Cindy Watson wants to know more about the public school board's plan to remove certain books from its library collections and is exploring the idea of bringing forward a motion asking for details and public oversight of the process.
At Monday's Waterloo Region District School Board meeting, Graham Shantz, coordinating superintendent in human resources and equity services, explained that some texts in school library collections "are not appropriate at this point” given the progress the board has made in creating an equitable, inclusive and safe learning environment for staff and students.
He explained how the board developed a framework last year for reviewing its collections in elementary and secondary school libraries and plans to implement that framework in removing books considered "harmful to staff and students" over the next few years.
The framework doesn't apply to literature being taught in classrooms, he added.
Shantz went on to explain that while the board has made great effort to include literary works to reflect the diversity of students, staff and the community, the board hasn’t done an equal job in ensuring "inappropriate" or "questionable" texts are removed from school library shelves, or texts that "don’t have the pedagogical frameworks that we need.”
The notion raised immediate concerns for Watson, one of three public board trustees for Cambridge and North Dumfries, who says she is now exploring the idea of bringing a motion forward at the next school board meeting that seeks detailed information about the framework, the process and how the board plans to consult with the public.
Watson was the trustee who questioned the measure during a portion of Monday's school board meeting where staff outlined progress on various parts of its strategic plan.
Part of that plan mentions development of criteria for the book review that is part of an effort to deploy resources in classrooms that "ensure a safe, productive and equitable learning environment for staff and students."
It also says the board is procuring a third party consultant to perform that review.
Watson said she didn't get a chance to get into what that means during the meeting since trustees are only permitted two questions of staff.
And she said she still isn't sure if the plan was to bring the review to trustees for approval or if the review was going to happen strictly at the operational level.
"We are elected representatives, representing the voices of our constituents," she said. "I understand there would be material that would be offensive, but there's a process that we have to discuss and make sure we are including voices out there that have concerns."
"As far as I know there won't be any public consultation," she said.
Speaking Thursday, Watson added she'd already heard from some community members who recognize that every book has the potential to offend in some way, but "there's a lesson in that story."
"They're concerned that literature that they find valuable might be taken out of the library and out of the classroom," she said.
"I'm sure there are many that are attached to a novel or literature that may be excluded."
Others are worried about losing the historical context of these works regardless of the fact that there may be things in some books "we're not proud of."
Watson says she and her fellow trustees want to understand what the framework is and if there will be any consultation at all with students, parents and community members.
After CambridgeToday and other media outlets reported on the school board's plan Tuesday, it spawned social media backlash around the world, including from author Margaret Atwood, whose 1985 novel The Handmaid's Tale is among the most frequently challenged books ever written.
From there, the outrage snowballed.
This is what they are doing: The Waterloo Region District School Board is undertaking a multi-year review of its library collections to identify and remove any texts deemed “harmful to staff and students.” Call it whatever you like, but it's bad.
— @ijbailey (@ijbailey) October 28, 2021
The Waterloo Region District School Board is undertaking a multi-year review of its library collections to identify and remove any texts deemed “harmful to staff and students.”
— Guy Gavriel Kay (@guygavrielkay) October 28, 2021
For those trying to make a story — or stoke some (white) outrage — about WRDSB reviewing books for harmful content: https://t.co/QIIpgcffYP
— Jude Oudshoorn (he/him) (@judahoudshoorn) October 29, 2021
In attempting to seek clarity on the types of library resources targeted by the review, CambridgeToday requested an interview with Shantz and the board's director of education jeewan chanicka.
Both requests were denied, citing busy schedules.
Instead, the board issued a statement about the framework it developed to review its library resources.
"The review of library collections, with the removal and inclusion of books, is a routine process at all libraries across the country," reads the statement.
"WRDSB set a goal to develop an official framework for this process in our 2021-2022 operational plan, and the recent discussion at the trustee meeting was an update on this work.
"This is not a policy, the framework will formalize what WRDSB librarians have always done, connect it with the values of the Board, to ensure each and every child feels welcome."
A follow up request seeking further detail about the framework, information about the third party consultant the board plans to hire to complete the review, and if any books had been identified for removal, went unanswered.
Freedom To Read is an organization made up of various Canadian authors and publishers that promote the preservation of intellectual freedom as guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The group encourages freedom of expression, access to information and shining a light on censorship through its efforts.
It also aggregates a list of books that have been challenged in Canada over decades, some of which have been upheld and some that were rejected.
