Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

What is the Equity Policy?

This is a policy that commits the school board and the school district to keep principles of equity in mind “at the forefront of our decision-making and practices.” Equity, in this policy, is defined as “procuring access to human and constitutional rights and privileges for everyone, with the understanding that achieving so requires different approaches because our barriers are unique.”

Who wrote the Equity Policy?

The drafting process of this policy has been, and continues to be, a collective effort. Before being reviewed and revised by Board Policy Committee, which comprises board members and district administration, the policy was drafted by two earlier committees over a period of two years, which included members of the student body, guardians, staff, and community members. Additionally, the community has been invited to provide feedback through various means.

Why is it necessary to have an Equity Policy?

We live in a diverse world and we want all our students to graduate prepared for success as engaged citizens locally and globally; therefore, it is essential that all members of the organization - staff, students and families, are able show up as their full selves and work, teach, learn and take part in a safe, inclusive and affirming school. Our proposed policy draft aims to be a guide in this endeavor.
Embedded in the MTSD Mission and Vision is a commitment to practices that consider the whole child and that protect the right of every person under our care to feel safe, respected, and valued. We understand that each of our students is unique and that one-size-fits-all approaches are not enough to help them reach their greatest potential. The Equity Policy aims to provide common language, principles, and direct expectations that anchor all dimensions of the district’s work toward achieving our Mission and Vision for student learning.
Equity in Education is not a new concept. It is embedded in a long history of Federal and State laws and education change initiatives committed to ensuring that all students have access to the resources, support structures, and educational opportunities they need to learn and thrive, understanding that achieving so requires different approaches because student barriers are unique.

How do I provide feedback?

Why is this policy so long? Why not adopt the VSBA recommended model which is 1.5 pages?

The length of the current draft is by design, as we want to be responsive to the MTSD structures, local needs, the systems assessment carried out by the director of Equity and Education Support Systems in the fall of 2021, and all the stakeholder input gathered over the past two years. A cookie-cutter policy would not be useful for the type of work the district’s mission requires. Reading this document slowly and critically is indeed what we hope for, so that we may engage in meaningful debate and conversations rather than keep things at surface level. Your questions and our opportunity to answer them are an example of the importance of this approach.

Is this policy required locally or nationally?

School districts are not required to adopt this policy. The VSBA categorizes this policy as "Recommended" rather than "Required," and so it is up to each locality to decide. Similarly, there isn't current statute or federal law that explicitly mandates the adoption of a policy like this, and if there are things within it that are required, they are likely already covered by another board policy, in which case the language in this one would simply be supplemental. If there is any section or clause in the policy for which you want to know more about in terms of its connection to existing statute, please contact the Director of Equity and Education Support Systems, the Superintendent, or attend future public meetings where specific language is discussed.

Is this policy being rushed through the adoption process so that the taxpayers are caught off guard?

No. Unlike all other policies, and unlike typical board practices everywhere, the policy committee would like to offer additional and extensive public input opportunities around this proposal before even a first reading is done by the board. This will include ongoing publications and open forums around specific sections of the proposal. This process is projected to take several months if not longer. We are currently compiling questions and engaging in discussions both within and beyond the schools. For now, this draft is open to change, and your input is invaluable in improving it. The Board has not yet set a date for a first reading because the policy committee is currently reviewing it formally first. This is already more than every other policy from the past and more than boards are required to do.

Is my feedback actually being read?

What is a “foundational document”? Should I see this policy as the new standard from which all new coming curriculum will stem?

Are we having to create a taxpayer-funded position jut to implement this policy?

What job duties of the superintendent might be sidelined so the superintendent can oversee equity is being maintained in the three schools?

Will the Advisory Panel have the power to review anything and everything and make decisions related to whatever they choose?

It is the expectation that the Panel would not review anything and everything, but rather look at the most important questions related to equity (thus the words "explicitly," meaning that the matter's connection to equity has to be obvious and explicitly stated, and, "in ways that most members would reasonably deem relevant to the committee’s work"). The advisory nature of this entity precludes it from usurping board authority in decision-making. Members of the Panel continue to be considered members of the public, which prevents them from obtaining unchecked access to all information. Rather, they fulfill advisory responsibilities within the parameters set by their own procedure, which in turn is approved by the superintendent and board.

Why is it necessary to define terms in this policy? Aren't words already defined in dictionaries?

Why is there a definition here that does not match what I found in the dictionary?

Since when does the word "affirmation" have anything to do with marginalized groups?

Section 3b ii has a paragraph on the "publication of large informational panels about posted flags and slogans that educate the public and the school community." Are specific organizations outside of the school district being promoted within the school walls?

This clause is based on currently or previously posted campaigns that, without enough context, can cause some members of the public to adopt reactions based on speculation or lack of information. The proposal requires that the schools provide more visual explanations that can educate people who are exposed to these campaigns. There is very specific law, policy, and court precedent that guides our decisions on what is published and promoted in public spaces within our premises and during school hours.

Why are minorities and "marginalized" groups mentioned so much in district plans? Doesn't this take money away from my child just because he is white?

