File photo

File photo

<p>File photo</p>

File photo

ANSON — At the Anson County Board of Education meeting last Thursday, board members mulled changes to the 2024-2025 school year dress code. Addressing the board, Erin Adams, who is a sixth grade math and science teacher at Lilesville Elementary, explained from her perspective, why students may feel a need to wear hoodies at school.

A teacher with Anson County Schools for four years, Adams acknowledged, “From the start I have been informed of the initiatives implemented by Anson County schools to incorporate social and emotional learning. Passing a policy against hoods in the district is a total contradiction to the initiatives of Anson County Schools implementing to reach the social, emotional, and academic needs of our diverse student population.”

She added, “Students do not wear hoods out of defiance. Not once this year did I ask a student to take off their hood in my classroom, but they continued to wear them. There are numerous benefits to allowing students to wear hoods in a learning environment, that in my opinion, far outweigh any argument as to why students should not be allowed to wear them.”

Adams said students wear hoods because “for some, it is cultural. For others, it is a security blanket to help students feel more at ease in the structured classroom setting. It can be a focusing tool to help block out distractions around them.”

Commenting on equality issues, Adams remarked that students with an IEP in place, that wear a hoodie in the classroom, can stir questions such as, “Why do they get to wear their hood and I can’t, and that is not information that I can disclose to that student.”

Opening board member discussion on the issue, Dr. George Truman stated, “We understand kids come to us with health issues, some that have received some radiation and might be losing their hair or part of their hair, or they may have complexion problems… We certainly want to accommodate those students any way that we can.”

Pointing out that many of these students have an IEP, or 504 already in place ensuring that the school accommodates that particular child’s needs, Truman said, “But we do need to deal with the issue of when it is just being stubborn, when it is just being confrontational… to talk about when we are going to allow students to wear hoodies and when we are not.”

Declaring his trust for his staff, Truman clarified, “If there is a health issue and you need to accommodate something for a child, then accommodate them. If the child is just being stubborn, and you are trying to teach your class, and that child will not even look at you… then you have the right to ask that child to remove his hoodie, because you have a duty to teach that child. These could be safe school issues because you don’t know what that child has up under that hoodie.”

Pointing out the slippery slope of such a policy, Mike Turner stated, “Maybe we need some input from some teachers, principals.. We don’t want them to lose control of the classroom, but we don’t want a student that is being abused unknowingly.”

For her part, Bobbie Little wondered, “Would it be crazy to suggest that we get a task force, with teachers and maybe a board member?”

Approving the idea, Truman remarked that the issue of hoods is an ideal one to table for now, as it is not an immediate issue in the middle of summer, adding, “There is no one policy that we can make that is going to cover everything.”

Also agreeing, interim Superintendent Brian Ratliff stated, “We are presented with a problem and it can be addressed, but I would like to be afforded, if time allows, for us to have discussions here administratively and colleague-wise, and maybe even student wise, at some point. Involve other people in the discussions so that you can come up with an umbrella policy by which there is administrative discretion…teaching discretion on how we handle that (hoodies) from situation to situation.”

Following a motion made by Mike Turner to table dress code discussions until more evaluation can be done, the Anson County Board of Education voted, the motion carrying with no dissenting votes.