I believe the institution of public education works best when there is accountability for all involved. Staff have fidelity in their classroom, while simultaneously there is an understanding of abiding by policies. During the hearing of Stamped three key factors uncovered an attempt to circumvent processes to allow content in a classroom.

1. The book did not have to complete a Quality Review Checklist. [A criteria at the time for all content being used by curriculum, which was to ensure well rounded teaching. In addition the board was told the content did not matter since the standard it was used to teach was "rhetoric"]
2. The book was NOT vetted by an MTAC committee, but made it into the media library after a request of adults to do an adult global read aloud, thus technically justifying the use in curriculum.
3. The book was left off the AP syllabus.

Feedback from staff is imperative as we develop and change policies, however the cornerstone of a quality unbiased education should always be the focus.  In addition we must follow federal and state laws.  Since the board was brought into this process due to all of the technicalities of how this book came to be part of curriculum it is my opinion that there are better ways to teach rhetoric with less divisive content while still applying the AP rigor.