The Lafayette Story
Update: the district is saying that the HR investigation of the "Lafayette issues" will be completed early next week. That's pretty fast considering how long this has dragged out. I'm hoping the district has really done a complete investigation along with an explanation of how it got to this point. I also hope that Dr. Enfield will be making some kind of statement of assurance to parents about principals and their understanding of how to handle these kinds of issues.
This is a serious subject with serious allegations. That there appears to be many witnesses and e-mail evidence to nearly everything said and done is clear.
This is a serious subject with serious allegations. That there appears to be many witnesses and e-mail evidence to nearly everything said and done is clear.
I lay this out as clearly as I know it from extensive input
I have received. I have a statement (at the end of this
thread) from the district that I believe would cover any statement from either
the principal, Jo Lute-Ervin or
Aurora Lora, Executive Director for that region.
I have known Lafayette to be a popular and high-performing
school. It is one of the many
over-enrolled schools in West Seattle.
But as I have told others, this issue is much bigger than just
Lafayette.
Once again, if staff had followed protocol, this issue could
have been quietly resolved in a fair and satisfactory manner. If the district staff had followed
protocol, it could have been resolved without any outside notice. However, it appears that did not happen
either at the school or district level.
The upshot is two-fold.
One, we once again have a principal believing she could
substitute her own judgment for what she legally was supposed to do, both from
a state law view and from district procedure. Not only that, she did an investigation in what could be
viewed a highly questionable manner.
Two, there appears to be a student who needs support and
help for his behavior. Escalating
behavior does not just stop or change overnight. My concern is that the next step would be for this student
to physically engage with another student (perhaps someone younger). The district would open itself up
to a huge lawsuit if this happened and it were discovered that the district
knew about this pattern of behavior and had done nothing.
Our principals – all of them – need immediate
retraining. There is something
fundamentally wrong if this keeps happening.
I don’t know why this continues but clearly, something needs
to change.
Incident
In early April, a group of students from one class was lined
up on the playground. One student,
a boy, allegedly shut his eyes, then rubbed his crotch (on top of his clothes)
and was moaning. The little girl
next to him was frightened by his behavior as were some other children. They told their parents when they got
home (unclear if they told the teacher).
The parents reported it, in writing and in person to the
principal. Nothing happened. They e-mailed her again, this time
cc’ing the district.
The principal launched an investigation of her own even as
the parents had used wording that should have created an investigation of
sexual misconduct per district policies.
This was on or around April
13th.
Allegedly, one by one, the children in question were taken
to her office. (It is unknown when
or if she questioned the boy.) The
door was closed and she asked them to describe what they saw. She then told them to act it out for
her. There was no one in the
office but the principal and each student.
The children later told their parents they were embarrassed
and confused and some did not want to touch themselves in that manner and
showed her on their leg. She then allegedly
demonstrated some kind of action on herself and all but one child refused to
follow her lead. She told the children to NOT tell anyone about their talk and
the children thought she meant their parents and only one child did tell his
parents.
The parents of children interviewed were not told about the
interviews either before or after them.
One parent was in the building during a child’s interview but was denied
access and told it was against “district
rules” to have the parent present.
When two parents confronted the principal she allegedly admitted
that this was how she did the investigation and that she had asked the children
to show her what happened using their own bodies. She took no notes and had no documentation of the
interviews. She closed the investigation saying the children had not
demonstrated the lewd behavior.
The principal, for whatever reason, allegedly called the
parents of the boy in question and told them that a couple of parents were
trying to get their son expelled and named them. The boy’s parents then called the reporting parents and made
mention of hiring a lawyer.
Allegedly, one parent of the boy saw a reporting parent in
the hall and yelled at that person.
No one was trying to get this child expelled but clearly
there was a tremendous worry about him.
This worry was compounded by the fact that the boy apparently using foul/inflammatory
language towards other students, both in the classroom and on the
playground. This behavior had been
reported to teachers, school counselor and playground supervisors as well as
the principal and Ex Director. He
also allegedly looked for porn on the internet at school (how I don’t
know). One parent told the
technology teacher when she found he was showing other children the site. (The child received input from
school administrators for this behavior.)
The parents believe this child is creating a negative
learning environment for the class and children feel unsafe and uncomfortable
around him.
Aurora Lora is the Executive Director of that region. She wrote to the parents saying she had
talked with the principal and felt she could clear up some “misunderstandings”
about the issues raised.
Parents did finally meet with Lora and the principal. The principal claimed she never heard previous reports about
the boy’s behavior even though at least 4 parents from his room had reported issues
to her. In e-mails, Lora
said she looked into the situation and told one parent that she would be happy
to meet and discuss how things might be done differently next time.
Lora said, “It does
sound to me like everyone is ready to get this sorted out so we can all move on
and let the school handle any
school-related misbehavior. “
(bold mine).
A district caseworker from Safety and Security was then
assigned to do a “safety assessment” of the situation. Additionally, Lora told parents that she
had consulted with both the Superintendent and “legal” about the
situation. But, because of
personnel issues, nothing could be disclosed to parents about any disciplinary actions
to the student but she could confirm they had been applied.
She stated, “I hope
you can understand that we have to follow the law..”
The Superintendent has a procedure for Sexual Harassment
complaints and must write to both the complainant and accused within thirty
days to say either the evidence isn’t there, corrective actions the district
can take or the investigation is continuing. So far that has not happened and Lora’s e-mail seems to
indicate nothing else DOES have to
happen.
There was also supposed to be an investigation by a
compliance officer as well as a full written report.
Two parents then went to the district ombudsman to file
official reports. One was a parent
of the girl who had been standing next to the boy in line and who was deeply
concerned because his daughter was now fearful at school.
The parents of the children involved want assurances their
children will not be questioned alone during any district investigation (or at
least have a fully-qualified child investigator in the room).
The father of the girl who stood next to the boy filed a
police complaint on May 15th but it was not assigned to a detective.
At last night’s Board meeting, the parent of the girl went
to the meeting and personally handed out information to the Board, both
superintendents and senior staff.
The district’s statement:
At the direction of Assistant Superintendent of Human Resources
Paul Apostle, we are conducting an investigation into alleged inappropriate
behavior by a student at Lafayette Elementary and the principal’s response to
that incident. Because it is a personnel matter, we are not able to comment
further until the investigation is completed.
Charlie and I have known about this for weeks but said nothing, hoping the district would have learned from the Lowell incident. Senior staff were alerted early on in the hope that they would see this as something important to keep on their radar and to make sure was properly handled.
I knew that once the police report had been filed, it might have been a matter of time before another media source picked up on it. When the father of the girl handed out his information at the Board meeting, apparently some TV person heard about it. So I knew then, this was not going to be contained. I go back and forth on whether it should have been contained at all given the alleged responses by the principal and district.
Charlie and I have known about this for weeks but said nothing, hoping the district would have learned from the Lowell incident. Senior staff were alerted early on in the hope that they would see this as something important to keep on their radar and to make sure was properly handled.
I knew that once the police report had been filed, it might have been a matter of time before another media source picked up on it. When the father of the girl handed out his information at the Board meeting, apparently some TV person heard about it. So I knew then, this was not going to be contained. I go back and forth on whether it should have been contained at all given the alleged responses by the principal and district.
Comments
Oh. My. God.
Melissa, I think the district did learn from the Lowell incident, and what they learned is clearly stated in the following quote:
Lora said, “It does sound to me like everyone is ready to get this sorted out so we can all move on..."
