North Carolina’s adoption of the “Parents’ Bill of Rights” law has led to school-based policies and practices that discriminate against LGBTQ students, the Campaign for Southern Equality (CSE) alleges in a against the State Board of Education and the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction.

The complaint was filed with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights and the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division on Tuesday. It contends that the state’s public schools are “systematically marginalizing” LGBTQ students with the mandates included in Senate Bill 49. The law requires educators to alert parents if their child changes their name or pronoun at school. It also restricts instruction about gender identity and sexuality in K-4 classrooms.

“Under the leadership of the North Carolina State Board of Education and the Department of Public Instruction, local school districts are barring LGBTQ-affirming content, outing transgender students, erecting barriers to LGBTQ students receiving needed health care at school as well as support from educators and prohibiting transgender girls from playing athletics consistent with their gender identity,” CSE wrote in its complaint on behalf of LGBTQ students.

The complaint is critical of Lt. Gov. Mark Robinson for making what CSE contends are “homophobic and transphobic” remarks. The complaint shares several Robinson quotes about homosexuality including in which he said: “There’s no reason anybody anywhere in America should be telling any child about transgenderism, homosexuality, any of that filth.”

CSE is also critical of State Superintendent Catherine Truitt for her support of SB 49 and House Bill 574, the so-called “Fairness in Women’s Sports Act,” which restricts transgender females from playing middle school, high school and college sports.

“While she [Truitt] avoids ranting about “filth,” she agrees with the Lieutenant Governor [Robinson] that transgender people do not really exist,” the complaint states. “ She consistently refers to transgender women as “biological males” and speaks consistently of “gender preference.”

CSE asked federal officials to protect students.

“SBE’s and DPI’s implementation of SB 49 and HB 574 is discriminating against LGBTQ students in North Carolina,” the complaint states. “This discrimination has created a hostile educational environment that harms LGBTQ students on a daily basis and, in so doing, violates Title IX.”

Educators have been left in an impossible position due to SB 49 mandates and a lack of guidance from the state education leaders about how to implement them, the complaint said.

“They [educators] must choose between, on the one hand, following state leaders’ orders or, on the other hand, federal and state legal obligations as well as their professional obligations to their students,” the complaint states.

NCDPI spokeswoman Blair Rhoades told NC Newsline in December that the department provided information about SB 49 to more than 350 participants via a webinar. Rhoades  the department has provide for guidance with the lengthy title: “Parents Guide to Student Achievement (PSGA) Considerations from NCDPI: Based on Parents’ Bill of Rights – SB49; Session Law 2023-106.”

Meanwhile, the complaint included dozens of testimonials from students, parents, educators and other who shared stories about how the mandates are harming students by forcing LGBTQ students back into the closet and preventing them from receiving supportive services.

One high school student reported: “I personally have a supportive family who has put my preferred name in PowerSchool, but my friends are no longer feeling safe going by their preferred name and pronouns because they’re afraid that they will be outed to their families who are not supportive. These friends are scared for their safety and well-being.”

Democratic critics of the law complained that the legislation would have a chilling effect on student and teacher relationships at a time when student mental health is a top concern. But Republican supporters said it grew out of parental concerns about school curriculum parents saw when children were learning from home during the pandemic.

Chapel Hill-Carrboro School member Mike Sharp said SB 49 needs more work.

“I think a logical next step then would be to send this back to the policy committee with a clear directive from us that says: take out the parts of this that are harmful to children, rewrite it, ignore whether you’re breaking SB 49,” Sharp said in testimonials shared by CSE.

Last week, Sharp’s board declined to create a procedure to alert parents before allowing a student to use a different name or pronoun at school. It also declined to prohibit instruction about gender identity and sexuality in K-4 classrooms.

Truitt said there could be consequences for not following the law.

“No. Sorry. You may not break the laws you don’t like – even in Chapel Hill. I worked with the legislature to pass the Parents Bill of Rights to protect children and empower parents and it’s unacceptable for Chapel Hill or anyone else to ignore it,” Truitt tweeted last week.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. NC Newsline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Rob Schofield for questions: info@ncnewsline.com. Follow NC Newsline on and .

During a heavy snowstorm Tuesday that caused schools to close all over Wisconsin, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jill Underly spoke by telephone with the Wisconsin Examiner about the health of the state’s public education system, student achievement, the growth of school vouchers, political attacks on diversity and her hopes for the coming year.

