Some Dalton Parents Want to Save the School

Proposals reprinted here in full. This was attached to the bottom of the letter in my previous post. Note that members of the board have already privately dismissed much of this to be "racist," and the letter writers remain anonymous for fear of retribution.

By the way, remember how Jim Best's initial reaction in the wake of the Naked Dollar's revelations in December was to describe the faculty demands as a "conversation starter?" The letter below, as well as the one in the previous post, make it clear this was a lie. Many of the demands were already fully implemented. Illustrating this perfectly is that (per Jim Best's welcome back email), Dalton no longer implements "DEI," which, as we all know by now, stands for "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion," but "DEIA."

Apparently, this is going to be like LGBTIAQ (...) where every few weeks a new letter is added to placate ever-more narrowly sliced constituencies. It used to be just "D&I," but the equity part was added a couple of years ago. The "A" now stands for "Anti-racism," which is a full-throated advocacy of Critical Race Theory.

And there's this: the Dalton Board is in complete disarray. They are preparing a response to the "concerned parents" but have no idea what to say. There have been many drafts. Some on the board want to concede that "anti-racism" shouldn't necessarily be the school's entire reason for being, while others claim this view itself to be racist. They apparently aren't even close to figuring out what to say.

Here's a takeaway quote from the parent letter below: 

"It's quite clear that over the summer, when schools across the country were thinking deeply about how to reopen and teach students, the Dalton administration was on a crusade to radically transform the school's curriculum and pedagogy."

By the way, you will see references to something called "Pollyanna." The Naked Dollar will explore connections between Dalton, its board, and Pollyanna in the next post.

Ideas for Restoring the Confidence of the Dalton Community

In response to the crisis of confidence, we believe three important steps are necessary., and we outline them below. We welcome a dialogue and a free exchange of ideas - if there are better ideas those would be great too!

First, the Dalton Board must immediately appoint and impartial ombudsperson to advocate for Dalton's education mission and to solicit feedback from parents and alumni about the changes to the curriculum. This could be an Ombudsperson for Curricular Excellence as outlined by the incoming Board Chair. This must be someone who is widely trusted, someone that parents and alumni may feel comfortable reaching out to in absolute confidence. Ideally it would be someone well steeped in the Dalton way. This person would be ethically and legally bound by confidentiality.

It is essential that this ombudsperson be impartial and not come from the DEI industry or specialization, which would defeat the purpose of having an independent voice. The recent appointment of experts on DEI from outside Dalton to ascertain whether we have gone far enough is not sufficient. These may be respected and talented professionals of good will, but the nature of their mandate and professional expertise does not necessarily position them to look at whether the school is being served by the curricular changes, whether the school is staying on mission, and whether the proportion of DEI materials in the curriculum is right sized. They are not positioned to see how upset the parent body and alumni are. The administration must not be involved in the selection of guidance of this important representative of the community.

Second, the ombudsperson must open a confidential avenues of communication with community members and hold an anonymous survey of the faculty, parents and alumni to understand how the community feels about the pedagogical changes. This is very different from the survey being proposed by the administration. If the results of the survey aren't anonymous, it's basically useless. It must be designed and implemented by an ombudsperson accountable to the Board and bound by confidentiality to honor the anonymity of respondents. This is the only way to get a real feel of the depth of the crisis that has been created. The survey should include the following areas:

1. Do you feel Dalton has stayed true to its educational mission?
2. What are your thoughts about the Dalton "anti-racism curriculum?"
3. Does "anti-racism" make you feel hurt or excluded?
4. Is the cadence right? i.e. should it be every class, every day, every subject? or perhaps an assembly once a year? once a month? In response to current events?
5. Would you be happier supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion, or DEI, without "anti-racism" in the curriculum?
6. Is a DEI program which appears to segregate parents and children by race in groups and clubs contributing to the healing within the community?
7. Do parents and faculty feel the new material is age-appropriate?
8. Does the community have confidence in the administration and DEI leadership to champion Dalton's educational mission?

Third, the school must immediately put a hold on this new "anti-racist" curriculum and revert to the Dalton curriculum. Immediately pause the "anti-racist" teacher training programs, Pollyanna, and other well-intentioned programs that are altering the curriculum and mission without proper review. First Program students and Middle Schoolers have been exposed to a college-oriented curriculum with sexuality and violence. Make Health and Assembly optional until there is a consensus that these are age-appropriate. Empower the teachers to passionately take responsibility for the children's education and teach their subjects according to the Dalton Plan, as they have done so well for 100 years. It seems insane that we have to say this, but let's restore the centrality of education to the school's mission.

With regard to the teacher trainings driving curricular changes, a glance at Pollyanna's website suggests that their recommended curriculum has already permeated Dalton classes from social studies to science. This is a brand new, untested endeavor and it appears there are close ties between the Board, PA, and the administration that suggest a conflict of interest, or at least a muddling of priorities and missions.

The company's website features a quote from Jim Best: "Pollyanna is transformative. You'll talk the talk, you'll walk the walk, and you'll see the world-and-your-work-in a new light." We don't believe it's right to transform the Dalton curriculum and pedagogy with a new "anti-racist" pedagogy, or "racial literacy." It appears some of the worst abuses this year stem from this source. It's quite clear that over the summer, when schools across the country were thinking deeply about how to reopen and teach students, the Dalton administration was on a crusade to radically transform the school's curriculum and pedagogy. Many parents and alumni have lost confidence in the administration's leadership and ability to make independent and unbiased decisions about the content of the curriculum. 

A neutral and unbiased ombudsperson appears to us the only way that a reasoned dialogue can be achieved in the wake of a highly divisive rollout of curricular changes, in an atmosphere of fear of speaking up. If the Dalton Board is not willing to step up and get an independent person that can be trusted to take the pulse of the community and act as a steward of Dalton's educational mission, as concerned parents and alumni, we would be open to finding a neutral third party for this important role.

We understand that the Board isn't set up to design the curriculum. They are, however, trustees and stewards of Dalton's educational mission. Curricular changes that affect that mission should concern the Board. In civics terms, these curricular changes that have been taken in the heat of the moment by Executive Order, but are serious enough to require a Constitutional Amendment. 

Once the situation has been stabilized and the school reconnects with its core mission, we can consider a multi-year curricular review. The content of the curriculum could be considered holistically by some of the finest minds of the educational world. It is in this context of ensuring a broad liberal arts education that curricular changes might best be considered and evaluated in accordance with Dalton's educational mission.

We hope this is food for thought, and we implore the Board to open a more meaningful dialogue with the community before the administration makes major changes to Dalton's curriculum and educational philosophy.