or gender is used by [the] government to select a less qualified applicant over a more qualified applicant." In April of 2019 the WA state legislature passed, without the will of the people, I-1000 attempting to alter I-200, but the initiative was overturned via Referendum 88 by WA State voters later that year. As of now I-200 still stands.
Policy discussion courtesy of Tahoma Education Advocates
Rewriting a Bullying/Harassment Policy that Only Recognizes a Problem Among the “Marginalized”
A large argument made by Policy 3203 supporters was centered around the bullying of marginalized groups. At the beginning of the school board meeting, Equity Committee Family Support Team member Laura Meyers made an emotional plea to pass the policy:
“…I also stand before you this evening to amplify the voices of students and families currently experiencing unsafe learning environments right here in our schools. These students are currently facing daily verbal and physical harassment toward them making it difficult for them to focus on learning and negatively impacting their mental health so much so that I share with you tonight that these students are considering or have already left our district and are currently attending online schools. The students facing these challenges attended school every day accepting that racist, homophobic, ableist and misogynistic comments are just a part of the learning environment…”
Equity Family Support Team member Laura Meyers statement courtesy of Tahoma Education Advocates
Laura Meyers is absolutely correct in her assessment that bullying of marginalized groups occurs within the district. What she fails to state is that bullying of non-marginalized groups occurs just as frequently. Tahoma Parents receives inquiries from parents of both “protected” and “unprotected” classes within the community. Parents of straight white children have also had to pull their children from the district and seek alternative means of education. There is more to the issue of bullying in the district than perceived “isms.” Regardless of this fact, let’s take a look at the existing anti-bullying laws and policies set in place.
According to stopbullying.gov (a government resource that details existing state specific bullying laws), WA state already requires anti-bullying policies from districts.
Washington school districts must adopt or amend a policy and procedure prohibiting harassment, intimidation, and bullying of any student that incorporates the model policy and procedure developed by the state. School district policies and procedures must contain key policy and procedural elements including, but not limited to:
● Statements prohibiting harassment, intimidation, and bullying and statements of scope indicating where and when the policy applies;
● Definitions of prohibited behavior;
● Strategies to prevent harassment, intimidation, and bullying, including policy dissemination, education, staff training, and implementation of individual, classroom, school, and district-level prevention approaches;
● Designation of a compliance officer who serves as the primary contact for harassment, intimidation, and bullying;
● Requirements for immediate staff intervention;
● Procedures for reporting and investigations;
● Disciplinary consequences and corrective actions for a student who commits an act of harassment, intimidation, or bullying;
● Supports for the targeted student;
● Lists of other resources and related policies and procedures; and
● Requirements for how school districts must community the district’s harassment, intimidation, and bullying policy and procedure to parents, students, employees, and volunteers.
Washington anti-bullying laws require districts to provide the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction with a brief summary of policies, procedures, programs, partnerships, vendors, and instructional and training materials to be publicly posted, and must provide a link to the school district’s website for further information.
…Washington anti-bullying laws prohibit harassment, intimidation, or bullying behavior that includes but is not limited to behavior shown to be motivated by sex, race, creed, religion, color, national origin, honorably discharged veteran or military status, sexual orientation including gender expression or identity, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability, or other distinguishing characteristics. Washington school districts must also adopt policies and procedures that incorporate all elements of the state model transgender student policy and procedure.
The Tahoma School District’s existing policies appear to correlate and comply with WA state law, to include existing protections relating to marginalized groups.
Tahoma School District policy 3207 - Prohibition of Harassment, Intimidation or Bullying states in the introduction that:
“Student(s) will not be harassed because of their race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender expression or gender identity, mental or physical disability or other distinguishing characteristics.”
So the question is this: if the State and TSD already have laws and policies in place to prevent bullying, why is there a need for a new equity policy to prevent bullying? How is adding another redundant policy going to stop the slew of harassment that is already occurring? The equity committee made the claim at the meeting:
“…we've heard from a lot of our teachers that they want this kind of thing in place. They want it so that they know we have their back so that when things come up, they feel like they can go ahead and respond when harassment, racism, and other incidents occur.”
Are teachers unaware that this “kind of thing” is already in place? Do they not know that they already have an established toolset to address these issues? Either teachers are not being provided with a clear explanation of available means or the equity committee is pushing a false emotional plea to pass district policy for other reasons (such as race based hiring practices).
More of the same policy, injected with text that will lead to further divisive practices will not solve the problems occurring within the district. Harassment and bullying could be solved right now under existing policy and law. Redundant text will not fix issues related to poor enforcement.
What we need are leaders.
We encourage parents to read the policy, watch the reading, and form their own opinions. It is imperative that you write the school board and present your opinions at the next meeting.