--The Lowell parents (who were inconvenienced by that little matter with Special Education students and set-up-and-targeted- teachers) taught the district well, now didn't they?
--enough already
What the boy did on the playground was inappropriate horseplay. What the principal did, behind closed doors, was sexual harassment.
If I were a parent, my report to the police would be against the principal for her actions.
I would expect her to be fired by the district.
If my child has any adverse consequences, I would expect the district to pick up the tab for the counseling.
I would probably also sue the principal individually. I would argue that she was acting outside the scope of her authority when she was engaging in sexually suggestive behavior in one on one situation with the kids.
Our own pediatrician will not see a young child alone in a room. Our daycare providers work in pairs. No investigator would ever require a child to act out a lewd act on themselves, alone in a room. There are clear protocols, if such an extreme demonstration is needed, using dolls and being videotaped, and with other, safe people in the room with the child. In this case, the verbal description should clearly have been more than enough. Furthermore, such behavior on the boy's part is deeply troubling, and a possible indication that he himself may be a victim of sexual abuse.
Everything else was also badly botched, but the private acting out of a lewd act takes this to a whole different realm. I hope that principal gets arrested for sexual misconduct with a child. because that is exactly what that is.
Oh. My. God.
Does Lafayette actually have a counselor? There is none on the staff list. There is a psychologist listed, but I believe they generally spend very little time at any one school. It sounds like Lafayette (like all schools) could use one.
I think I am in denial and hoping this is not true.
I am stunned that a principal (or anyone) did this and was not arrested already.
Seriously, Melissa? This seriously happened?
--enough already
These are long-standing protocols. Somewhere in a 30+ year career folks didn't learn how to respond appropriately? Every single manager training I've ever been in on these topics includes the reminder at several points that "you don't have discretion here. You have to follow these rules." Now, this is in the corporate world, not in the school district, but can it be that different?
OMG
SPS has an ingrained culture of situational ethics, which can (and does) easily cross over into situational abiding.
These people were definitely taught what to do, probably even learned what to do, but didn't think they had to do it.
It is a combination of arrogance and lack of accountability. Nepotism is rampant, and so is ass kissing. It is a really, really good paycheck for a lot of administrators, without the demands of the real world.
That is SPS in a nutshell.
--enough already
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
that is situational law abiding AKA criminal activity
--enough already
This demonstrates the dysfunctionality of the Exec Dir of Schools model. Instructional leader my *ss, more like who's the best brown-noser.
Wonder what they'll do now that their mistress is leaving for Highline. SpEd families have countless stories where Exec Dirs have merely phoned it into their $135K jobs. Look at Marnie Campbell, getting promoted beyond her level of competence after she botched SpEd.
Personally, I have let my (admittedly wonderful) school know that my disabled child may NOT be questioned without me present.
It won't be'front page news' unless it's a very slow news day, and I hope this blogs post about this situation doesn't hinder Lafayette's chance for hiring a better principal for the coming years.
Clementine
Really? Do you read the newspaper much?
As for finding a principal because of a troubled school, well, we did it for an entire district.
How long can the mismanagement of people and money continue? I hesitated to apply the label "EVIL" to the SPS powers that be during Charlie's Face of 'Holiday on Ice' post a week an a half ago. But the continued culture of willful ignorance and failure to learn from the past can barely be called anything but evil.
Whoa!
This story goes beyond the alleged incident last year, but I have always wondered if privately questioning kids is okay.
-curious parent
"Student complainants and witnesses may have a trusted adult with them during any district-initiated investigatory activities."
also disgusted
The children who witnessed the behavior should have been offered some guidance and their parents should have been assured that the matter was being investigated by the proper authorities. And they should have been assured that possible efforts were being made to ensure the safety of their children.
The principal pulling the kids into her office and asking them to show her the act was sexual harassment- not intentional, but harassment nonetheless. It shows an extreme lack of knowledge and poor judgement. You can't train away that sort of ignorance- she should be fired.
Situations like this happen pretty frequently in public schools, I'm horrified by how poorly it was handled.
Teacher Sally
"You're fired."
If that invisible interim superintendent has any god-forsaken clue about legal action being taken...
-Sue in Zen Field
Not really -- not unless you want to give up even the last bit of control you have with a vote. Go talk to the residents of Detroit, where emergency managers are being installed right and left, and much of the government is in one form of receivership or another. And tell me the difference between that and a dictatorship -- because the governed no longer have any say -- at all -- in who makes and enforces the rules. We can call in the "grown ups" if we think we can't do the job ourselves. But these grown ups are not our parents. They do not love us. They do not even like us or wish us vaguely well. Their continuance in office does not depend on whether they do a good job for us. In fact, it may depend on their doing a great bit of active harm -- if that is what their campaign donors want.
We made a start, this year, on taking back our school board from big business and corporate ed reform. For them (the four not trying actively to give the District away every day) to do much, they have to get control of a dysfunctional downtown operation (THIS is the fight that has been going on for decades -- at least 2 of them). To do THAT, they need to get a superintendent who is willing to see and acknowledge the problems, and has the skills, time, and political backing to make a difference. (THIS is what I THOUGHT we were doing when we hired MGJ -- HAH! Guess I got THAT one wrong!
To date, the board is still dealing with a Superintendent who rose under MGJ, the EDs that MGJ hired, and -- for the most part -- principals (and a toxic leadership culture for them) that MJG devised. They are also dealing with a classic "whisper campaign" impugning their motives, their base of support, and their governing style (before even the first votes took place, there were claims of "micromanagement" -- but never any examples to back them up).
Hiring Mr. Banda is STEP ONE -- on a board that BARELY has a majority of folks willing to take on the task (since Carr, DeBell, and Martin Morris seem to want nothing than to hand over the entire governance/management to someone who can and will govern and manage alone, with no oversight).
If Sahila is correct in saying we no longer have the luxury of complacency, we also do not have the luxury of throwing our hands up, walking off, and leaving the mess to be picked up by some off-stage "adult" whom we neither elect nor control.
It will take years of FORWARD motion to clean up this mess -- and for three of the last four (MGJ's years) we went backwards. For the last year, we made forward progress in some departments -- but none in C & I or with principals. Dr. E. left all that stuff in the same toxic, destroyed state she found it in.
In my opinion, the biggest, stinkiest SSD mess at this point (well, maybe no bigger than SPED -- but right up there) is principals/EDs. THAT is where I hope Mr. Banda starts, when he is done doing his evaluation time.
We will know soon enough if Mr. Banda is willing to take on this work. Even if he is -- think of how many people have to go (or be retrained to do their work in a civil, moral way). And when someone new comes in, for the first few years, they will be surrounded by superiors and reports who learned in the "bad old days."
But I see no choice. We simply must do this work. And I don't think we can hand it off, any more than we would hand off parenting to someone and relinquish control.
Jan
-Sue in Zen Field
1st - school based
2nd - Short-term suspension and parent conference
3rd - Short-term suspension
For middle and high schoolers it is similar, except it says long-term suspension for 3rd incident.
Seems pretty lenient. And of course no mention of counseling or help for any students.
Of course, how the principal handled this was way out of line!
Signed,
-sad for the kids
Also I think we need more counselors. In fact I think it would save the district money and energy by preventing situations like this by getting early help for troubled students, and also for having the training to actually assist principals and add a check and balance in situations like this.
