Lafayette Principal Missteps in Investigation;District Does Little
I had learned of a serious situation at Lafayette. Charlie and I both felt it better to say nothing (it is not our place nor could we do much). I did let a few senior SPS people know that I knew and that it was vital for them to give the situation their notice and best effort.
As the situation has played out, I did not see that happening. Not from the principal, not from the Executive Director and not from SPS administration. Some of them are now saying they knew nothing about it and that is virtually impossible to believe.
But it has now been leaked to the media and I believe will become front page news in the next day or so. I will try to fully explain this when I get home from the Board meeting.
I am sorry to see another scandal to try to explain but I will say that the district had better get principals better training NOW before a lawsuit drags this district down. There is no excuse for this to happen at this point. Unless, of course, principals saw the handslap given to the Lowell principals in that case and thought that using their own judgment is fine in case they may confront at their own schools.
As the situation has played out, I did not see that happening. Not from the principal, not from the Executive Director and not from SPS administration. Some of them are now saying they knew nothing about it and that is virtually impossible to believe.
But it has now been leaked to the media and I believe will become front page news in the next day or so. I will try to fully explain this when I get home from the Board meeting.
I am sorry to see another scandal to try to explain but I will say that the district had better get principals better training NOW before a lawsuit drags this district down. There is no excuse for this to happen at this point. Unless, of course, principals saw the handslap given to the Lowell principals in that case and thought that using their own judgment is fine in case they may confront at their own schools.
Comments
I don't know what the issue is, but I don't think we need more people in administration just because they have trouble in the buildings.
- high school parent
Parent
Sick of It
Hoping Banda will fix this
Fed up and I vote.
Parent
another fed up parent
( & I found a nice article about William a Blair, who retired as Lafayette's principal in 1945. He begane at the district in 1906, and moved to Lafayette in 1923.)
But if you let the principal stay in one building for so long, as in Cathy Hayes case, they become an advocate for the community that they spend their time in & not a spokesman for the district party line.
Move the principals around every two or three years and it's harder for them to build ties to any one school, they are reminded they are employed by the district( being paid by the taxpayers is just an aside).
Darn glasses.
I don't have to add anything.
We agree totally and are sad too.
These are the lingering effects of the "anything goes" culture MGJ/Kennedy fostered and (SOME)directors have become accomplices rather than leaders.
Sad & disgusted
Shouldn't we kinda expect them to be "trained up" when we hire them?
I mean come on, really!
My dad had two words that really helped me understand following rules: "County Jail".
Worked for me.
The structural flaws of the institution are exacerbated by lawyers who will defend any prevarication that might "stick to the wall" and the whole crew mouth the same line.
--irked by innuendo
Laf alum
Also Irked
So no matter what comes out it still is going to be a shock.
Saying that another serious scandal has occurred, is vague enough that it could be anything from paying millions for substandard concrete at Garfield, to systematically dismantling th gifted program and harrasing the families, to selling district gas cards.
In this district it really could be anything.
Melissa said she was going to fully explain soon, so it's kind of pointless to complain that it's a game. Especially with someone who publishes more school-related info than anyone else in this city.
That said, Melissa, I'd just as soon wait to see these kind of things until there's really something to publish. I can see why someone could be bothered by this kind of "placeholder" post. The blog already has a strong reputation, I wouldn't want to see things trend toward the big-media mindset of trying to be the first to break news, (even if it's only by 15 minutes over the other outlets).
My recollection of SSD principals from years ago was that they were champions of, and advocates for, their buildings and programs. You got the sense that downtown was dysfunctional, but your principal backed his/her staff and families, and did their best to make things work. They carried water for their schools and families, and were problem solvers.
Lately, the sense I get is much more that principals are there to be the "voice" of downtown in the schools -- to implement the downtown policies at the school level. If so, they are now "carrying water for" the Supe and the EDs -- they are part of advancing the downtown agenda. I always thought it was maybe just the difference between elementaries and the high schools. But maybe it is much, much more.
I definitely think that moving them around from building to building is part of it -- as is moving programs around (both break the bonds between principals and kids/families, and decrease trust and collaboration. It may work well with the "corporate model" which "moves" assets around every year or two as lower level employees go the "up or out" route, but even in corporate America, it leads to bad management (offset, I guess, by the idea that it leads to good leadership training -- and who cares whether the underlings who make the widgets like it or not). But here -- the "underlings" are our teachers, and the "widgets" are kids. We need to return to a model that uses more thought and care in placing principals (in light of programs and school needs) and then leaves them there long enough to build strong school communities.