Parents bill of rights

As we spoke, Republican legislators were preparing to hold an executive session Thursday on , a “Parents Bill of Rights” that encourages lawsuits by parents who feel that their rights have been violated because they were not informed about medical services offered at school or about the discussion of “controversial subjects”  in class, including gender identity and racism, or because they were not given the authority to determine the names and pronouns used to address their children.

Under the bill, a parent or guardian who successfully asserts a claim “may recover declaratory relief, injunctive relief, reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, and up to $10,000 for any other appropriate relief.”

“The reality is that meaningful parental engagement is happening every single day between our teachers and their students’ families and caregivers,” Underly said. The Parents Bill of Rights “is designed to shut down discussion and creates an environment of fear for our educators because it inserts them into a culture war that no one should be fighting in the first place.”

She sees the bill as part of a larger pattern of attacks on public schools and democracy itself.

“You think about the things that the Legislature picks up on,” Underly said. “Let’s attack libraries. Let’s attack the curriculum. Let’s attack teachers, let’s attack school boards because they wanted to wear masks during the virus. … I think it’s really a way to make sure that we instill distrust in our public institutions.”

There is “a lot of misinformation out there,” Underly added, propagated by people and groups insinuating that schools provide inappropriate materials to kids. “That’s by design. Misinformation is designed to stoke outrage.”

Another Republican bill, , would require public schools to comply with written requests from residents in their districts to inspect a textbook, curriculum or instructional material within 14 days.

“That’s really burdensome,” said Underly. “Let me just say right now, if you have a question about curriculum, you can access that. You contact the school, the principal and the teacher will work to get you the information.”

School voucher lawsuit

The message that public schools are “failing” and do not adequately serve Wisconsin families has been promoted for decades by advocates for school privatization, including the Bradley Foundation, which also Milwaukee’s first-in-the-nation school voucher program. That program, which started out serving 350 kids, has mushroomed to include more than 52,000 students in the statewide, Racine and Milwaukee programs.

In December, the Wisconsin Supreme Court declined to hear a challenging Wisconsin’s private school voucher program. The suit, sponsored by Minocqua Brewing Co. owner Kirk Bangstad, named Underly, in her official capacity, as a defendant. It charged that taxpayer-financed private school vouchers are a huge financial drain, pushing local public school districts into a “death spiral” and that they violate the state constitution’s promise to provide high-quality public schools for every child.

Asked to comment on the lawsuit, Underly said she couldn’t speak to the constitutionality of school vouchers. But, she added,  “I believe that we cannot afford two school systems.”

“We need to robustly fund the system that serves all kids,” she said, “and that’s our public schools.”

(Late last year Underly another recent Supreme Court lawsuit, filed by teachers and other public employees challenging Act 10, the 2011 law that took away most collective bargaining rights from most public employees: “Returning collective bargaining rights to public sector employees will strengthen our educator workforce, and strengthening our educator workforce will improve our children’s education and create a stronger future for our state,” she said in a statement.)

Even though the voucher lawsuit was kicked back down to lower court, Underly said it could still help raise awareness  that, unlike public schools, which are open to every child, Wisconsin’s school choice programs “are allowing these schools that accept vouchers to discriminate against students, students with disabilities, students who are LGBTQ+.”

Worrying about LGBTQ kids

Underly said she worries “all the time” about the well-being of LGBTQ kids in Wisconsin. She cited data showing that “these kids who struggle to feel included or to be seen, you know, their mental health struggles are higher.”

“At the heart of all this I think what I would like people to realize, and I think many people do, [is that] at the center of all of this is a child.”

“And when we attack them,” she added, “when we tell them, you know, their identity doesn’t matter or we have to take down symbols that show that they’re included, that’s hurting them. … It’s saying that you don’t belong here or you’re not wanted. … I just want to tell people, these are kids. These are human beings. And they deserve love and empathy.”

Missing the Regents’ vote to cut back DEI

Along with recent efforts to ban books and remove LGBTQ Pride flags, Wisconsin schools have been at the center of a battle over diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. Underly, who serves on the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents, was absent for the vote in which the Regents reversed themselves and agreed to legislative Republicans’ demands that they eliminate DEI positions in exchange for promised funding for faculty raises and capital improvements.

Underly was out of the country, traveling with her elderly mother in Austria, on a vacation she said she’d had to reschedule several times, when the Regents voted 9-8 to reject the deal limiting diversity positions on Saturday, Dec. 9. She was still out of the country the following Wednesday, Dec 13, when the Regents reversed their decision in a second vote.

Between votes, Underly issued a statement asking that the second vote be postponed so she could attend. She had intermittent internet access, she explained, and wouldn’t be available at the meeting time. But the Regents went ahead without her.

