Book banning isn’t real. At least, not in the way that many Americans think it is. With new laws being put into place in state after state almost weekly, it can be hard to figure out what’s really going on and what’s just something the government, news or social media said. People need to educate themselves on what book banning really is and realize that there are so many other options for schools, families and students.

“Banning” a book, as the term is used today, has a more specific definition. Generally, book bans happen only within an individual public library or school district, as these public entities are more frequently subject to state and federal laws, and therefore lawsuits. But a book can be banned in one library district and not a school library just down the street and vice versa, which is where more confusion lies.

Brief Definitions:

Banned
It’s more accurate to say that a book is “removed from the shelves” or “successfully challenged”, but, for consistency, the general term “banned” will be used most often throughout this story.

Materials
“Book banning” policies don’t only affect books in the library, they can affect movies, textbooks, documentaries, speeches and more, so the general term “materials” is used here.

Missouri State Policy

This all begins with the Missouri policy that is used as the basis of book banning policies in school and library districts across the state. While many assume that the wording would outright say that any book can be banned, that’s not the case.

The Missouri 2022 Senate Bill 775 (Section 573.550), outlines the meaning of and punishment for “providing explicit sexual material to a student”.

This is being blown out of proportion everywhere, whether it is people saying that there is no way books should be banned under these vague circumstances or others claiming that this law should be broader to allow for other materials to be removed from libraries.

Francis Howell School District

Starting with this state policy sheds an interesting light on the policy laid out by FHSD. The school district has three policies in place that pertain to materials distributed by the Learning Commons and other faculty in the building: P6241, Challenged Instructional Materials; P6310, Learning Commons; and P6341, Challenged Learning Commons Materials.

Each brings their own stab at the idea of banning books, but all have specific means and ideas outlined within them that add more restrictions to what can and cannot constitute banning.

For example, P6241 states that instructional materials cannot be “excluded on the basis of the writer’s racial, nationalistic, political, or religious views,” or “removed from the classrooms on the basis of partisan or doctrinal approval or disapproval,”.

Then, P6310 articulates that, unless under extraneous circumstances, instructional materials, like textbooks, used for classes like biology, anatomy, physiology and health are not subject to the same vetting as other materials.

And while P6341 does explain that the BOE can remove materials from the Learning Commons if they are “pervasively vulgar or lack educational suitability”, it also goes on to assert that they can’t remove items just “because they dislike the ideas contained in those materials and seek, by their removal, to prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion,”.

All that said, the FHSD policies are fairly balanced. Although “Any resident or employee of the District” is allowed to challenge materials under P6341, they have to go through many hoops in order to do so.

The FHSD website says “To report a concern, please first contact the building principal where the material is kept. If the issue cannot be resolved informally, please … submit it to the Superintendent of Schools”. They offer alternatives even when there is the opportunity to send everything to the superintendent.

As of Feb. 2025, no books have been even challenged, let alone successfully removed, from any shelves across the district.

What To Do

While these policies are in place and offer one option for parents and community members in the district who are uncomfortable with an instructional material the district uses, they aren’t the only option and should never be the first option.

There’s a whole hierarchy of people to discuss these feelings with, starting just at the teacher level. If a student is assigned a material and the student or guardian is uncomfortable with it, all they have to do is request an alternative assignment. Teachers have or can set up alternate assignments for these cases, and it has happened since well before book banning even made its way into the spotlight.

Another way for guardians to monitor their students’ media is to request their Learning Commons check-out records. These come in the form of emails that happen daily on any day a student checks anything out. An alternative is for guardians to just log into their own account and view all materials a student currently has checked out at any given time.

Something for members of the community who do or do not have a student in the district to view is the monthly Learning Commons materials requests. Due to the recent Policy 6310, these are included in the free and publicly-accessible BoardDocs from every BOE meeting throughout the year, along with one Annual Collection Report that details every material in every building’s Learning Commons space.

Community Members

Although there are opportunities for community members with no students in or entering the district to have a say in what materials the Learning Commons should or should not be able to distribute, that’s not necessarily something they should need to have a say in.

Yes, community members’ taxes go towards paying for these materials and funding the education students are able to receive, that is perfectly clear. This is why community members have the access to read the BoardDocs, show up to BOE meetings and have plenty of other opportunities to see what the schools are up to.

However, limiting students’ access to information is not within the scope of people who are just “interested” in the district and do not have students within the district or prospective students.

Now more than ever, it is extremely important that students have access to all viewpoints and sides of the world, especially while they are attending a public school, or even visiting a public library. Whether it’s because they’re no longer allowed to talk to their teachers about these topics while at school or because they aren’t exposed to different ideas while at home, having a well-rounded education, and therefore an educated population, is imperative to the continuation of democracy in this country.

Democracy requires a certain threshold of education in order to continue on as it should. The foundation of our government system requires voters to do their own research into the candidates, their values, their proposed policies and even their political parties in order to make an informed decision.

In today’s world, this has become less of a calculated decision and more of a “red or blue” choice. People rarely look past the political party a person is running for and just vote for the same side they’ve always voted for. The idea of political parties is to offer guidelines, not a black-and-white “vote for one side, not for the other” kind of thing.

Documents for legal and medical purposes are intentionally written at a level that many people can’t understand, so it’s up to our public schools to provide a well-rounded and unbiased education. Having a full view of the world allows students to grow into well-functioning citizens and make meaningful decisions and contributions to society.

Books and other learning materials are extremely important parts of K-12 education. FHSD is handling these new policies extremely well, but it will come down to what the community decides over the next few years. The more people can educate themselves and their neighbors about all of these alternatives to banning materials in schools, the more opportunities students will have in their futures and the stronger the First Amendment will remain.