State of Maryland Attempts to Use Authority it Does Not Possess When it Comes to Curriculum
- Fellow Editors
- 4 days ago
- 5 min read
Updated: 4 days ago
When it comes to curriculum, the State of Maryland has resorted to threats and overreach, using unethical tactics to force its liberal agenda on local Boards of Education. The political weaponization of state agencies has become unmistakable, exposing the state’s errors, missteps, and partisan motives. Counties are being pressured and harassed simply for refusing to adopt the state’s preferred curriculum vendor. Yet the state’s demands are highly inappropriate, as they ignore local authority, are misrepresenting the purpose of a grant, and imposing an agenda that has nothing to do with improving education.
Understanding the Maryland Education Code on Curriculum:
MD Education Code § 4-111 - Subject to the applicable provisions of this article and the bylaws, basic policies, and guidelines established by the State Board, each county board, on the written recommendation of the county superintendent, shall establish curriculum guides and courses of study for the schools under its jurisdiction, including appropriate programs of instruction or training for mentally or physically handicapped children.
State standards exist to establish minimum education requirements. Local Boards of Education have the legal authority to decide what curriculum, materials, and courses of study best serve their students, as long as they meet those state standards. However, the liberal State of Maryland has repeatedly sought to transform these minimum standards into a packaged political ideology—using coercion against any BOE that rejects a scheme which has strayed far from the mission of general education.
The State of Maryland has an Inspector General for Education (OIGE) where citizens can file educational related complaints for investigation. The purpose of the office as listed on their website is as follows:
The Maryland Office of the Inspector General for Education is an independent entity within the government of the State of Maryland. The office is responsible for examining and investigating the management and affairs of county education boards, local school systems, public schools, and nonpublic schools that receive state funding to determine if established policies and procedures comply with federal and state laws. The Office may also examine and investigate the management and affairs of the Maryland State Department of Education and the Inter-agency Commission on School Construction.
The Office investigates complaints and information that involve civil rights violations of students and employees as defined in federal or state law. The Office conducts an annual review of local school systems to ensure policies and procedures that govern the prevention and reporting of child abuse and neglect comply with applicable federal and state laws on child abuse and neglect.
Vision: To serve the State of Maryland and safeguard educational funding, programs, and operations for now and generations to come.
Mission: To promote, prevent, and deter fraud, waste and abuse, and mismanagement through independent and unbiased audits and investigations while promoting integrity, efficiency, and excellence throughout educational programs and operations.
Is that so?
The OIGE’s role is to investigate and identify violations of law or regulation, then report its findings to the local BOE and the State Board of Education. The office itself has no enforcement authority. Yet in this case, the OIGE has been weaponized against the Somerset County BOE as a tool of political coercion, which is a far reach outside its scope.
A letter from the OIGE regarding curriculum reveals little understanding of the facts or the investigative process. Acting prematurely, the office issued warnings and threats to the SCBOE based solely on unverified assertions from a complaint. In other words, the OIGE did not do its homework or conduct a proper investigation.
In that letter we found on the Internet, the OIGE made several factual errors, including:
The OIGE claims that local boards have no discretion to substitute or reject materials approved by MSDE and AIB. This is incorrect. Maryland Education Code § 4-111 clearly states that local boards have the authority to select their own curriculum, provided it aligns with state standards. Once selected, the local board can submit its curriculum to the State Board for review.
The OIGE refers to a $10,479,027 “Read and Learn Grant,” but the grant’s actual name is the Read and Lead Grant. Their report also claims these funds enable SCPS to develop an ELA curriculum, as if that would be impossible without these funds.
What the OIGE fails to recognize is that the Read and Lead Grant is not for purchasing or developing curriculum. It is a supplemental literacy support and intervention program. While it must be implemented alongside a district’s chosen curriculum, its purpose is to supplement (not fund) curriculum development as the OIGE suggests.
Did you catch that the source of this grant is federal money? That’s right, the State of Maryland has taken federal funds, repackaged them, and attached a DEI program disguised as a literacy program. These funds originally came to Maryland under the Biden Administration. Now that the Biden Administration is gone, the state is pressuring the Somerset County Board of Education to accept this so-called “literacy” money along with the state’s own injected DEI conditions.
Instead of identifying and serving all students struggling with literacy, the Read and Lead program imposes DEI criteria that prioritize students based on their physical attributes. If you are Caucasian and struggling with literacy, you are not a priority. Why should a literacy intervention program discriminate at all?
Fueled by a flawed OIGE report, unions and liberal media have pushed a false political narrative that the Somerset County Board of Education risks losing over $10 million dollars of funding if they do not adopt the SAVVAS courseware.
Independent of regular funding, the one-time grant is not a loss. The grant is a potential opportunity for something the district never had. But what strings are attached, and why is the state pushing so hard for SAVVAS in particular?
SAVVAS is not just a curriculum. It is a turn-key courseware platform for delivering curriculum, lesson plans, and tracking student progress. Nevertheless, SAVVAS is jam-packed with Culturally Responsive Teaching (CRT), centered on DEI and social justice activism as stated in the company's past press release.
Somerset County Public Schools applied for this grant without the knowledge or approval of the SCBOE. Today, the State of Maryland is trying to force the Board to adopt its preferred curriculum by August 31, 2025 or risk losing funding. The state claims that rejecting its monopolized vendor by the start of the school year will harm children, yet it is threatening to cut funding that would directly harm those same children. Does that make any sense?
This is a calculated political tactic to strong-arm and trap the SCBOE into buying a vendor-specific courseware and a deceptive DEI literacy program. Both SAVVAS and the Read and Lead grant embed DEI initiatives that contradict Board policy, federal Executive Orders, the U.S. Constitution, and civil rights protections under Title VI and Title IX.
Of course the state knows that. As a result, this has now become a federal issue. Here is a letter from Congressman Andy Harris to the State Superintendent who has abused her authority.
Related articles:
Fellows & Editors
August 15, 2025
Copyright DelmarvaPTC.org. Please consider subscribing to the Delmarva Parent Teacher Coalition and follow us on FaceBook to stay informed of what's really happening with education in our schools.
All copyright © information provided at no charge and strictly for educational purposes under the Fair Use Act