It would be pennywise to hire more counselors and save on lawsuits and investigative costs. But the district won't budget elementary counselors centrally, the schools have to pay from their minimal budgets and elementary counselors continue to disappear. If the district budgeted elementary counselors centrally there would actually be more money to send to schools. Plus students would have a basic support that they deserve.
my opinion
SSD has a serious systemic problem. Lawsuits are settled with taxpayer's money so there's very little correction by the staff when there is no personal economic risk or even job risk. Mum's the word. And so the pattern and cycle of bad behavior to downright law breaking continues. SSD isn't unique as a public institute to go down this road. CPS and our police force are facing similar public scrutiny and investigation.
Will there be any real changes? I think that will depend on us, the public, to continue to scrutinize and lobby hard for things to change because I'm not sure our school board or civic leaders have the guts or political will to do so.
parent
• Gregory King, an educator for 20 years including an award for work in Atlanta, will be assigned a principal position
• Antionette Pearson, current principal at DPS’ Osborn Upper School; will be assigned as principal at an elementary school to be determined
Is this our very own "I never got the report, but am happy to encourage an investigation against those on my staff who reported it" Gregory King? How many Gregory Kings are out there floating around in principal land? We know he already tried to leave mid-year for Tacoma. Is it too much to hope, for Lowell's sake, that he has jumped ship again -- and this time into the trusting employ of MGJ, who will certainly not hold the investigation against him, and who is accountable to no one (except Governor Snyder -- who is busy)?
I know there were laws that made it very difficult to get rid of principals. I can't recall the details, but Carlyle was working on something to make it easier to get rid of principals.
I'd love for this person to be taken off the state payroll and retirement system. The district is just adding one more incompetent person to headquarters.
--amsiegel
What the bloody hell is this world coming to when this is tolerated by a school administration? I am beyond disgusted, especially with Susan Enfield on this count. The buck stops with her, even if she is on er way out. How anyone in the chain of command can sleep at night is absolutely beyond comprehension.
Sickened
The principal, Jo Lute-Ervin, was new at Lafayette as of the 2011-12 school year. In February 2012, she tendered her resignation effective June 30th. Her resignation letter confirms that she intends to become an SPS administrator:
http://westseattleblog.com/2012/02/west-seattle-schools-lafayette-principal-wont-stay-for-2nd-year
Prior to Lafayette, Lute-Ervin was principal at Tops K-8 for two years, and before that she was principal at Leschi Elementary for 9 years.
Lafayette used to have a counselor who worked nearly full-time, with half of her pay funded by the PTA. I do not know her status for this school year. Lafayette also has a very strong autism and special needs inclusion program, including an occupational therapist.
My heart goes out to the talented and VERY dedicated staff at Lafayette. I know an incident such as this would never have occurred under the previous principal, Virginia Turner.
I feel compelled to say that this idiot principal does not reflect who Lafayette is as a community. I sincerely hope any new principal candidate will see these issues are a result of our bad principal, not our community. This is the lowest of the low - it can only get better from here. (I hope!!!)
This is not something that can be trained. Whet this principal did shows a complete lack of commen sense. True to form, she will be promoted rather than fired. Shame on the SSD administrators.
My first reaction is anger at the parent who made public a situation that had already been dealt with. It is a well-known fact that Lute-Ervin lacks judgement; this has been recognized and resolved: she's leaving in six weeks so we can hire a competent leader. This was just another example of the very behavior that got her "fired."
Instead of recognizing it as such, the "outer" is bringing down a slew of good, capable people, like Aurora Lora and others, in the process. At the same time, s/he is tarnishing the reputation of Lafayette at a time when we're trying to attract a new leader.
From what I understand, this young man needs intervention, esp with all the class disruptions he's caused.
But that is no reason to publicize a situation that was mishandled by someone who has already been fired for her poor judgement.
Lafayette is already in a rocky place. We don't need to add any more antagonism to an already tumultuous environment.
Our school has an incredible opportunity to grow and blossom under new leadership. We need positivity and strength right now. Not this.
- Analytical One
Seriously? If this was your child, would you feel OK that the person responsible for traumatizing her was still in her life day to day? And beyond that, that she will be in a position to negatively affect even more kids and staff by virtue of a promotion? She should have been fired and then arrested.
The problem is (and it is A BIG PROBLEM) is how SPS passes these bad or incompetent principals (and teachers and other staff) from school to school for years. This is appalling and should not be tolerated. If the Exec Director or the Super are unable or unwilling to rehabilitate a principal with better supervison and training or if the behavior continues, cannot or won't fire the person, then we are left with public outing. It certainly shoudn't be our job, but the alternative is to inflict this person on another hapless school and on other people's kids. That is wrong!
-we deserve better
If this situation had been taken care of, there would have been no reason to pursue it beyond the school. Unfortunately, the local administration did not do that. The parents then went to Aurora Lora, who sought to "move on", without addressing the behaviors of the child or the investigatory methods of the principal, and duplicitously stated that the superintendent and legal had confirmed her handling/closing of the case.
In escalating this issue, the parents are not trying to harm innocent people or bring negative attention to the school. They are just trying to get accountability from the school/district/superintendent. If your child were on the receiving end of the "interview" Melissa described, I don't think you would have been satisfied to "move on" without resolution.
As far as the new principal, the parents of Lafayette are completely united in wanting a wonderful new principal. After all, this has been a tough year in a fantastic school. There's no reason that a prospective principal should think negatively about Lafayette because of this situation. This is just about an inappropriately placed principal who lacked good judgment, not about a troubled school. Lafayette is a great place with excellent teachers and strong community support. The community will undoubtedly embrace a good principal next year. Rather than spend any time criticizing other parents, let's all focus together on moving ahead together with a fresh start.
-Another West Seattle Mom
Maybe a prospective principal would avoid a position based on this information, but they would eventually find out about it through water-cooler gossip. I think they might resent not being fully informed prior to taking the job. Hardly a good way to start a cooperative relationship.
Likewise, I think that prospective families can evaluate this one incident/principal against the school's reputation and make their own decision. And they would be just as likely to resent learning about the incident after enrolling.
SPS is too used to sweeping things under the carpet. Loyalty to one's school or one's boss is not enough justification to treat this or any incident as just an anomaly.
What is your perception of "dealt with"? That's she's leaving the school. Sorry, but the process has to be honored. There has to be a real investigation of the incident AND her administrative behavior. (You have to have to first to determine the other.)
Also, if it was his child, shouldn't he be the one deciding if it has been "dealt with"?
Aurora Lora allegedly did NOT follow the protocol. Are you sure she did?
So we sweep the incompetent principal off to headquarters and that's out of sight, out of mind.
This principal was at Leschi for years and the neighborhood avoided the school completely. She was moved on to another unsuspecting school when the Montessori program was moved in to make Leschi finally attractive to the neighborhood.
TOPS worked for two years to move her on, under the guise of "not a fit for an alt school" and so she lands at Lafayette.
Something was going to happen when you play musical chairs with principals that don't have a home.
- central mom
Distressed reader wondering about those educational directors
Neither Aurora Lora (this year) nor Bree Deasualt (sp) (last year) have an inkling of how to do their jobs. They are not experienced educators. Trouble follows them and we keep hiding them in the south end.
Hopefully during his year of listening, Supt. Banda will realize their incompetence and kindly ask both of them to find new employment elsewhere, like Detroit. How much longer will SPS continue to turn a blind eye to inept administrators like these two?
Think back a bit further. I'm certain Carlyle tried to pass legislation that would enable the district to get rid of principals secondary to the Alex Coberly debacle. I don't recall the details or outcome. I only remember it being very difficult to get rid of principals.
I suspect there are legal reasons this woman is heading to central office.
-Aarghh!
