Board Approves “Compromise” Curriculum Policy After Debate Over Oversight
- Steve Jurrens
- 5 days ago
- 3 min read
Northeast Radio SD News – Watertown, SD - In a move to clarify the “unspoken” authority of elected officials over classroom materials, the Watertown School Board approved a revised curriculum review policy (Policy IGF) on second reading Monday.
The updated policy explicitly states that while professionals design the courses, the Board may provide feedback or request more information on any curriculum report.
Crucially, it adds that “Formal board adoption will be required only for programs or courses that constitute an extensive alteration in instructional content or approach”.
The “Unspoken” Authority Made Explicit
The debate centered on a fundamental question: Should the board formally vote on every piece of curriculum, or should it rely on the district’s professional staff?
Dr. Danielsen explained that the updated policy aims to clarify what he called the “unspoken part” of curriculum adoption. While the district has historically operated under the board’s acceptance of annual reports as “constituted approval,” the new language makes the board’s power to intervene explicit.
The newly added text states:
“Following review of these reports, the board may provide feedback, request additional information, or identify items for further consideration. Formal board adoption will be required only for programs or courses that constitute an extensive alteration in instructional content or approach.”
Navigating a “Politicized” Landscape
The policy change comes at a time when curriculum choices are under increased scrutiny. Dr. Danielsen acknowledged that educational materials have become significantly more polarized in the last decade.
“I feel like having a little bit of flex in the policy allows for that ebb and flow,” Danielsen told the board, noting that the goal was to provide a “compromise” that wouldn’t force a formal vote on every minor update—which could delay the ordering process by six months—but would still allow the board to step in when necessary.
Board members echoed this sentiment, framing their role as representing the community’s values.
“As a board, our number one responsibility is what children learn and how children learn,” said Board President Jon Iverson. “Should our curriculum become incredibly woke, I think there would be some of us that would say, ‘let’s revisit this.’”
Defining “Extensive Alteration”
A point of minor friction during the meeting was the interpretation of the word “extensive.” Board members questioned who would ultimately determine if a change met that threshold.
Dr. Danielsen clarified that the interpretation would lie with the five board members. If the majority felt a change was major—even if administration presented it as minor—they have the authority to pull it for a formal vote or discussion.
“You would be our guardrails in terms of whether we got to one way or the other on that political spectrum,” Danielsen said to the board.
Moving Forward
With the policy now officially adopted, the Watertown School District will continue to rely on Subject Area Curriculum Committees (SACC) for initial selection and review. These committees, comprised of teachers and administrators, will submit their findings to the board.
Under the new Policy IGF, the board will now formally “accept” these reports as its official adoption of the curriculum, unless it determines that the changes are “extensive” enough to require a separate, recorded action.
What is the Subject Area Curriculum Committee (SACC)? The SACC is a delegated group appointed by the Superintendent to handle specific curriculum revisions and textbook selections. It includes representation from the teachers who will use the materials, as well as administrators. Under Policy IGF, parents and students may also be invited to serve on these committees.