“Part of my frustration with that is that my position on diversity, equity and inclusion is very clear,” Underly said. “I think people knew how I was going to vote. Unfortunately, I couldn’t make it …  I wasn’t part of any of the discussions.”

Like Gov. Tony Evers, Underly doesn’t believe there should have been any further negotiations between the Regents and the Legislature over funds that were already approved as part of the state budget.

Now, as Assembly Speaker Robin Vos pledges to eliminate every trace of DEI throughout the state, Underly said, “It’s definitely that slippery slope argument. You give in on one thing, and they certainly will want to take more.”

Still, she added, “these programs aren’t going to go away. … They exist to make sure that every citizen in the state of Wisconsin has access to higher education. That includes veterans. That includes kids from rural Wisconsin who want to study to become doctors. It includes women. It includes kids who come from economically disadvantaged backgrounds.”

Will UW hold onto minority scholarship programs and other targets of Republicans in the Legislature, and somehow meet its agreement to eliminate the language of DEI without actually getting rid of programs that promote diversity?

“I don’t know,” Underly said. “I guess in my role as Regent what I do look forward to is having these conversations and in many ways protecting these positions [including] the scholarships and [other] components.”

What about voucher schools that serve underserved kids?

On the flip side, what does Underly make of the argument made by school choice advocates like Madison’s One City independent charter school founder Kaleem Caire, that Wisconsin’s between Black and white students is unacceptable and the lack of diversity among teaching staff contributes to a lousy environment in the local public school district for Black kids?

“I’m not going to say that his heart’s not in the right place,” said Underly. “We want all kids to be successful, and he is in a community and he interacts with children of color and their families all the time.”

Still, “I don’t think the answer is pulling kids out of public schools and funding private schools,” Underly said. “I would argue the opposite and say we need to put the resources in the public schools so that all kids can be successful.”

Working on teacher training, curriculum, adjusting the length of the school day or the school year are all “ways we could address the achievement gap, and the opportunity gaps that we see, especially among children of color,” she said.

“This is really where we get at the root of what equity is,” Underly added, “getting the schools what they need, so that their kids can be successful, and that’s not going to be the same thing in every school or in every community.”

Poverty and student success

Among the biggest equity issues public schools must address, Underly said, is poverty.

Children facing housing insecurity and hunger are “not going to score as well on a standardized test,” she said.

“What public schools have done is they’ve tried to level that playing field. They have provided food for kids, they provide stability, whether it’s for in-school or after-school programs, they provide the art and the music and these enrichment classes that kids in poverty perhaps can’t afford to get outside of school.”

The whole purpose of public schools is to create a more equitable society by providing opportunity to kids whose families live in poverty. “That’s a fundamental value of democracy,” said Underly. “That’s inclusion — making sure that not just the wealthy have access to these things.”

Fundamentally, Underly agrees with the plaintiffs in the anti-voucher lawsuit that the private school voucher movement undermines democracy. “Public schools are among the most democratic institutions that you can think of because they accept everybody, regardless of their language, their socioeconomic status, their gender, who their parents are, their immigrant status. Because that’s what inclusion is. And when you have these outside groups attack public schools, they’re really attacking that democratic institution.”

School report cards

The latest round of released by DPI showed students test scores continuing to improve after the disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic.

None of Wisconsin’s school districts is rated as “failing” in the latest assessments and 94% of districts meet or exceed  expectations. But critics say DPI is setting the bar too low. Will Flanders of Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty told : “While DPI may tout there has been an increase across the board, we still have districts like Milwaukee where proficiency rates are less than 20% and somehow that seems to be meeting expectations.”

Public school student proficiency rates for 2022-23 were better than in 2020-21 and 2021-22. But they still seem low:  38.9% were proficient in English language arts and 37.4% were proficient in math. Students participating in the state’s Private School Choice Programs, however, had even lower proficiency rates of 22.1% in English language arts and 17.9% in math in 2022-23.

Student assessment scores are only one factor in determining district report card scores, a spokesperson for DPI explains. For districts with high percentages of low-income students, growth is weighted more significantly than achievement — a .

“Our public education system should be about getting every kid what they need – in the way they need it – in order to achieve success,” Underly said.

In announcing the latest assessment data, DPI pointed to a that found Wisconsin’s performance standards in reading and math were among the highest in the nation, corresponding to higher levels of proficiency as measured by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).

Big financial challenges for public schools

Still, schools face big challenges, particularly those with large numbers of low-income and special education students and English language learners. The biggest challenge, Underly said, is revenue.