VERY IMPORTANT: Please read the school board policies on Harassment/Intimidation/Bullying (3207 and procedures just following), Sexual Harassment (3208 and following), and Anti-Retaliation (D51.00 and following procedure).
Why are these policies and procedures so important? THEY ARE THE RULES OF THE GAME. Here it seems like SPS did not follow them. If your child is harassed, you need to know to walk into the office and say, "I want to make a formal complaint. Here's my written statement." These procedures (except anti-retaliation) are BRAND NEW, just adopted, and most staff are not familiar with them. It falls on us as parents to advocate not just for our children but for all.
T
-ex motown girl
I'm also worried about the boy whose actions on the playground started it all. How old is he? Is he getting the help he needs? Isn't that sort of sexual acting out a sign that the child might be sexually abused? Is anybody looking into it or doing anything besides scapegoating the kid? I sure hope so.
Ms. Lute-Ervin was our principal when I decided to pull my son out of TOPS last year. I can't even begin to describe how sickening it felt to read about her alleged actions here.
First is the child's story.
Second is the spectacular failure of the principal (and the assistant principal) to respond correctly. This includes their initial non-response as well as every aspect of the "investigation": the one-on-one interviews, denying a parent the right to be present, asking kids to "act it out", acting it out herself, directing the kids to tell no one, telling the accused child's parents that other parents want their kids expelled, and the conclusion that the act was not sufficiently lewd to merit punishment. Wow. It's almost as if she was trying to do it as wrongly as she could.
Third is the equally spectacular failure by the District to respond correctly. The District's response was not to follow the procedure - who cares about that? - nor was the District's response to take this seriously as a failure by the principal to follow the procedure because, as was earlier stated, who cares about procedure? Instead, the District responded to this as a public relations problem and a legal problem and they responded with thin lies and soothing noises and by lawyering up.
I understand that is the least sexy part of this story, but I am interested in the health of the District as an institution, and that response is incredibly unhealthy.
Shocked and horrified.
Who said anything about her? Did I miss something?
Shocked, good points. Your school and its community are not the problems and any principal candidate will clearly see that. Your principal is the problem.
As I said in my piece, Lafayette has been a strong, popular school for years and I believe this is just a sad, unpleasant blip.
Principal Lute-Ervin is not fit to work in an environment with children.
"The father of the girl who stood next to the boy filed a police complaint on May 15th but it was not assigned to a detective."
The police complaint should be filed against Jo Lute-Ervin for her "interviews" with children.
I know that name calling is verboten, so I'll try to be careful here. Lute-Ervin responded in an unprofessional manner on several occasions. Lute Ervin behaved in an oblivious and thoughtless manner with children. Lute-Ervin lied to her "supervisor" ED Lora. Lut-Ervin behaved in an inflammatory manner by communicating information about the reporting families to the "alleged" "misbehaving" boy's parents. Why is Lute-Ervin even on the payroll at SPS after this? Because all the way up the chain at SPS there are apparently plenty of unprofessional, oblivious, thoughtless, lying, inflammatory...behaviors tolerated and performed.
Shame. On. Them.
-Sue in Zen Field
-can't believe this story
"But that is no reason to publicize a situation that was mishandled by someone who has already been fired for her poor judgement."
If Lute-Ervin is still in the building how the devil can you say she's been "fired". Being fired means you're gone, clean out your desk, hasta la vista baby, bye bye.
How about you express your frustration about Lute-Ervin, about Lora and Enfield for the fact that Lute-Ervin is still in the building? Where's your outrage?
-Sue in Zen Field
Please take note of this word! STOP commenting until the investigation is complete.
This is spirling out of control and only gives this blog a National Enquirer feel to it.
Secondly, put this incident in context to 1620B. I know DeBell wants a hands off board, but I know a few ladies on that board have NO tolerance for this type of thing. I'd be glad to let them handle this. I guess (maybe) it will be reflected on Enfield's evaluation- the one managing principals and ex. directors.
Lafayette is still a great school and you will be able to weather this significant debacle.
randi
Please remember, Ms. Lute-Ervin is a person. She may not be a good principal (in fact, she’s simply not), but she is not a bad person and she does not deserve this. She was trying to figure out what happened in a way that she thought was appropriate. She probably should have talked to the parents. She definitiely should have been more careful about telling one parent what other parents were involved. But she did not harass anyone.
The kids who were interviewed are not traumatized, by the way. They were confused at the time, of course, but they’re fine. I get the impression that many of you believe that if you put the word “sexual” in front of something, it automatically becomes a huge deal that will scar a person for life. This was not a big deal until it was made into a big deal. The level of vitriol is staggeringly out of proportion to actually incident.
Melissa, have you spoken with Ms. Lora? Ms. Lute-Ervin? Any of the other kids’ parents? Have you gotten any perspective at all other than that of the person who for weeks threatened to “take this public” if the district did not give him what he wanted as quickly as he wanted it, and then did so? The way this information came to the blog was a game of telephone, which included in the middle of it, a third grader with no idea what was going on. I guess you’re not a reporter, but you still should know better. You question Ms. Lute-Ervin’s judgment? How about your judgment for publishing on the internet something that so obviously should have been kept private?
I’m embarrassed for our school and our parent community. I saw Ms. Lute-Ervin in the hall today, obviously shaken. All year, parents have been awful to her behind her back and to her face. Again, I don’t think she was cut out for the job at Lafayette, and I am sure she would agree with that. That is why the decision was made for her to leave months ago, a decision by the way that was handled appropriately and privately and respectfully (point of clarity: the current controversy has nothing to do with why she’s leaving).
- Lafayette Dad
You're right. It's a bad situation. In my mind I don't think the prinicpal is a bad person either. I also don't think she should be a principal anywhere. Your are right from what has been posted by you and others, this situation should have not seen the front page or garner blog attention EXCEPT the situation was mishandled badly and it's not by the kids nor the parents even. Yet somehow this situation and others like it continues to fester until it boils over in public.
Even if you have an unreasonable outraged parent, as a principal (heck as an adult with a bit of common sense), there are ways to engage angry parents, ways to engage kids, ways to defuse the tension appropriately. This district has a cadre of well paid admin folks to supervise and assist principals and teachers. They need to do their job and follow their policy so that you or I shouldn't have to be here trying to figure out how to repair the damage. IF it's the CB that is restricting them, then they need to have a hard look at it. I think there are more good principals out there who want fair, professional accountabilty.
When you are placed in charge of kids and their education AND well being, you need to have good internal self check that guides your action so you DO NO HARM in trying to do right. You have said in your piece why Ms. Lute-Ervin needs to go from Lafayette. Is it right for her to even arrive there in the first place given her rocky past as principal at other schools? Is is right to shelve her downtown while paying her a salary? Wouldn't you want that money for busing, for a counselor, for better principalship selection and training?
It's fine to get angry, but think about where you want to focus it on and how you can get calm again. Maybe some parents can't get over what in your mind is a molehill matter. Have you asked them why? What if your kid is the one out of the bunch who maybe struggling with it or the child who displayed the troubling behavior? What can we do to help children coexist among their peers and thrive in the community? If you want your school to move on, there has to be real mending. If you don't want this to happen to other schools, to other children, to other parents, or to the next school your child may move on to, then we do need to fix it.
we deserve better
"She may not be a good principal (in fact, she’s simply not), but she is not a bad person and she does not deserve this. She was trying to figure out what happened in a way that she thought was appropriate."
"Deserve" what? Having questions raised about her actions?
