DEIJ Coordinator Controversy Continues

Congratulations again to Rachael Blansett, ORCSD's first DEIJ Coordinator. The board approved the superintendent's nomination at the June 1 meeting, and Ms. Blansett accepted the position a few days later.  The superintendent has said that Rachael plans to attend the Wednesday, June 15 board meeting, 7 pm in the ORHS library, and will officially start work on August 1st. 

The controversy around her candidacy began about two weeks prior to approval, when her name was announced and, among other things, I publicized her podcast 2 Happy Heauxes within the district.  Probably due to the ensuing controversy,  the 2 Happy Heauxes website has recently been password protected and all the episodes, formerly available on the site as well as from various podcast distributors and soundcloud, have been scrubbed from the Internet.  This is the kind of thing one generally does before seeking employment, but better late than never I suppose. The rumor is some Oyster River folks downloaded all the podcasts before the purge.

The position was controversial even before the candidate was announced.  I rewatched the Demember 1, 2021 board meeting where the decision was made.  Incredibly, the board made almost all the objections my wife Ruth Sample later made: The budget is too tight this year, the job description is too vague, consultants would be preferable, the position would embroil ORCSD in scandal, the public should be surveyed and allowed to vote on the position, etc.  I was reminded that $50K of the money for the position comes from the Special Education Speech, Audiology and Vision Services budget.  Are some students not going to get their hearing or vision addressed because we're paying for a DEIJ Coordinator? 

Ruth made the case against creating a new, expensive administrative position in February, adding that the process that led to the position was not transparent and that a needs assessment was not done.  There's also an inconsistency about whether consultants were hired before deciding we needed a full time post, with some board members claiming yes, and the superintendent saying no consultants were hired.

Back to Rachael. With all the sites related to 2 Happy Heauxes down, I can only access various items folks have posted from Rachael's website. Let's include a few for the record from the Community Discussion Group for Durham, Lee and Madbury on facebook.

In this first example we see language that would be likely be inappropriate to use with students.  Had this remained accessible, the students would likely ask about it, but with the scrubbing that possibility is lessened now.

Here we're getting into slightly questionable territory (in exactly what sense are white people not OK?), but it seems like all good fun. 

It's this list, from Season 1 Episode 1, that's probably the most concerning:

Now I'm no DEIJ Coordinator, but there's no doubt that if White was changed to Black here, the title and a few of these items would be condemned as outright racist statements. When the DEIJ coordinator gets here, she can explain why it's not racist in its original form. I look forward to that explanation.

My wife Ruth Sample sent email to the board and superintendent about this list, stating:

Her advice that “wh*te” women should “WASH YOUR FUCKING LEGS” and to “Do your baby’s hair, bitch” (among other fascinating pieces of advice) is bigoted, offensive, and vulgar.  I would say it is “inappropriate” except that “inappropriate” is when one uses the salad fork for shrimp, or when one wears crocs to a funeral.  It is racist, divisive, and the very opposite of what DEIJ aspires to.  It is completely at odds with K-12 education. It is disqualifying.

Ruth is obviously a much better writer than I am. The district and board are pretty much sticking their collective heads in the sand. Superintendent Morse stated in an email to Ruth:

The district does not audit social media accounts as our lawyers discourage this practice as we may come across information that is a violation of federal and state law that we have no business knowing, such as one’s religion, sexual orientation, marital status, age, or disability that could potentially be used to discriminate against a candidate.

That's a scandal right there. The district doesn't look at candidates' social media?!? That seems like HR malpractice. Plus the superintendent didn't seem to be all that concerned about avoiding litigation when he previously stated that it was the Rachael's "lived experience" that made her preferable to those with actual "K-12 experience" which seems to imply he knew something about her sexual orientation and her race when we made the offer, which he obviously did.

Members of the board knew about Rachael's social media; several had commented on my May 17 post shortly after it was published. Even if Dr. Morse didn't do a google search, anyone who looked at my post saw the results of Google searches on the two finalists. The board and superintendent discussed the hire for 30 minutes in non-public session on June 1. Surely the subject of Ms. Blansett's social media must have been touched upon.

Chair Williams replied to Ruth, stating:

Voters overwhelmingly supported the budget adding the DEIJ coordinator position both at the Deliberative Session in February and at school district elections in March. Voters, the School Board, and Administration are generally aligned on the direction the district is moving.