No decent private schools have the sort of administrator churn that has become "normal" for SSD -- if they did, they wouldn't have any students.
I don't think Melissa's post is meant as an "I know something you don't know, and I am not telling." I think that it is more that ordinarily, she reports whatever she knows, as long as she has some confidence that her information is credible. Where there are "investigations" or the information is sensitive (relates to employee conduct, etc.), she tries to hold back until "credible stuff" actually hits the streets -- which means she needs to wait for entities with investigative staffs, the District, the ST, etc. But, as we all try to follow current District issues, knowing that there are various things out there that are being investigated or followed up on is useful, even if it is frustratingly vague.
I also think that, because the investigations take so long (and sometimes, the District doesn't want them to come out at all), it is helpful to know that they are going on early. That way -- when the District tries to do things like "just move on" from the Lowell incident -- claiming it is isolated -- it helps to know whether -- AT THAT VERY MOMENT -- the District is in fact dealing with another similar (or not) issue somewhere else. It goes to their credibility and their ability to actually think and act strategically, rather than reflexibly, about incident management.
If Melissa said nothing, some folks would be annoyed to find out, next month, that she had known about stuff 5 or 6 months earlier. If she told everything she thinks she knows, even though some of it may be just rumor or the facts ultimately are different than what she was told, lots of people would criticize her for jumping out in front with unsubstantiated facts, and not just waiting for the course of an investigation or lawsuit.
The real problem here isn't Melissa's timing. It is a District which over and over seems to come up with issues that are dealt with badly and in an untimely, reactionary rather than proactive manner. I for one am willing to wait for details, but am grateful for the heads up.
--TC
Clementine
My intent seems to be misread so lesson learned but I would appreciate people not assuming bad intent.
Principal is being reassigned
There is an investigation
May or may not involve staff
Senior staff either sat on their hands, or act clueless
That's it. I find this info useful. I will be watching how this plays out. Others may move along.
It was reported that a student at Lafayette sexually harassed another student by directing the gesture of rubbing his crotch and moaning at another student. This behavior was witnessed by about half a dozen other students. A complaint was made.
The principal did everything wrong at every opportunity.
First, she was non-responsive to the complaint.
Second, when the complaint was repeated with greater force the principal responded with a dreadfully inappropriate investigation.
The principal's conduct of the investigation was wrong all the way around the track starting with the fact that she should not have done it in the first place. The superintendent's procedure for sexual harassment complaints dictates that a compliance officer should conduct the investigation.
Then the principal botched it by refusing to allow the parent of the victim to be present during her interview - a direct violation of the policy - by claiming it was against the rules.
Then the principal botched it further by conducting a completely inappropriate investigation. Let's just say that the conduct of her investigation led to complaints of sexual harassment against her.
Then the principal determined that the incident did not happen, or was not sufficiently lewd to require consequences.
Then the principal told the boy's parents that certain other parents were trying to get their son expelled.
Then the principal told the complaining families that the student had been disciplined when he had not.
That's a lot of wrong, but it gets worse.
And, yeah, didn't we just do this?
-Sue in Zen Field
It's baffling and deeply disturbing to me as parent that the district is willing to open itself up to such legal and ethical liabilities by leaving such unfit people in charge of our kids' schools.
What does it take for a principal to be truly fired? How much harm has to happen and to whom?
It is not just this incident, but the entire way this district has mishandled and swept under the rug serious allegations, going all the way back to the Shayne Hill case seven years ago. There has been serious mishandling of these cases by many principals, with apparently no significant consequences to their careers. The same cannot be said about the teachers and staff who bring these allegations to light, however.
I take these things very, very seriously. I need to know that my child will be safe from harm while at school, and that the people in charge - the principals especially - will do the right thing every single time, without fail. I need to know that the adults hired by this district will not throw my child under the bus to protect or advance their own career.
Everything I have seen over the last few years shows a broken and corrupt system that has allowed the abuse of vulnerable children to be blatantly disregarded. It is shocking and appalling that this situation continues to happen over and over again.
Our family is making some very expensive and very difficult changes so we can leave the Seattle public school district. I no longer feel my child is safe, nor the primary concern of administrators here. I sincerely hope that the new superintendent can address problems such as these. I no longer feel that I can wait any longer for this to happen. My children are growing up. Between the poor math curriculum, the excessive testing, the loss of art, library, and music, and the lack of trust in our building staff, we just cannot do this anymore. My kids are too important to me to ignore this anymore.
Ms Lora told them that she would look into the situation. Then she told them that she had taken care of it and that consequences had been meted out for the principal and the student, although there was no evidence of either. Ms Lora said that she could not describe those consequences due to privacy concerns. This is, in fact, incorrect and non-compliant with the sexual harassment procedure.