"..in a way that she thought was appropriate." Appropriate for whom? Did she not have the slightest clue that "interviewing" the children in the manner she did was stunningly inappropriate?
Has anyone said that she's a "bad" person? It's her actions that are being questioned. And the actions up the chain.
If she's not cut out for the job at Lafayette why is she still there? Weak and ineffective management and administration. Adults not prepared or willing to professionally and competently do their jobs.
-Sue in Zen Field
FP
There is no contradiction between saying that his behavior indicated that he needs help and saying that it constituted sexual harassment. From what's been reported, both are very likely true.
Helen Schinske
Wow. You are WAY off track here.
I’ve been impressed by how many people have correctly seen that the embarrassment should be for the DISTRICT and for the PRINCIPAL, NOT for the school and NOT for the kids. With your mindset, maybe you believe that victims should not report their attackers for fear of bringing embarrassment to the institution. This is not the 1950s where blaming the victim was the norm; this is an age when we try to teach kids to report these incidents, and there are specific procedures in place to ensure that someone who values the reputation of an institution over truth and accountability, as you apparently do, gets the chance to sweep “embarrassing” incidents under the rug.
When you say “you were there the day this happened”, I’m fascinated to know of your birds-eye view.
The initial incident occurred on the playground during the school day when only students and staff were present. Are you a student or a staff member?
The “interviews” also occurred during the school day, and only the principal and each child individually were in the room; even a parent was denied entry. How could you possibly have been in the room behind that closed door or know what went on? If so, I guess you must have heard the principal instruct the kids sternly “not to tell ANYONE.”
-to be continued
But, really, at this point the issue is not the incident, it is how the incident was handled.
-NWMom
As far as knowing the psychological ramifications of each kid involved, how could you possibly speak to that? Are you a trained psychologist or psychiatrist? Have you interviewed these children?
At least one kid who was interviewed is scared and upset every time he/she walks into the lunchroom, because it’s necessary to walk past the stairs to the principal’s office to get there. Another child mentions the constant fear of being called to the office, and a number of parents at the school have submitted letters expressly forbidding that their children ever be behind closed doors with this principal.
Were you also in the principal’s office on April 23 when the principal explained her investigatory techniques in detail to two of the parents whose children had been subjected to them? I don’t remember any other attendees. If you had been in that meeting, you would know that the principal described in excruciating detail exactly what had occurred. She TOLD the parents that she had first asked the children to tell about what had occurred, and then asked them to ACT IT OUT. She even stood up in front of these parents and imitated masturbation to them, saying “and they all did this little dance”, as she actually swayed, making rubbing motions over her crotch about an inch off her clothes.
The parents were completely horrified on multiple counts. A) She was admitting and defending her “interviewing style”, B) They were forced to witness the principal performing mock masturbation in front of them, and C) Their CHILDREN had been forced to witness that behind closed doors, and then were asked to do it themselves?
With the principal describing and acting this out in this way to two parents in this way removes all doubt that it occurred. It’s not a case of the kids making up a story; the principal DESCRIBED and DEFENDED exactly what she did. Why would you say it didn’t occur, or say that the parents are over-reacting? You would really be fine with this occurring to your own child?
I do share your belief that the principal is not a bad person, and I feel very sorry for her right now. She’s very friendly, and I’m sure she is embarrassed, as she should be. She displayed absolutely horrendous judgment at every turn. The problem is that she is completely incompetent to run a school. She should never have been placed there, and for the safety of the children, she shouldn’t remain there. The district should be embarrassed at how they’ve handled this, Susan Enfield should feel embarrassed at placing this principal at this school, and the principal should feel embarrassed at having shown such bad judgment. On the other hand, the kids should NOT feel embarrassed. The teachers should NOT feel embarrassed. The families of Lafayette should NOT feel embarrassed, and the school should not feel that its name has been besmirched, just because of a principal with horrible judgment. The parents who publicized this did so only after exhaustive efforts to get the district to do the right thing and follow its own rules. For you to judge them and act offended at their willingness to defend their children and demand accountability from the district is way, way off-track.
-Shocked mom
I had to get my child out of there. It was not worth her mental health and quality of life. I am just sorry she doesn't get first grade back. I was actually glad to see that they had transferred Principal Turner, and that Lisa Clayton was returning to Pathfinder. I thought that maybe they could change the culture of Lafayette for the better- to make it a more accepting place for diverse cultures.
So I was thrilled to know that their would be an African American principal at Lafayette. But if only the District could do something right. This could have been a good thing for the whole culture of Lafayette. But instead, and I think, on purpose, the District assigns an unqualified principal. And I absolutely knew, that even if this woman had been Jesus Christ, some of those parental would have had a problem with her. I can't believe how right I was so fast.
Those parents complained about her from day one. By October, I heard there was a contingency of parents who were trying to get her fired. She hadn't even done anything wrong in October! I remembered how miserable we were by October at that school. God help that woman that she put up with it as long as she did.
I am not saying she was the best principal, nor the worst, but I can well imagine the intolerance and discrimination she had to deal with at Lafayette, and not necessarily because she is black, but because she wasn't a "Lafayette kind of person."
I hope Virginia Turner never is reassigned to that school. The culture badly needs to change. All she did was enable those power elite parents. That culture will never change if they don't find a better principal who isn't a) pushed around by these power parents, and b) can integrate a little culture in this school that all kids feel welcome, not just those in the $500,000 houses. Public school.is a right for all children, not just those whose parents raise the most money.
Ps. For those parents and teachers who marginalized us and let us know in no uncertain terms, my daughter is going to private school next year. So, I guess someone does want us after all.
1) No one said the principal is a bad person. And you are saying she's a bad principal so I guess you would know. That's a pretty big statement in itself.
2) "This was not a big deal until it was made into a big deal." You said this about the interviews. Was it your child? No, then it is YOU who making suppositions about what is and isn't upsetting to a child. Neither Charlie or I have said any child was traumatized. But not your call to make nor mine. It is the parents'.
3) As I said, I did not talk to any district official except to tell Dr. Enfield and Ron English, early on that they might want to get out in front of this, and to get a comment from the district yesterday. As you may well know, neither Ms. Lora nor the principal are in any position to talk with me and I knew it useless to contact them.
The district had EVERY opportunity to keep this within the district. That they didn't make a good faith effort to do so is on them.
4) Yes, I did have contact/information from more than one parent. I also have seen some e-mail information from the district.
5) "She definitely should have been more careful about telling one parent what other parents were involved." Interesting you say that because the principal denies telling one parent who the other parents were that were upset. I guess you must know something about that.
Joy, I can't speak to the culture of Lafayette but I am sorry to hear you had a tough time.
I don't think the concerns shown here is over Ms.Lute-Ervin's ethnicity or race or elitist sense of entitlement. There is just as much concern about her present and former supervisors: Dr. Enfield, the Exec Directors Aurora Lora and Bree Deusseault.
The focus is on people's action and lack of accountability. Your post encompasses things that have been discusssed in previous threads so I don't doubt your perspective or even some of the elements you've described. But I think in this case, the parents who are looking for help are not doing so because of race issue or some elitist entitlement. I think they are upset and frustrated about what happend to their kids and how their concerns are being treated by administrators. They want better accounting and they deserve it.
we deserve better
OH yes. I'm no fan of Ms. Lute-Ervin and it doesn't change my opinion about these particular alleged incidents, but I know what you're talking about. It's insidious, but it happens all over this school district...not just at Lafayette. Seattle does discrimination the "Seattle nice" way.