The chair is telling us there's nothing to see here.  A large number of folks on facebook have expressed surprise, saying they knew nothing about the position, and are truly shocked when they learn of Rachael's online content. District communications still need some work.  I personally think the vote at Deliberative Session or on election day might have gone a little differently had the voters known that the candidate to be chosen publicly advises white women to  “WASH YOUR FUCKING LEGS.”

The chair added:

State law in New Hampshire (RSA 98-E) and district policy GCR, GCB, and GBI protect the private freedom to speech of school district employees. Oyster River Policy (GBEB) as well as the NH DOE codes of Conduct and Ethics include standards for educational professionals (including administrators) when in contact with students, other staff members, and parent/community members in their responsibilities for the district. I have full confidence that Ms. Blansett will build positive relationships with staff, students, and families in alignment with these policies. If it was used in our schools, the content that you are concerned about from Ms. Blansett’s social media presence could likely violate district policy. I don’t expect that to happen.

That's a bit convoluted.  Why would we hire someone as a district leader whose social media content would violate school policy if used in school?  

I've been a big supporter of the board and most of the members over the past decade, but I still speak up when I think they've erred. This was a totally unforced error, embroiling the district in a scandal that could have easily been avoided by choosing a less controversial candidate.  I honestly thought when the 2 Happy Heauxes stuff arose the district would just say oops and look at other candidates, but that wasn't to be.

I'm a liberal Democrat that's supportive of DEIJ, but the way this process has played out really concerns me. I don't think I'm alone. We'll see if there's any public concern voiced at Wednesday's school board meeting (7pm 6/15 ORHS library).

New Dress Code Proposed

The students have produced a draft dress code.  The impetus was an email I can't track down when students were returning after being remote that warned students about the dress code.  I'm guessing it was similar to the one that went out to students in a May 14, 2022 email:

Proper School Attire

The nice weather is here, and we are seeing some attire that is not school appropriate. Please review:

Students are expected to adhere to standards of cleanliness and dress that are compatible with a safe and respectful school learning environment. School administrators have the authority to impose restrictions when, in their judgment, a student’s dress disrupts the educational process or poses a threat to health or safety.

Overtly sexual clothing (which includes clothing which, by its brevity, shortness, looseness or tightness, is sexually explicit), clothing that is distracting to students and teachers, or any apparel which by being worn at certain times or places or which through word or design is demeaning or discourteous shall not be allowed. Specific guidelines to keep in mind are “all of your outerwear must cover your underwear” and tops and dresses must have over the shoulder straps and fully cover the midriff (waist) area. Students who violate the school dress code will be held in the main office until more suitable clothing is found and will be expected to make up missed class time in detention.

Clothing and Other Items- No references to drugs, alcohol, tobacco, sexual activity, or illegal acts are allowed. The school administration has the authority to prohibit other logos, pictures or messages which they determine to be in violation of the Board’s nondiscrimination or harassment policies, or disruptive to the school’s learning environment.

This is the language from the student handbook, though the underlining and boldface are exclusive to the email.  One wonders if Coordinator Blansett's shirt in the photo would pass muster.

This dress code is all pretty much fiction.  Somebody made up these words, and they've been blindly carried forward.  That quoted text doesn't appear to come from another document. It's not the dress code adopted by the school board. It's not from an R-document produced by the administration to comply with the district's policy -- that R-doc doesn't exist. 

Here's the actual dress code policy JICA in its entirety, adopted in the 1990s and still governing:

The students produced the following draft to replace this (click to enlarge):

I was writing up the DEIJ stuff and not really paying attention to the dress code presentation by the students.  I perked up when I heard that visible bra straps were no longer a violation.  I used to wonder about that when I was in high school.  The actual language isn't as clear as I'd like:  

Students Cannot Wear:

• Visible underwear (straps of undergarments worn under clothing are not a violation)

 Exposed nipples are not allowed.  The policy is gender neutral -- this applies to everyone.

Todd Allen named interim superintendent of Newmarket School District

In other news, former ORCSD Assistant Superintendent and ORHS Principal Todd Allen was named Interim Superintendent of Newmarket School District.  Three administrators, the superintendent, assistant superintendent and a principal, all left around the same time, but there doesn't appear to be any scandal.

Allen retired from Oyster River last year. If he really wanted the big chair, he could have stuck around, as Superintendent Morse's retirement is on the horizon, In fact, Todd can still apply when the time comes.