After more than a decade of school funding that , and a less than 30% state reimbursement for special education — a mandatory cost that is eating up school districts’ budgets, driving deep cuts in other programs, public school advocates with the latest state budget.

Gov. Evers had adopted DPI’s proposals in his own budget, including a big increase in the state reimbursement for special education from less than 30% to 60%, lifting local revenue limits and providing a total funding increase of $2.6 billion. The Legislature stripped that down to $1 billion, and left 40% of school districts with less funding this year than they had under the previous, zero-increase budget.

Remaining hopeful part of the job

Despite the existential challenges facing Wisconsin public schools, including the elimination, next year, of the cap on enrollment for voucher schools, Underly said she has a lot of hope for 2024.

“When we talk to kids, especially the ones that remember COVID — middle school, high school kids — they have a lot of hope for the future.”

She is already working on her next budget proposal, which will include teacher recruitment, increasing funding for mental health and, once again, an increase in the state’s special education reimbursement, as well as programs including free meals that address poverty.

“We need to get kids what they need, so that they can be successful and making sure that they’re not hungry is really critical for them to be able to focus and concentrate,” she said.

“I think it’s important that we continue this hopeful outlook because that’s what our schools need,” Underly added. “Our schools don’t need to be attacked. Our students don’t need to be attacked. So just supporting our schools, supporting our students and supporting that hope is part of supporting their education.”

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Wisconsin Examiner maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Ruth Conniff for questions: info@wisconsinexaminer.com. Follow Wisconsin Examiner on and .

An Ohio House bill to notify parents of any content in state schools that may contain “sexuality” was introduced before an Ohio Senate committee earlier this month.

Critics likened the bill to Florida’s “, which was implemented in 2022 and bars classroom discussion for some grade levels on sexual orientation and gender identity.

Republican co-sponsors state Rep. D.J. Swearingen, R-Huron, and Rep. Sara Carruthers, R-Hamilton, brought the bill before the Senate Education Committee.

“This is a common sense bill that simply acknowledges the fundamental role that parents play in the life of their children,” Swearingen told the committee. “It is statistically undeniable that when parents are involved in their kids’ lives, kids succeed.”

During its run through the House, the bill was opposed by a variety of youth advocacy groups, including the Kaleidoscope Youth Center, the Children’s Defense Fund-Ohio and the Trevor Project, along with some school districts, the ACLU of Ohio, the Ohio Education Association and the Ohio School Counselor Association.

The groups took issue with House Bill 8’s language, which requires schools to notify parents and allows parents to remove students from classes based on the “sexuality content” of those classes, and amendments made that LGBTQ advocates said made topics related to the LGBTQ community “perhaps inappropriate for the classroom,” according to Equality Ohio’s then-spokesperson Kathryn Poe, during the House committee process.

Mallory Golski, civic engagement and advocacy manager at Kaleidoscope Youth Center said calling the content “sexuality content,” the bill is “targeting LGBTQIA+ youth and even something as simple as a story that they might be reading in English class, if there is a queer character in that story, that can be flagged as sexuality content.”

In the Dec. 5 committee hearing before the Senate Education Committee, Carruthers, however, likened the regulations under the bill to the process that would take place if a child was hurt in the park and an ambulance was called.

“Who do they call to find out your child’s medical history or allergic reactions to medications?” Carruthers posed to the committee. “Somehow, I don’t believe they would call the school to find out this information.”

Swearingen said the bill “protects a parent’s ability to direct their child’s physical and mental health.” To do so, the school districts are “prohibited from keeping changes in the health of the student from their parents, and the school district is also prohibited from encouraging the student to hide these issues from their parents,” he told the committee.

That is part of the problem youth advocacy and education groups have with the bill, saying that opens the door for children to be “outed” for their gender identity or sexual orientation, when such information might put them at risk in certain households.

At the committee hearing, the bill received revisions through a substitute bill, which made changes “per the revised federal code,” according to Carruthers. She said the sponsors had “been working very closely” with committee chair state Sen. Andrew Brenner, R-Delaware, on the sub bill.

The bill included definitions for the terms “age-appropriate” and “developmentally appropriate,” which were modeled after existing federal definitions. Federal law uses those definitions for “activities or items that are generally accepted as suitable for children of the same chronological age or maturity” or “typical for an age or age group,” according to state Sen. Sandra O’Brien, R-Ashtabula, who presented the substitute bill to the committee.

The substitute bill will continue through the hearing process in the education committee before moving on to a vote of the full senate.

The bill passed the House with a vote of 65-29 in June.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David DeWitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com. Follow Ohio Capital Journal on and .