Other than the fact that both situations reveal incompetence by downtown management and the EDs in training, supervising, and supporting principals, this seems to be a very different situation than Lowell. Ms. Lute Ervin may have done this wrong. I agree with Melissa and Charlie that it speaks to an overall failure by the district to hire right (we have too much inexperience in the principal corps), place (we put teachers in schools where they are not a good fit), and train its staff to deal with complicated conflicts. But the description of what King and Rina did, if true, denote real malevolence. Based on what people have reported, it sounds to me like they knew they were creating, and intended to create, an atmosphere of fear and intimidation. I think they knew that they were demoralizing, and may have intended to demoralize, their staff. It sounds as though they intended to drive certain teachers out of the building, through unperformable PIPs and repressive and unfair reviews.
From this story as reported, I don't think any of those things were true of Ms. Lute-Ervin. If indeed a parent was demanding that she be instantly fired, Lafayette parent is right. That is out of bounds. If people don't like the principal contracts, we need as a community to demand that they be changed. But in the meantime, the District is bound by them. They are "the deal" our elected representatives agreed to. And we should be careful what we wish for. Just as administrators can be unreasonable bullies, there are also plenty of toxic parents out there. How would parents feel if the situation turned -- and a caring, experienced teacher or principal who clashed with a family (refused to change a grade or revoke a disciplinary action under parental threat), was dismissed due to the threats of an outrageous and unreasonable family. Remember, this isn't private school, where the principal can just toss the family out. I have known toxic, unhinged parents who stand in a headmaster's office demanding the head of a teacher. And I am aware of at least one instance where the most tolerant, wise Headmaster I ever knew finally "separated" a family from a school because of concerns that the level of abuse being heaped daily on a teacher was going to result (if it hadn't already) in PTSS. The Headmaster would have done so earlier, but had equal concerns for the mental and emotional health of the child who had to live with those parents on a daily basis, and who also showed the effects of that stress) and the Headmaster was justifiably concerned that no other private school would put up with the parents long enough to help their child.
It is hard to say what exactly went on here (on the parental pressure side of things), but I thought JoyA and Lafayette parent had valuable perspective to add to the conversation. It is meanness and bullying, more than incompetence or mistake, that rile me up. From Lafayette dad's description, there may have been some intentionally bad behavior in this case, but if so, it may not have been coming from Ms. Lute-Ervin.
Jan
parent
I think we need changes in the principal contracts that address this better.
It does not matter if her intent was sexually motivated, asking a child to simulate masturbation is in and of itself has sexual overtones. This is a one-strike event. There is no way to excuse or ignore or explain away the gross impropriety and possible illegality of what she did.
No matter what else may have happened, that series of incidents should permanently bar her from being around children. Susan Enfield herself should have made sure she was personally escorted her off campus and put on leave the very minute she caught wind of this. This should never, ever have been left to a parent to shout to the rooftops to get someone, anyone, in administration to pay attention. At the very first report of something this gobsmackingly inappropriate, every single administrator that heard of this situation should have taken swift and decisive action. This should be second nature, intinct, for anyone who works with children.
The fact that a parent called for her head is irrelevant - because the administrators should have been first in line to get her out of contact with children, and to get an investigation started, and to keep the kids at the school safe from further harm. Period.
I am literally speechless at how very, very badly this was mishandled. Particularly after the Shayne Hill case seven years ago. This District has apparently learned nothing in those intervening years. Absolutely nothing. What is deeply troubling is that there may very well be even more egregious cases of sexual or physical misconduct and abuse going on by staff, teachers, or students, and a culture that tries to hide it away rather than dealing with it.
I am disgusted, absolutely disgusted by this district's handling of this and other cases. I do not feel that I can rely on the adults in charge of teaching and caring for my children to protect them from harm. I no longer have faith that my kids are safe while at school in this district.
Jane Doe
Given recent events, she should be put on leave and a formal investigation should be instigated, both within the district and with the police department. A potential crime may have occurred here.
Jane Doe
I'm assuming no malice on the part of complainants, which someone could probably question, but I'm gonna assume the parents of the witnesses wanted nothing more than feedback and support to the "gesturing" child & family as attempts to set some boundaries around behavior for the school a as a whole. (Just like the person at Lowell, had the person received some feedback, might have not taken it further.)
If it's true what the witnesses and their parents got instead, that is totally intimidation and poisining of the environment - i mean these are kids!
Signed, Google eats my posts as google account
Sometime you just gotta wonder...
Signed, Google eats my posts as google account
I will be advocating that the new Banda administration scraps this tier of middle managers. They've totally discredited themselves in so many people's eyes. That function in this district absolutely has to get onto the audit and finance committee radar, or the budget committee radar, whoever it is that oversees whether the district is spending money on central office personnel who do not contribute.
Reader
Helen Schinske
Melissa, to your rhetorical questions at 3:21, the reason is quite apparent that the Principal at Lafayette, as well as RG and GK at Lowell don't even have the foggiest idea that there might be a protocol or process to follow in these situations. The stunning ignorance of these "educational leaders of the building" is breathtaking. And to have the additional layer of the ed directors sucking money out of the classroom with their fatuous management and supervision skills is baffling.
-Aaaggghhh
I also recall vaguely from a post a long time ago that if a principal moves downtown, they still get the benefit of the principal dismissal rules (which basically means -- you can NEVER terminate them, since they will never violate THOSE standards from a desk downtown) -- whereas other downtown staff are subject to termination rules much more like that "at will" rules that govern most office/managerial staff. Am I just dreaming here? Does anyone else have a similar recollection?
This is one critical area of dysfunction in the District. No one bothers to learn the policies, procedures, or processes. It never even occurs to them to check the policies or procedures because they don't matter. They don't matter because no one is ever held accountable for following them or violating them. That's the culture and it is the culture that is promoted by the leadership.
All complaints sent to the office are recorded for is they were male or female, and what was the ethnic association of that student. If a student is not caucasion and a male, it increases the number of students who get sent to the office. These stastics indicate discrimination if there is a trend that more males, or other catagories, get reprimands. I have seen principals attack teachers who bring bullying and other serious misconduct to the attention of the principal.
I have reduced trust in how a principal handles many situations that get sent their way. Much is swept under the carpet that should not have been handled that way.
Parent outrage comes closer to how situations should have been seen. I am so pleased that this blog exists, as it seems like a more realistic, rational approach.
Seattle teacher of 31 years.
I am glad that parents raise the issues that need to be raised. Teachers would like to do so, but can not. Administration does not condone teachers "making an issue" of these types of behaviors.
Seattle teacher
Concerned Educator
ethicalgirl
ethicalgirl
Sign Here
Settingrecordstraight
Sign Here
-ethicalgirl
Are you saying that this principal did or did not demonstrate touching herself for the parents, and did or did not ask the children to do the same, regardless of intent.
Sign Here
"Anonymous said...
I see that my comment made early this morning defending the assistant principal has been removed. Why? Charlie's inclusion of her in his post is inflammatory and she doesn't deserve to get dragged into this."
Sign Here (really, nearly anything will work at the bottom of your post)
ethicalgirl
Are you saying the principal did or did not demonstrate touching herself?