From the first moment children enter the public education system, they experience the obvious distribution of resources and services depending on need and see that services that a student receives may be different from another’s. This way of doing things has been increasingly a characteristic of public education through a growing number of federal and state-level mandates that have moved away from standardization and exclusion, typical of most of the last century. But please know that the purpose of efforts to provide students with what they need is not to create another privileged class of students that receive things for the sake of receiving them while taking something from someone else. When a service or resource is made available it should be because this need is backed up by the best available data. The greatest percentage per capita of students receiving additional supports in our district are our white students, and that is not likely to change much because the need is great across populations and identities beyond race or ethnicity. We are here for our white students and students without a disability or need as much as we are for our students in need of additional supports, students with a disability, and BIPOC students. Paying attention to one student does not mean neglecting the other.

How do you decide that a group is "marginalized" or "disadvantaged" before it's included in a school initiative or document?

Is it really necessary to "re-think" so much about our schools, especially when some members of the community do not agree with the changes?

Over time we should not continue to do things that are clearly not working just because they have always been done the same way. Some of the traditional systems have proven to make disadvantages for some children worse. Public education in the USA has a couple of centuries of well-documented experiences and there is much we know now about what works and what doesn't. Still, old education models, even when failing, are a stubborn thing. This calls for leaders to be open to new ideas as long as they build expert learners fully equipped to face the world with humility, respect, and appreciation for themselves and others.

Can you give me a specific example of when equality is not appropriate in schools?

There are many ways we can answer this, but the fastest way to illustrate your question is Special Education or students whose first language is not English. We do not expect students with certain eligibilities to perform at the same levels as their counterparts without a disability or language barrier, yet we ensure that they receive everything possible to get them to achieve their own highly individualized goals. Someone could argue that we are not treating them “equally” or even that we are discriminating against them for creating “separate” goals for them. But neither we nor the law see it that way. Through equity (in this case, being affirmative) we are ensuring equal access to the educational program, even if different means have to be activated. Providing an “equal” education without affirming the difference in need would mean imposing an unnecessary barrier on the child, or a de facto impediment to accessing the educational program.

Still, this question deserves a much longer conversation since this is the subject of much debate in education policy and our society in general.

Why is meritocratic thinking being discouraged? Are students with high academic achievement not being supported?

Is there an economic incentive to get educators to engage in equity work? If the universal learning is being implemented, why would they need to devote extra paid time to complete this?

It is common to provide stipends for work related to district priorities, normally in direct connection to existing improvement plans and grant-specific expenditures. We expect all teachers and staff to adhere to inclusive practices during their contract time, but do not require that they play roles in peer growth, coaching, and education without additional compensation. This can currently happen on a voluntary basis or through specific grants, but it must be in full compliance with the Master Agreement.

Why does the district feel the need to do more than what the law already requires?

Why do you need to box students in “special” categories? Why cannot we just treat everybody the same? Aren’t we all about equality?

Equity can be conceived as a natural extension of equality. The list of state and federal statute and regulation that require the categorization of special groups and equity-related work is extensive, so here we provide at least a small number to start with. These are most commonly cited in the work of districts:

Every Student Succeeds Act (Equity as federal priority)
ESSA Vermont State Plan (Equity as the state's main lens)
Title 1 (Low income students): https://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/index.html
Title 3 (English Learners and Immigrant students): https://oese.ed.gov/offices/office-of-formula-grants/school-support-and-accountability/essa-legislation-table-contents/title-iii-part-a/
Title (Homeless students): https://www.everystudentsucceedsact.org/title-ix-education-for-the-homeless-and-other-laws
Title 6 (Indian, N.H., A.N. students): https://www.everystudentsucceedsact.org/title-vi-
McKinney Vento Act: http://www.nationalhomeless.org/publications/facts/McKinney.pdf
IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act): https://sites.ed.gov/idea/
Civil Rights and the Office for Civil Rights
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972
16 V.S.A. § 570: https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/section/16/009/00570
Vermont Act 173
Vermont Agency of Education Equity Guidance (Equity Briefs are listed here as well)
AOE's Equity Lens Tool
National School Boards Association "Actions for Equity"
Vermont School Boards Association Statement on Equity and Anti-Racism
AOE's Spotlight on Equity Resources
Milton Town School District Vision of Learning and Core Values
Town of Milton Selectboard and School Board Joint Resolution: https://4.files.edl.io/eb6e/03/31/21/143315-13c642ac-6604-48dc-a84b-cd99773abf20.pdf
Vermont Education Quality Standards: https://education.vermont.gov/education-quality-assurance/education-quality-standards
Vermont Act 1
Social Emotional Learning
MTSD's latest Continuous Improvement Plan
MTSD Student Supports
9 V.S.A. § 4502: https://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/section/09/139/04502
Milton Inclusivity Declaration: https://www.miltonindependent.com/news/town-of-milton-draws-up-declaration-of-inclusion/article_430d28a8-b8ca-11eb-82a3-83ee9c87fe44.html