Then Ms Lora said that she had consulted with the superintendent and the district's legal department. Later both the superintendent and the legal department denied any knowledge of the situation.
But wait, it gets worse.
The father of the victim then files a formal sexual harassment complaint. That's when people even further up the org chart got an opportunity to botch it.
As of this moment, there are a half a dozen district officials who have either lied about taking action on this complaint or lied about knowing about the complaint.
The one thing that has not happened is the procedure that was supposed to happen. Not only did the principal botch it but so did the assistant principal, the education director, and, now, a host of upper-level management in the District.
Here's the worst thing. Lots of district staff have stepped forward, make sympathetic noises, said that they will take care of everything, and then either did nothing or did nothing right. The situation remains unresolved.
The families involved now suspect that the district's strategy is to delay and defer and pass the buck until the school year ends. At that point the principal will be re-assigned and they will regard it as no longer a matter worth pursuing.
The families are really angry about how they have been treated. They have been patient, they have shown good faith and expected good faith, and they have followed the procedures. The district - at every level - has failed, been dismissive, been deceitful, and failed to follow the procedures. This has been a show of systemic and institutional dysfunction.
Hear, hear.
So not only did Lafayette lose its longtime strong principal, it got stuck with a highly problematic one, and now this is the result.
Why is it always a zero-sum game with this district?
One community's 'win' (here, Coe) is always at the expense of another community (here, Lafayette).
It should not be this way.
We have a crisis in leadership every step of the ladder up to the top in SPS.
Surely there must be better principal candidates out there -- people of integrity, experience, and good judgment. Surely.
But I suspect that we have had superintendents who do not want upstanding strong principals who will be loyal to their schools, but may in fact prefer flawed, problematic ones who are indebted to the district for having such a high-paying job, and who will in turn do whatever the district demands -- harass senior teachers into early retirement, not even try to get a math waiver though parents want it, accept MAP testing and all mandates blindly, hire TFA novices instead of fully qualified teachers, just to name a few.
Again I am sadly forced to reach a cynical conclusion about the underlying machinations and motivations of this district, but how else to explain the persistent mediocrity and downright dangerous incompetence that is allowed to continue in so many SPS principals?
Mr White
Teachers are being evaluated with a fine toothed comb--by a four step rating scale--while more than a few of their "superiors" display reprehensible and/or incompetent behavior and continue to collect six figure salaries.
Worse, the pattern of principal misconduct and incompetence is not only troubling on ethical and leadership levels--but imagine being a competent staff person who is being evaluated by (and at the mercy of) such individuals. This is a recipe for extreme demoralization.
Why do these Ed. Directors even have jobs? Why can't the principals report directly to the superintendent? Ed. Directors are analagous to "instructional coaches" for teachers--competent principals don't need Ed. Directors and competent teachers don't need coaches. In the meantime, more counselors are being cut.
Ms. Lora is the TFA darling. Does she even have a combined ten years of teaching and principal experience? Brea Dusseault's hatchet job on Martin Floe (highly defended by the Education Sector crowd in the "report"--wasn't she formerly a colleague of Goldhaber of UW/Education Sector?) is another example of someone who was promoted without sufficient experience. Thanks, Susan Enfield, for both hires!
This principal is not new. Many of the worst principals are being warehoused in schools with vulnerable children--out-of-sight/out-of-mind--until they are put into schools where parents have some power and their long-time behavior quickly hits the fan.
This district is corrupt. It needs a complete housecleaning.
--enough already (I agree with concerns by posters who thought the "inquiring minds want to know" approach to this thread was beneath the character of this blog)
I think we would all agree that children really benefit from boundaries and consistency. I have found that when they know that they will be caught and there will be consequences when they misbehave they all behave much better and don't keep pushing the boundaries to see what will happen. It has been amazing to me to see how quickly the (child) culture of a school can change when the leadership changes.
Leaders don't need to be punitive; but they do have to be clear and consistent and observant and active. And it helps if they really like kids.
- Lafayette Parent
Another parent
Frankly, while I agree with Charlie's assessment that this was massively bungled all up the line, I also think these kinds of decision can be very difficult especially if (and I don't have any clue whether it is true here -- though the police report filing, and the allegations of parents yelling at other parents in the halls certainly set off alarm bells) you have one or more sets of unreasonable parents.
Seriously, what you need now is a seasoned administrator with a great internal character compass, and who is willing to go to bat for your school and its kids.