Sign Here
I am saying that the original incident was not sexual in nature and so how the principal was told that is was is a mystery to all. How did this get to the principal labeled sexual and where did that come from. That is a key question. So, for example, were the parents there telling her it was sexual and so she then asked them what they were talking about?? I don't know. But things are missing here is what I am saying. There are a lot of conclusions being made against a lady and she is not here on this blog to defend herself..a lot of things have been said about her here and she is a human being and why are we trying her here. I don't believe this is appropriate or fair to her as a human being, is all.
ethicalgirl
I am not saying she did the exact right thing in the situation, but she did her best in the situation. From what i have heard, she asked the kids to demonstrate what they saw of the original incident and she drew honest conclusions. Why would she be motivated to do anything else? Think about that one.
ethicalgirl
The principal's intent is not in question here. It is her actions that are in question, regardless of intent. Even if she did not mean for her actions to be sexual, a reasonable person could construe simulating masturbation as being sexually intimidating, and possibly harassing, *even if that was not here intent*. The person watching her do this has no idea what is going on in her mind. They only see what she is doing. They only see the actions.
This is even more likely when done in front of young children, to the point that what she did may in fact be illegal, and potentially fall under a child abuse charge.
This is not just a personal opinion. Anyone who has ever gone through any type of workplace sexual harassment training gets this drilled into them. Intent is NOT the driving factor, but the actions. There are things you simply cannot do in a school or workplace setting, no matter what you intended them to be. By any reasonable standard, simulated masturbation falls into that category. Furthermore, a person in a position of authority should never ask a child to demonstrate an action that could even remotely be construed as sexual in nature. Simulating masturbation clearly falls into that category as well.
This should have been very clearly spelled out by District training, policies, and procedures. It is reasonable to expect that every adult in a position of authority over children be familiar with these standards, and follow them.
The number of failures on this count are simply spectacular.
Sign Here
By any reasonable standard, she should have never asked the children to act out such a thing, because of the inherent sexual component of touching your groin area. Even if her intent was not sexual, the act can reasonably be described as having a sexual component to it. Which was what disturbed the children int he first place, by the way.
Sign Here
ethicsgirl
Doesn't matter.
The original email to the principal that spurred the investigation - which I have seen - described it as sexual harassment.
At that point it should have been regarded as a sexual harassment complaint and treated as one, which means that the principal should have followed the procedure for that.
If the action was not, in fact, sexual harassment but a dance, then we can rely on the compliance officer to reach that conclusion. More to the point, the principal should have relied on the compliance officer to reach a just conclusion instead of conducting any kind of investigation herself.
The first problem here is that the principal did not recognize the complaint as a sexual harassment complaint - not as an informal one and not as a formal one. She really should have since those were the words in the email.
The second problem here, for the principal, was not allowing a parent to be present when their child is interviewed. Then comes the "don't tell anyone" admonition. Then the leak to the accused child's family, then the misleading statements about the outcomes.
I can imagine that there are all kinds of reasonable explanations for each of these. She probably didn't mean "anyone" when she instructed the children not to talk about the interview. She probably just meant "anyone at the school". The leak may or may not have come from her. The family might have figured it out on their own, but they said that they got it from the principal. The principal might also have some innocently mistaken or outdated ideas about the District's current rules for investigations into violations of the student rules. We would all hope for better, and people would give the benefit of the doubt if the relationship justified it. But the relationship isn't there and the District procedures are.
I think a single, clear, cogent explanatory communication would have gone a long way to ending this controversy early. None came.
Again, for me, nothing the principal did is as wrong as what the district staff did in their response. That's where the real Keystone Kops took over.
When you say that the original incident wasn't sexual in nature, you're wrong. This was not a kid arranging his underwear. This was a kid who was moaning, swaying and full-on rubbing his genital area with his eyes closed. This was definitely sexual, and the 8 and 9-year old children around him were all horrified enough to report it to their parents.
Further, the behavior was perceived as sexual harassment by the little girl standing close to the boy. She was in line, so she couldn't remove herself from the situation.
Beyond that, the Seattle Police Department detective who took the report of sexual harassment felt that the behavior met the threshold.
Sexual harassment is not only about the actions, it's about how the actions are interpreted by the victim.
Finally, regardless of all that, when the father reported in person, and then in writing that he believed his daughter had been sexually harassed, the training mandated by the district should have caused SP320 to kick in. If the principal had followed the procedures mandated by SP320, she would never have found herself in this position. The rules actually protect the district as much as any victims, because following these rules brings in trained personnel from the district security department to investigate. The principal's role should have been as reporter, not investigator, and it's her investigation that has her in hot water. Well, that and the subsequent cover up that goes all the way to the top.
I urge everyone to read the full rules of SP320. Maybe you can even pass them along to your own principals and Ex Directors, since many of them don't seem to have read them.
http://www.seattleschools.org/modules/groups/homepagefiles/cms/1583136/File/Policies/Board/series3000/3208SP_sig.pdf
-The district should follow its own policies
You might find it hard to believe, but the principal herself TOLD two parents exactly what she did, and it matches what is described in Melissa's article.
It is not her personality or intent that is in question; it is her judgment. A principal needs to have good judgment, and also needs to follow district policy. In this case, she supposedly had district training on SP320 (per the statute itself), so should have easily recognized that the situation called for a compliance officer to be called in.
As for your accusations against Charlie and Melissa, I completely disagree. They are informing the community about a serious situation in their ongoing efforts to require accountability from the district.
Considering how badly the principal, the executive director and the district staff have botched this investigation (and others), I would definitely say that the district needs people to call it to accountability, or at least the public needs those people. As is true in so many cases, the cover-up may be much worse than the crime.
I find Melissa and Charlie to be extremely factual, and I appreciate their ongoing reporting. Without them, the district would be even more of a star chamber than it is.
-The district should follow its own policies
-Several weeks prior to this incident, he was caught looking up pornographic images on a school computer in technology class. This was reported to the principal prior to the incident in question here, and the teacher reported it to the parents. The boy had a website URL written on a piece of paper, searched for that website and then searched for related images. He also called other children over to see the images. Those children told their parents, who reported it to the school.
-Several reports were made by parents to the principal regarding extreme swearing on the part of this boy, including swearing directly at classmates and using hate language toward other students.
Since the principal had received these reports prior to this incident, she should have been more likely to recognize warning signs in relation to this incident than if this child had never been reported for any bad behavior before. Not only had he been reported for bad behavior, some of that bad behavior had been sexual in nature.
-More information
Instead, since MGJ/Kennedy and prior, the GC's office (NOT including the dear departed Noel Treat, who seems the wisest of all) has been repopulated with staff who only seek to twist or cover the truth in order to protect the currupt regime.
Lots of good people at JSCEE, a few bad apples in charge of covering up or equivicating wrong behavior. Clean house there (although English has fortified himself and a few croonies well) as first step toward "moral healing".
Until that happens, I fear we are destined to see these things happen over and over because they are only symptoms of the deaper disease.
Please don't delete me "administartor", I was really careful.
It may seem that way, but it isn't that way really. That's why it's a bad idea to make conjecture about the motivations of others. You can't speak with any authority at all and it makes you seem to be a presumptuous and dishonest jerk.
"They think of themselves as junior reporters who are digging at the truth, but in the end are not constructive or helpful in finding possible solutions to a problem."
Again, almost always a bad idea to make conjecture about what other people think. Beyond that, I'm pretty sure that I have clearly stated on numerous occasions that I am not a journalist. In case I need to repeat it, I will.
I am not a journalist. I do not claim to be a journalist. I do not hold myself to journalistic standards and you should not expect them of me.
I hope I have brought clarity to that question.
Ethical Girl, both you an L Dad say there was nothing sexual. Were you there? Were you there when the principal questioned the kids? Were you there when the two parents asked the principal about her interviews?
