A draft of the so-called “pronoun policy” that made waves in Colorado Springs School District 11 earlier this spring returned to the Board of Education late Wednesday without a single mention of pronouns. The board last publicly discussed this policy, which will govern staff conduct, at a February meeting. A subcommittee has been drafting its language ever since.

The policy’s accompanying regulation more broadly states staff members are prohibited from the following communications, among others:

? Any communications without a legitimate educational reason.

? Requiring of, or otherwise compelling students to render statements regarding personal or other inappropriate private matters.

? Proselytizing on behalf of any particular religious or political point of view.

? Willfully disclosing personal or other inappropriate private matters.

Following the board’s feedback, the policy and regulation will undergo additional revisions and clarifications.

In Colorado Springs school district divided over pronouns, staff conduct policy will look different than expected

“Will we ever get the exact definition of inappropriate? I think any of us can go into our emails and discern that it may also be in the eye of the recipient and maybe not the intent of the deliverer,” Superintendent Michael Gaal said. “I would hope that this will eliminate egregious behavior and will allow us to have adult and mature conversations about questionable behavior but not send us down rabbit holes of assuming that every conversation is illicit by definition.”

School leaders for months maintained that despite being colloquially referred to as the “pronoun policy” among some pockets of the community, its purpose has always been much wider in scope: to outline appropriate student-staff relationships and staff behaviors. It remains to be seen how a staff member asking students to share their pronouns might fit into the policy’s newly drafted language, which is still subject to change.

The “pronoun policy” moniker stems from comments made by board Vice President Jason Jorgenson in February, when he suggested the policy should prohibit “any type of questioning about pronouns or gender or sexuality, regardless of the age of the student.” Such questions serve no educational value and can make cisgender students – those whose pronouns align with their gender at birth – feel uncomfortable, he said. Students would be welcome to share their pronouns on their own accord under his proposed language, but staff could not prompt them to do so.

A guide to pronouns and gender-neutral language etiquette basics

Four of seven board members expressed support for Jorgenson’s proposed language at the time, including board members Sandra Bankes, Al Loma and Lauren Nelson.

Jorgenson further suggested teachers be prohibited from discussing personal, sexual or romantic aspects of their lives, including marital status.

“Our students shouldn’t have to go into the classroom and know whether (teachers) are blatantly this or that. They should just be, ‘I’m coming here to learn mathematics from a nonpartisan teacher who’s giving me a fair shake and teaching me what I need to learn,'” Jorgenson said at the Feb. 8 meeting.

While some community members said these expectations would shield students from distractions and gender ideology, critics accused the board’s proposal of being anti-LGBTQ+ and dangerous for an already marginalized population.

GUEST COLUMN: Asking students to publicly declare their pronouns is a major mistake

Critics said the board had a flawed concept of how teachers ask students their pronouns in a classroom setting. Rather than requiring students to share or putting them on the spot, those conversations are instead optional or are held in private.

Whereas the school board is responsible for adopting policy, which provides overarching guidance, only administrative staff and the superintendent can set regulation detailing more specifically how the district will implement a policy in its work. Neither the drafted staff conduct policy nor its accompanying regulation contained language as specific as Jorgenson’s earlier proposals, however.

The policy prohibits inappropriate behaviors such as physical contact or harassment, infringing on students’ rights to privacy and engaging in conflicts of interest. Per the policy, staff, students and parents or guardians should notify their principal or the superintendent if they believe a staff member is in violation.

The policy will require a majority vote at a future board meeting before it can take effect. The board does not vote on regulation.

GUEST COLUMN: Legislation, rules threatens transgender people’s rights