Scottsdale Unified School District has a message for parents: Inquire about the curriculum taught to your children at your own risk.
After launching a public documents request portal in July 2022 to selectively expose the names of requesters and the topic of information they seek, Scottsdale Unified is now publicly releasing the unredacted names of parents who request a review of their child’s school curriculum.
Parents being targeted in the district’s new effort to suppress curriculum review inquiries are Scottsdale Unified School District’s newest elected board members, Amy Carney and Carine Werner. The first public attack against the parents-turned-board-members was launched by the document requestor, a vocal pro-Menzel ally, during public comments at the April 18, 2023, Scottsdale Unified governing board meeting.
The speaker first directed her outrage at Carney by sharing a bizarre, seemingly racist idea that a “white woman from Scottsdale” could dare ask for a review of a book that features a young black character. Some have noted that following the racist comments from Superintendent Menzel, his allies have taken to labeling opponents as racist and anti LGBTQ+.
Carney responded to the statements immediately following the public comment: “So I thank you for your comment, but I will continue to encourage parents to ask for any learning material, including books, to be reviewed that they feel aren’t age appropriate or up to the standards of the world class education that we promote.”
It appears the attacker lacked an understanding of the situation, as Carney further clarified, “I also asked for Ghost Boys to be reviewed … at the request of parents who were too afraid to put their name on it because of possible retaliation on their students in the classroom.”
Some have called Carney and Werner standing up for parents who do not feel they have a voice, or feel reprisal from the district, brave and a breath of fresh air given the attacking and Menzel-rubber-stamp approach exhibited by the other governing board members.
“It’s even more concerning to me that a parent filling out an online review of instructional materials can be outed to another parent doing a public records request,” said Carney. This is especially pertinent given that these records requests have been used to publicly attack parents who do not unquestioningly support Superintendent Menzel.
Werner also set the record straight on her curriculum review request: “I submitted three items on behalf of three parents because they were afraid to come forward.” Regarding the 8th grade rap poetry assignment of concern, Werner stated that the poetry itself was very good, however, she indicated that the selection of rap songs that accompanied the assignment were potentially not age-appropriate. She encouraged attendees to review for themselves a song suggested to students by the teacher called “No Role Modelz’ by J. Cole. Werner claimed that one item she submitted for review contained “paid-for-sex in high school.”
“Every parent should feel empowered to ask questions and raise concerns about their child’s education,” said Werner. “I encourage parents who have curriculum complaints not immediately resolved with SUSD to file information directly with the Arizona Department of Education via their Empower Hotline.”
“Because publishers may update or add to curriculum that is available online, it’s possible that students and teachers will find assignments that may raise concerns or not be age-appropriate. Ensuring that SUSD staff works in partnership with parents and staff is key to resolving issues quickly,” stated Werner. “The more parental engagement we have in curriculum committees, on-campus, and through open dialog, the stronger SUSD, our students and our community will be. Parents must know that their concerns are heard, properly reviewed and responded to promptly.”
Documents show that SUSD has previously redacted the names of individuals not employed by the district when releasing public records request responses. This new example of doxing is despite evidence presented to the SUSD administration showing that pro-Menzel allies have used similarly exposed names to harass and bully parents who request information on “problematic” topics for the district.
The timing of the district’s doxing of Werner and Carney is also interesting, as the district released the documents to the pro-Menzel requester on April 6, 2023, the same day that Superintendent Menzel sent an announcement that he was canceling his superintendent supplemental curriculum review committee on which Werner and other parents served.
Menzel’s committee cancellation occurred days after SUSD parent, Chris Evans, sent a letter to the governing board outlining that curriculum adoption was legally a power held by the board; not the superintendent, and amid attacks on Werner from fellow board members Julie Cieniawski and Libby Hart-Wells who feigned concerns about a board member serving on a superintendent committee.
“Board member Werner steadfastly refused to resign from that committee – to her credit. As an advisory body to the Board, the superintendent had no authority to demand she resign. The Board could have voted her removal at any time, but they didn’t. Or, they wouldn’t,” said Evans. That would have been an offensive move. But if they took it, they would be admitting that they knew the committee was an advisory body to the board, not the superintendent.”
Ironically, or some have said hypocritically, Board President Cieniawski’s attack on Carney was an act of projection since she herself sat on the Strategic Design Committee for many months following her election to the board.
Parents who have concerns about curriculum are encouraged to continue contacting board members, or the Arizona Department of Education. The group Scottsdale Unites for Educational Integrity provides support and information for parents trying to navigate these situations.