Because why would she ask the kids to demonstrate what happened, and if it was dancing, they didn't want to do it. Why did those kids all say "he was just dancing?"
We all know she's a human being and no one is saying she doesn't have feelings. But she is a public servant and in the course of her job her professional behavior has been such that it raises questions.
Parent, you can give me the rap of "junior reporter" but Charlie has never being active in the same manner as I have (attending media events, etc.)
The blog is not about being gossipy and anyone who reads nearly any post can see that. If you feel that way, don't read it. That's your solution. You can come and complain, that's your right but really, if it's that bad, then don't read it.
Bu we absolutely are about solutions and the one to this problem was the principal, Ex Dir and senior staff doing their jobs, abiding by the law and protecting kids. You keep forgetting how long we have known about this and kept hoping that the district would do what they need to do. If you think this was never going to come out publicly, you would be wrong.
PS: The boy did not look up "porn" in school. That is made up.
Turthsayer
It will bother me if I got a detail wrong. Do I believe the investigation will show nothing at all happened and it's a tempest in a teapot? No. The actions and remarks from staff lead me to believe otherwise.
If we are wrong, we will admit it.
It will bother me if I got a detail wrong. Do I believe the investigation will show nothing at all happened and it's a tempest in a teapot? No. The actions and remarks from staff lead me to believe otherwise.
If we are wrong, we will admit it.
And the swearing was sweeping though the whole school and many kids were swearing, so why this kid?? Why not the other kids who were swearing? Why not other kids who have shown inappropriate behavior there in school..ask yourself why this kid and you will start to find answers. In addition, the boy looked something up in computer lab that other boys in school brought into the building. Obviously, the boy should not have looked up the doll in the bikini (hardly porn) and he was strictly disciplined for it. So, why are these parents going on about this incident. Ask yourself the whys of this story and find the answers and then it will make sense to you.
Truthsayer
Sign Here
Truthsayer
Truthsayer
Charlie is biased Blogger
Melissa is the junior reporter
I have only just now become involved only to see if there was an unbiased place that can help to come up solutions to the many problems that are in the district. I find a lot of complaining by parents and clearly non parents and sometimes a solution to a problem, but a lot of complaining and critically whining with no solution.
Your right Melissa, since your blog doesn't offer much in the way of a positive place to discuss solutions, I will stop waisting my time and do something active and constructive.
Good luck in the fight.
I am relieved to hear that you will be bothered if some things you are printing are wrong. You seem like a truly caring person who wants the the school environment to be a better place. I respect that more than you know. So, I feel relieved by the comments you made.
Truthsayer
By all reports, his inappropriate behavior continued. This may be an indication that he has been sexually or physically abused. The boy should be evaluated by a professional, and receive counselling.
Ignoring or dismissing his behavior after multiple reports(which is what the principal essentially did) will only make things worse for the child, not better.
Again, do you know this child personally? If so, what steps have you taken to get professional help for him?
Sign Here
-Jennifer
Truthsayer
Referring a child for evaluation should have been at least considered and discussed at that point (and who knows, maybe it was). Referrals do not mean something is definitely wrong, just that there may be something wrong. An independent, trained counselor can help determine if something is, or isn't, going on in the child's life that is unhealthy or even abusive.
I am guessing you have some sort of personal connection to the boy. Though I am obviously glad to hear he is doing well today, those three incidents should be raising some concern. A professional can explain what is, and is not, typical behavior, and what should be looked at more closely. Perhaps it is nothing after all (which is what everyone hopes, obviously), or perhaps there is someone unknown to you who is harming the boy and he is acting out. A professional counselor can help assess that, and provide an independent point of view that can be very hard to get when you are so close to someone. No one wants to think that a child they know is being hurt, and it can be hard to acknowledge. But it happens, and it really can happen to any child. Once warning signs are raised, getting an evaluation is a prudent thing to do, if only to rule out abuse.
Sign Here
Sign Here
Turthsayer, it's clear that you haven't noticed, but I'm not all that interested in what the kid did. I'm much more focused on the actions taken - and not taken - by the responsible adults in this story. That starts with the principal, but it certainly does not end with her.
You want me to lay off the kid - I have. I mentioned the child's (alleged) behavior only as much as necessary for the adult's actions to make sense.
PS: I never wrote that the boy looked up "porn" in school. That is made up.
Yes, the principal could have made a mistake, but we were not there to see it in context and so hard to know just really what went wrong, and she is entitled to her side. She is entitled to more than comments on a blog trying and convicting her. See? Don't you agree?
I read somewhere on here about porn. Not from you.
-Truthsayer
-Truthsayer
Tough love is what I call it and we've had quite enough of a rose colored glasses view of SSD.
Btw though: this has been on the blogoshere for 4 days now.....where are the "real" media? Wasn't this story supposed to "come out" soon somewhere besides here?
I suppose KIRO is too busy waging class war on custodians who try to be role models and may break up fights by "touching" kids to pay much attention to stories such as this but shouldn't somebody else notice this story?
Ore are the Strategies 360 folks working overtime already focusing on the "new boss"?
Ed
To truthsayer don't be discouraged, there many if us who agree with you and want this not tried in the court of blog opinion, but in rationale way.
I for one don't think that the higher ups in the district are all incompetent and try to what's right for the 45,000 kids in the district.
The Lafayette story plays out similarly along side so many others in this district. And I've only been in this district for only 6 years. I've seen families left public school for other school districts and private schools because of their experinces dealing with the bureaucracy and the lack of responses and good judgement over what seems like small things. The way this district handles and adjudicates stuff is inconsistent and at times contradicts its own policies. What gets left is often parents duking it out among each other trying to coexist. I also see coalition form within school depending on the principal, teachers, and parent group that makes separate decisions and policies---sometimes that's good, but can also be bad if you are on the out. The Executive Directors are no where to be found. The board members act as if this is an internal matter and they are above such matter.
It's such a mess. My kids and I have all kinds of school policies to follow. We have to get many forms signed and delivered by such and such date just to be in school, eat lunch, ride the bus, take time off to bury my dad, etc. Yet, when it comes to asking the district to enforce or just follow the very policies it sets so much by, it becomes a looking glass world and answers come in riddles.
So here we are left mirred and bogged down duking it out. In the meantime, take a look at our busing schedule and school start times, fewer counselors in schools, differentiation with no differentiation, class size of 32+ in ES, crappy curriculum, millions of BEX/BTA dollars wasted, and another $1billion more in the asking.......
My kids are saying stop typing and go shoot some hoops with them. Good idea!
PS mom
If the media reports what has been stated in an email or written document, and are careful with their references and with verifying sources, then they are not committing libel, at least not in the US. That applies to blog writers as well. Journalists are also usually granted qualified privilege in the US, which allows them to freedom to report on ongoing stories, even if some of the documents are later found to be untrue or even malicious, as long as the journalist has reason to believe they were valid at the time. The writer of a libelous document may be guilty of libel, but not the media reporting it in good faith.
BTW, slander is verbal defamation. Libel is written or broadcast defamation.
Personally, I have seen too many stories like this buried by the school district. Blogs such as this one are necessary when there is still so much dysfunction and opacity, and retaliation against those within the system. You need an outsider, with no job to lose or child to be affected, to dig into troubling situations.
Sad But True
The reason the other media haven't done a story is because they haven't known about it before. Charlie and I have know for weeks. (We have been keeping silent, remember? Hoping and waiting for the district to do the right thing and follow its own protocol, not to mention the law.)
It takes time to gather the facts and many of them may be waiting for the results of the investigation.