Jan
Jan
Here's the worst thing. Lots of district staff have stepped forward, make sympathetic noises, said that they will take care of everything, and then either did nothing or did nothing right. The situation remains unresolved."
Charli, for a minute there I thought we were still talking about Lowell.
Sue's in left field
At Lowell, Gregory King, Rina Geoghagan and others did everything in their power to discourage staff from reporting future misconduct.
At Lafayette the principal and others did everything in their power to discourage students from reporting future misconduct.
I don't know which is worse. Both situations are beyond alarming.
Sue's in left field
Wow.
Also,any good principal knows that all schools need good leadership and would not be afraid of a school that needs unity and calm. (I note this kind of thing was said with the superintendent search.) I would not be surprised if every single candidate knew about this going in.
Fine, circle the wagons but it never helps. Ever.
Lafayette parent, I am also a Lafayette parent. I hope you reconsider your defense of incompetence. Unfortunately, Director McLaren has been moved by the "they're out to get Jo" excuse.
Ollie North
As for supervisor misconduct towards adults (staff) , we all know there is a strong teachers union that will offer protection in those situations.
Sue's in left field
The union left the two Lowell speech therapists totally twisting in the wind. Can't say I adore a lot of unions, but if you are going to have one, and pay dues, it would be nice if they showed up when you were being framed by management.
The difference I see in the two is at Lowell, the higher ups continually denied that there ever was a problem, or that anyone had reported it -- and then tried to screw the SLPs for NOT reporting -- and then DID screw them for having the temerity to file an ethics/whistleblower complaint.
At Lafayette, they acknowledged receiving the complaint (it sounds like the downtown folks were still doing a "Lowell," but Aurora and Jo weren't), Instead, they just bungled it totally and then misled parents about whether, and how, things had been handled.
Same bad result -- different bad tactics. But I know what a toll Greg's and Rina's horrible management took on the Lowell SLPs. I can hardly stand to think of 4th grade kids in a similar position of difficulty.
Jan
The comment about 'strong" union was tongue in cheek - for many, our union dues have been a waste of money.
The sad consequence from both situations though, is that children were not protected and actions by school administrators (both building and central) will discourage future reporting. It would have been so much simpler to have done the right thing from the start.
Sue's in left field
Did you see "Clockwork Orange"?
Seemed to work for Alex.
Ed (NOT Director)
As to your comment about this being just "hearsay", at least one parent has confirmed that the principal did demonstrate mock masturbation in front of them and another parent, and was very open about how she asked the children to demonstrate the same thing to her. There is also a series of emails as well. This is well beyond simple hearsay. This incident seems very likely to have actually happened, which is simply appalling.
- Sign Here
-Truthsayer
Be careful not to be commenting on things that are not facts. Make sure you remember this. Talking is one thing, but when you are using hearsay as facts, you are unknowingly contributing to something that you might not believe in after all.
-Truthsayer
-L Parent
-Ethicalgirl
As to whether this is hearsay - the principal openly admitted to doing everything the parents said she did. As to the motivations of the parents - I know I would be absolutely livid if this happened to my child. I would also want to know if my child was acting out the way this boy was reported to have done, so I could have him evaluated immediately for possible sexual abuse. Young kids rarely do the things he was documented doing in a vacuum, which is beyond sad as well.
I do not doubt that you are upset by this situation. But the person to focus on is the principal and her bosses. She clearly stepped way, way, way beyond any procedures or policies, and escalated this into a very strange realm where she was acting out an act of masturbation for parents, and told them she did the same thing in front of their children.
Furthermore, her supervisors badly mishandled the situation as well, and tried to sweep it away. These are all very well-paid adults who are expected to know what to do in such a situation. That is what they are supposedly trained to do, and that is why they are paid as much as they are. The buck stops with them. The failure is theirs.
Sign here
I had a wild, impulsive boy. Mine didn't attend SPS until AFTER he had outgrown his wild, impulsive ways -- for just these reasons. He never did the things being discussed here. But believe me, he did plenty that had parents of milder, sensitive, law-abiding children convinced that he was just short of a criminal. Who knows what they thought of us, his parents. I also had two girls and another boy who did go to SPS and who had none of his issues. The teachers and principals willing to not sensationalize or overreact to his behavior but to work with us on it and who helped shield him from those who wanted him drugged, or in psychotherapy, or gone from the school, were angels.
I don't know what the child did, or why. I don't know what the principal did, or why. I don't know if the "other parents" were reasonable or hysterical. But I hear and appreciate what you are saying. One of the best things about this blog is the voices saying things we hadn't thought about.
--Think your name is apt
NOWAYLAFAYETTE
-an educator but not an idiot.