O’FALLON, Mo. – The Francis Howell School District is grappling with balancing free speech and the need to protect students from harmful or false information at their board meetings.
In August, the board of education banned hate speech, false science, and inaccurate historical claims from educational materials. However, just a month later, they are considering reversing that decision, with a vote taking place at tonight’s board meeting.
Educators and parents crowded the meeting, expressing frustration over last month’s decision to censor learning materials based on what they believe is personal bias. Many are concerned that the only sensible part of the policy—the ban on harmful content—is now up for removal.
The district’s “Challenged Materials” policy encourages a broad range of perspectives on various issues. Yet, Thursday night’s meeting brought the ban on hate speech, false science, and false historical claims back under debate.
One parent questioned how students would benefit from content like flat-earth theories or the idea that there are “two sides” to the hate behind the Holocaust.
“Frankly, I fail to see it,” he said during public comments.
Some board members argued that the ban limits free speech and could prevent students from exploring diverse viewpoints. Others countered that lifting the ban would open the door to harmful misinformation in classrooms.
Board Vice President Randy Cook defended the potential policy change in a statement, saying that the changes to policy 6241 “are based on guidance from the district’s legal counsel. I have every expectation and confidence that all of our teachers and administrators will only select resources that are educationally suitable for classroom instruction, as they have done for decades.”
However, not everyone agrees.
“We don’t have the staff to go through thousands of books. Literature is important, and book banning is ridiculous. We don’t have time for this,” Julie McDonald, an educator and teachers’ union member, said.
One parent said Cook asked her to “find it in her heart to trust the educators.”
She then recalled instances of hypocrisy where the board, including Director Cook, failed to trust educators on curriculum decisions, stating, “I trusted the educators to develop Black literature and history electives—my son took the class, and it was great. But standards were removed by this board.”
Several educators feel the amendment reflects the conservative board’s overreach. Becky Hormuth, a teacher and communications officer for the Francis Howell Education Association, voiced concerns as a parent of a transgender student.“
These policies directly affect what my child learns and their ability to connect with their identity. It’s beyond saddening,” she said.
If the policy passes, books containing alcohol and drug use, explicit sexual descriptions, and repeated profanity will still be banned.
During public comments, another speaker strongly criticized the board’s actions, stating, “I’m fully confident that future courts will have no shortage of evidence showing this board’s book censorship plans are motivated by their orthodoxy and their ideology. In the words of LeVar Burton, ‘Take a look; it’s in a book. I love to learn; I hope you learn too.’”
Some books potentially facing censorship include “The Dangers of Drugs, Alcohol, and Smoking,” “Am I a Frog?” and “Matilda.”
