Open Letter to Kentucky State Senator Frommeyer

Dear Senator Funke Frommeyer,

Thank you for writing publicly about student protests during school hours (continue reading: "Are student walkouts during the school day legal?"). I share your concern for student safety, and I agree that coercion of young people — in any direction — is unacceptable.

But this debate is larger than scheduling. It concerns the purpose of education in a democratic society.

You write that “school hours should be about teaching our children the basics, helping them build skills, and preparing them for bright futures,” and that protest, while protected by the First Amendment, should occur outside school hours. That framing assumes a separation between learning and civic expression.

We must ask: basics for what?

If schools exist solely to deliver test scores and workforce readiness, then civic action will always appear disruptive. But if schools also exist to prepare young people to participate responsibly in democratic life, then civic engagement — even uncomfortable engagement — is not outside the mission. It is part of it.

Civic learning cannot be confined to textbooks. It requires practice. When students research issues, organize peers, articulate concerns, and engage institutions, they are not stepping outside education — they are exercising it. They are learning how power functions, how rights operate, and how responsibility accompanies freedom.

I am concerned by the assertion that classrooms should be places of learning and safety, not “staging grounds for political action.” This presents a false division. Education has always been intertwined with public life — in what we teach, what we omit, how we allocate resources, and how we respond to difference. The task is not to remove politics from schools, which is neither possible nor historically accurate, but to cultivate the knowledge, discernment, and habits that allow young people to engage civic questions thoughtfully and ethically.

You rightly cite safety concerns, including the example of a student injured during a walkout. Risk must be addressed. But the appropriate response to risk is governance design, not prohibition: clear district guidance, designated spaces, adult supervision, and transparent guardrails that protect both student safety and student autonomy. When expression emerges, it signals the need for structure — not suppression.

There is also a broader democratic principle at stake. Protest exists to make concerns visible. If civic expression is permitted only when maximally convenient for institutions, its meaning is diminished. A democracy confident in its institutions should be able to withstand lawful interruption without interpreting it as collapse.

You raise concern about division. Democracy is not the absence of tension; it is the capacity to navigate tension without dehumanization. Discomfort is not disorder. Learning to disagree constructively may be one of the most essential competencies our students need.

Across the United States and globally, young people are asserting a stake in decisions that shape their futures. Whether one agrees with their specific positions or not, this pattern reflects civic development, not dysfunction. The responsibility of adults is not to silence that energy, but to guide it within clear ethical and safety boundaries.

Kentucky has long valued resilience, responsibility, faith, and freedom. Freedom includes participation in civic life. If we expect young Kentuckians to grow into responsible adults, they must have structured opportunities to practice responsibility — including civic responsibility.

The choice before us is not safety versus protest. It is fragility versus fluency.

We can protect students, reject coercion, preserve instructional integrity, and still affirm that student voice belongs within the educational mission.

I offer these reflections in the spirit of strengthening both our schools and our democracy.

In possibility,

KP Williams, Ph.D.
Independent Scholar & Founder, Creative Recess
Butler, Kentucky