Avenues for Engagement? Testing the Democratic Nature of Library Book Challenge Processes

Author:

Callahan Pamela Catherine1,Miller Joel D.1

Affiliation:

1. University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA

Abstract

Background or Context: Public school library book challenges have garnered ample media attention in recent years as many school districts and advocacy organizations have reported record numbers of book challenges. Book challenges are not a new phenomenon, historically speaking, but they have often illuminated values clashes in communities and raise questions about the rights and freedoms of public school students. Judicial rulings and school district policies that address book challenges could provide insights for many members of school communities (including, but not limited to, school board members, students, parents, and teachers) as they experience challenges, but these aspects of the legal record and their influence on responses to book challenges remains underexamined in scholarship. Purpose, Objective, Research Question, or Focus of Study: The 1982 Supreme Court case Island Trees School District v. Pico remains the lasting judicial precedent for interpreting public school students’ First Amendment rights as they interact with school library books. We examine the extent to which school district book challenge policies align with court precedent set in Pico (1982) and the implications for students’ rights and democratic participation during book challenges. Research Design: Drawing on elements of the law and society framework as well as political analysis categories, this study uses qualitative methods to illuminate specific elements of district policies that govern book challenges. Specifically, we examine 29 policies in school districts that experienced a publicly reported book challenge between 2017 and 2021 to understand relationships between school district book challenge policies and the Pico (1982) precedent. Conclusions or Recommendations: Our findings reveal ample space between judicial rulings and school district policies we examine. In fact, we find a broader array of relevant actors in book challenge processes than conceived by the courts and raise implications for students’ constitutional rights and protections related to who policies indicate may or must be involved in these processes, the settings in which book challenge decisions are made, and the limited roles for public involvement during school library book challenges.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Reference54 articles.

1. American Library Association. (2023, April 20). Censorship by the numbers. http://www.ala.org/advocacy/bbooks/by-the-numbers

2. American Library Association Office for Intellectual Freedom. (2023). Top 10 most challenged books and frequently challenged books archive. https://www.ala.org/bbooks/frequentlychallengedbooks/top10/archive

3. Democracy, Deliberation, and Education

4. “The Research Says”: Definitions and Uses of a Key Policy Term in Federal Law and Local School Board Deliberations

5. Board of Education Island Trees Union Free School District v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853, 102 S. Ct. 2799.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3