Ripe for abuse? Anonymous reporting systems for ‘racism, bias, sexism, microaggressions’ used in over 4,500 US schools, including this Missouri district

A Missouri school district is one among many in the United States using what critics call anonymous snitching systems to report on so-called “equity” and “bias” incidents.

However, one parent group is warning that such systems as are used in the Webster Groves School District (WGSD) near St. Louis, Missouri are ripe for abuse.

A report by watchdog Parents Defending Education (PDE) details 115 school districts around the country, representing more than 4,500 schools and nearly 2.5 million students, which deploy similar anonymous reporting systems.

Critics worry that equity and bias incidents can refer to simple expressions of speech that liberals don’t agree with, such as in the example, “a boy can’t become a girl.” 

A Google search of the WGSD website reveals several prominent anti-bias resources, including the anonymous bias reporting system warned about by PDE.  

“The report should reference bias incidents – example [sic] racism, bias, sexism, microaggressions, etc,” the instructions say, about the types of incidents that should be reported.

Punishment meted out by the system can include “disciplinary action or educational/restorative practices” for students and an unspecified administrative process for employees and teachers.  

But “restorative practices” could be a fancy way of saying reeducation training for wrong-thinking, Alex Nestor, an investigative fellow at PDE, told The Lion.

That’s not always the case, Nestor added. And that’s one of the problems in the system: There is a lack of specific definitions for what is considered an incident.

“Webster Groves specifically says you can report incidents that ‘negatively impact district culture,’” Nestor told The Lion. “What does that mean? Does saying that there are two sexes negatively impact district culture? I’m sure there are lots of principals across the country who would say no, but, depending on the district, that’s certainly something that could be included as a reportable incident.”

Indeed, many such “incidents” could be reported that most would consider innocuous. 

Phrases such as “school pride,” “assemblies and holidays,” and “student recognition,” can “contribute to a sense of entitlement among some students, and feelings of frustration or inadequacy in others,” claims a handbook on the topic of bias, written by the far-left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which is detailed on the PDE website.

Other examples of bias might include recognition for athletic or student achievement, because those students “enjoy privileges or are disciplined less severely for misconduct” because of their outstanding achievements, claims SPLC.

“Of course, if a kid is bullying another kid or making a racist remark, that’s something that a teacher should be told, a principal should be told, and that kids should be punished for,” Nestor said. But the anonymity of the system makes it subject to abuse, she added.

Another resource listed on the Webster Groves website refers to a parent-led group founded in 2017, dedicated to anti-bias against “families of color, LGBTQ+ children and families, [and] lower-income families” at a local elementary school.

The parents’ group recommends reading controversial writings such as the “1619 Project,” the largely discredited New York Times articles dedicated to CRT; and an essay titled “White people are still raised to be racially illiterate. If we don’t recognize the system, our inaction will uphold it.”

Webster Groves’ reporting system and related initiatives are overseen by its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) director, Dr. Shane Williamson, according to the website. Williamson was the district’s first DEI director, hired in October 2020.

Williamson also chairs something called the “Equity in Action Committee,” which “provides guidance to the district administration and Board of Education regarding the district’s anti-bias/anti-racism work, particularly in the areas of curricula, professional development, hiring and retention.” 

A recent Supreme Court decision makes the employment considerations of the committee’s work a concern.  

In a case against the University of North Carolina, the U.S. Supreme Court in June upheld the long-standing law that prohibits the hiring, firing or promotion of people based on race, which seems to be one of the primary purposes of the WGSD equity committee.

The practice of such DEI committees started at the “university level and has sort of trickled down to K-12 education,” Nestor told The Lion. “Oftentimes, as unfortunate as it is to say, the content that is pushed by these offices isn’t inclusive. It’s not about bringing people together. Rather, it’s about dividing teachers, staff and students by race.”

Indeed, Williamson is also involved with a district group called “Staff of Color,” which is “an affinity group for WGSD and SSD employees who identify as a person of color.”