Generalist Practice: Community Meeting

I observed the Jefferson County School Board meeting on October 2, 2014. The meeting took place at 1829 Denver West Drive in Golden, across the street for the Marriott. The five regular school board members attended. The board voted to postpone receiving an update on student achievement so it could instead deal with what had become a more pertinent topic, the board’s controversial announcement in September that it would form a committee to review AP History curriculum. The original proposal—slightly amended by the school superintendent before the October 2 meeting—would have ensured that the curriculum stressed “positive aspects” of American history and discouraged “civil disorder, social strife or disregard of the law” (Aguilar, 2014). This proposal enraged many community members, and hundreds of students walked out of class in protest.

The school board used parliamentary procedures and decision making by majority (Kirst-Ashman and Hull, 2012, pp. 107, 109). Ken Witt, the board president, would propose a motion, which another member would then second. The board would then discuss that particular motion, although these discussions were generally unproductive. More times than not, the president ended up arguing with the two minority board members—Lesley Dahlkemper and Jill Fellman—with the two sides never conceding any of the other side’s points. Early in the evening Dahlkemper asked that the board postpone the vote on the establishment of the curriculum review committee, stating that she wanted more time to study the proposal, the latest version of which had only being given to her that morning. Witt said that the board had discussed the topic for three meetings now and that that was enough time. Dahlkemper again stated that she had only received the new proposal that morning, and Witt again stated that the board had discussed the topic for three meetings. They went back and forth like this for a couple minutes, each of them just restating their initial position.

During the first two hours of the meeting, community members—mostly high school students—were given the chance to address the board. Individuals were given one minute and groups three minutes. Most of the students expressed indignation at the conservative majority (Witt, Julie Williams, and John Newkirk), deriding them for trying to “censor” American history. The majority board members displayed good attending skills, appearing “completely focused” on the students, but they lacked other important interpersonal skills—for instance, never giving any indication that they understood the frustration the students felt (Chang and Decker, 2013, p. 107). By way of example, one Evergreen High School student said that the majority board members had lied when they claimed that the students who had protested these proposals were mere “pawns” of teachers and union representatives. This student further expressed his concerns that proposed change would possibly cause students to lose their AP credit. Witt simply said “Thank you” to the student, but neither he nor the other majority members ever made an attempt to address the student’s feelings or concerns.

All in all, the school board did very little effectively. True to the principles of parliamentary procedures, every member got a chance to speak (Kirst-Ashman and Hull, 2012, p. 109), but, as mentioned above, there was never any real exchange of ideas. The majority members listened to the minority members politely, but they never really engaged them or attempted to reach any sort of compromise, and in the end they voted the way they came to the meeting knowing they would. Consequently, the minority members—as well as most of the audience members—left feeling disregarded and angry. Put differently, the school board displayed horrible conflict resolution skills, accepting a win-lose situation at every turn (Kirst-Ashman and Hull, 2012, p. 115).

References

Aguilar, J. (2014, October 2). Jeffco school board OKs compromise plan in curriculum review showdown. The Denver Post. Retrieved from http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_26648641/jeffco-school-board-meet-thursday-discuss-controversial-proposal

Chang, V.N., Scott, S.T., & Decker, C.L. (2013). Developing helping skills: A step-by-step approach (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Kirst-Ashman, K.K. and Hull, G.H. (2012). Understanding generalist practice (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.