By Laureen Boll | Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice
As a long-term resident of Douglas County — and a parent who watched my children navigate K-12 education in Douglas County School District (DCSD) — I’ve witnessed the shift from community engagement to ideological battles.
I was always an engaged parent, volunteering at my kids’ schools, knowing most teachers on a first-name basis, and voting in school board elections. However, my perspective on school governance dramatically changed with the onset of the COVID-19 crisis in 2020. As public schools remained closed, despite evidence suggesting low risk for children — while private schools just a few blocks away were re-opening — I began attending virtual school board meetings. The decisions made by the school board to keep the schools closed seemed to be driven by fear rather than data, directly affecting my son’s education.
I became acutely aware of blighted decision-making when the Douglas County school board unanimously approved the Educational Equity policy in March 2021. This policy essentially grouped students by identity markers like skin color, sexual orientation and gender identity, suggesting treatment based on these stereotypes would foster “belonging.” I couldn’t believe that not one of the seven board members dissented from the appeal that grouping children into identity groups was a good idea. It was clear to me that this was not principled decision-making, but rather a form of groupthink or succumbing to persuasive rhetoric.
DCSD’s Educational Equity policy, and its corresponding professional development session facilitated by Gemini Group consultants — who told 900 teachers that a student’s success in life hinges on skin color — aligns with Critical Race Theory (CRT) and postmodern ideologies, which directly oppose the Enlightenment’s focus on individual rights, a cornerstone of the U.S. Constitution. CRT, which was criticized as “progressive indoctrination” by the newly-elected board majority in November 2021, promotes the ideas of systemic racism and oppressive societal structures, which is divisive and contrary to fostering individual merit and equality.
The new board majority, which campaigned against CRT, made efforts to realign district policies with a focus on academics over identity politics. They ‘defanged’ the Educational Equity policy of its incessant focus on identity groups, removed compelled speech (pronouns) from the Parent Engagement policy, and rejected an unconstitutional update to a nondiscrimination policy that would have amended the definition of harassment to be “unwelcome” verbal conduct directed at protected classes. Nevermind the conduct itself, what would have mattered was the class of people subjected to said “unwelcome” conduct.
However, the unanimous approval in November of the AP African American Studies, brought forward by the same people who drafted the Educational Equity policy and hired the Gemini Group, seemed like a departure from principled decision making to compromise. This curriculum, according to an analysis by Dr. George S. Maurer (author of “’Critical Race Theory in Your School: How to Fight Back”) includes several elements of CRT:
- Portrays historical figures advocating for separate Black societies as a positive movement.
- Multiple references to America’s systemic racism.
- An entire section on “Interlocking Systems of Oppression,” focusing on intersectionality.
The decision to approve this curriculum was surprising given the board’s previous stance against CRT. Public comments during the meeting included threats and pressures from figures like MiDian Holmes (current CEO of Epitome of Black Excellence and Partnership and former Denver Public School board member who was forced to step down in light of a previous child-abuse conviction) and Colorado House Rep. Bob Marshall, suggesting external influences might have swayed the board. Additionally, the Equity Advisory Council (EAC), formed under the now-controversial Educational Equity policy, supported the curriculum. The EAC is known for coveting illegal, race-based discriminatory hiring practices under the guise of ‘diversity, equity and inclusion.’
School Board Director Susan Meek’s reliance on community feedback (150 emails, with only two opposing the curriculum) to justify the vote raises questions about whether the board was prioritizing compromise over the principles they were elected to uphold. With roughly 65,000 votes cast for anti-CRT candidates in 2021, this decision seems out of step with the electorate’s expectations.
This scenario illustrates a tension between principled decision-making, where decisions are made based on a consistent set of values or promises made during campaigns, and compromise, where decisions might be swayed by immediate pressures or a desire to maintain peace or political favor. For the well-being of children and the educational integrity of Douglas County, it’s crucial that the school board returns to making decisions based on principles that prioritize academic excellence and individual merit, rather than succumbing to ideological pressures or short-term compromises.
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.