Marshall principal accused of Bias incident.
In the end, the general public is not going to know the full details of what happened and why disciplinary actions were taken. Mrs Samuels is protected by a right to confidentiality regarding her employment. If she feels that her treatment by the district is unfair for any reason her union is tasked with defending her, or she can seek her own private legal representation.
This confidentiality is going to bother some people who feel entitled to know all the details about what happened. It's confounded by the fact that some details have been made public. People are drawing their own judgements and conclusions about the situation based on bits and pieces.
Some other people assume they have the right to know everything because Mrs Samuels is an employee of a public school district. But that's not how it works. Working for a government institution doesn't entail abdicating the right to confidentiality in matters of employment.
The Board of Education has the responsibility to make disciplinary decisions regarding employees in private. It's not a public process. So we'll never really know everything that lead up to where we are now.
ctrzaska said:
Tom_R said:
peteglider said:
To be fair, I found her to be a fantastic teacher. And from my conversations with other SPED parents, when she was still a teacher, they felt that way as well. I hope this works out well for her.
It's nice to read that somebody is not going to jump to a conclusion, which thus far, has no traction.
TomR
P.s., I still haven't seen the offensive photo. Has anybody?
I’m sure some have, but no one is publicly revealing specifics and it has not been posted anywhere that I’m aware of.
Not sure why “offensive” was italicized in your post, though. Are you questioning why one is describing it as such without having seen it, and is thus not qualified to make that judgment? Or that one is misdirecting their offense to the photo in lieu of the caption or the circumstance?
The term offensive was used because I don't jump to conclusions.
If the photo depicts the student teacher standing on a step-stool while writing on the board, I'd say the principal has demonstrated very poor judgement. If, however, the photo depicts the teacher engaged in conduct, or manner of dress, designed to engage the class in the subject matter of the lesson; I might write it off to good natured ribbing of a colleague. Still not the best judgement by a superior, but far less egregious than laughing at a little person who is their subaltern.
With regard to the choice you present; it is, indeed, the first of the two.
Thanks for asking, rather than jumping to any unwarranted conclusion.
TomR
Stoughton said:
The issues being debated seem to be:
1. Is this a regrettable one-time incident that can be dealt with appropriately through sanctions or does it destroy Ms. Samuels' ability to serve effectively as Marshall principal?
2. Seeing that the district issued a punishment for the incident (a two-day suspension that Ms. Samuels served without protest or appeal), is it permissible to re-punish her? What new information, if any, came to light since the first punishment?
3. A letter was read on behalf of the teachers questioning Ms. Samuels' ability to lead. Should this be used when considering her future? If so, how?
4. The Black Parents Workshop and others have spoken at the last two BOE meetings, defending Ms. Samuels and stating that she is suffering from disparate treatment because she is African-American. How can we determine if this is a factor?
As you may recall, issues similar to 1, 2 and 3 arose a year ago regarding the CHS baseball coaches, which might be worth keeping in mind when the community considers No. 4. All, as annielou and mrincredible note, are complicated, especially given the limited public knowledge, making me question the wisdom of immediate and outraged calls for dismissals in cases like this.
No one said the photo was offensive. It was the comment that went WITH the photo that was offensive.
Tom_R said:
peteglider said:
To be fair, I found her to be a fantastic teacher. And from my conversations with other SPED parents, when she was still a teacher, they felt that way as well. I hope this works out well for her.
It's nice to read that somebody is not going to jump to a conclusion, which thus far, has no traction.
TomR
P.s., I still haven't seen the offensive photo. Has anybody?
yahooyahoo said:
No one said the photo was offensive. It was the comment that went WITH the photo that was offensive.
Tom_R said:
peteglider said:
To be fair, I found her to be a fantastic teacher. And from my conversations with other SPED parents, when she was still a teacher, they felt that way as well. I hope this works out well for her.
It's nice to read that somebody is not going to jump to a conclusion, which thus far, has no traction.
TomR
P.s., I still haven't seen the offensive photo. Has anybody?
And, LOL is offensive in what universe?
TomR
White principal sending a photo of a white teacher in blackface with that caption?
ctrzaska said:
White principal sending a photo of a white teacher in blackface with that caption?
Would depend upon the lesson.
TomR
Can’t think of a lesson where that would be the most appropriate approach, though I wasn’t talking about lessons in any case. You’re reaching.
ctrzaska said:
Can’t think of a lesson where that would be the most appropriate approach, though I wasn’t talking about lessons in any case. You’re reaching.
I misunderstood your query. My apologies.
What was the point of your query?
Good night,
TomR
DaveSchmidt said:
Stoughton said:
The issues being debated seem to be:
1. Is this a regrettable one-time incident that can be dealt with appropriately through sanctions or does it destroy Ms. Samuels' ability to serve effectively as Marshall principal?
2. Seeing that the district issued a punishment for the incident (a two-day suspension that Ms. Samuels served without protest or appeal), is it permissible to re-punish her? What new information, if any, came to light since the first punishment?
3. A letter was read on behalf of the teachers questioning Ms. Samuels' ability to lead. Should this be used when considering her future? If so, how?
4. The Black Parents Workshop and others have spoken at the last two BOE meetings, defending Ms. Samuels and stating that she is suffering from disparate treatment because she is African-American. How can we determine if this is a factor?
As you may recall, issues similar to 1, 2 and 3 arose a year ago regarding the CHS baseball coaches, which might be worth keeping in mind when the community considers No. 4. All, as annielou and mrincredible note, are complicated, especially given the limited public knowledge, making me question the wisdom of immediate and outraged calls for dismissals in cases like this.
That's correct, particularly #2. I don't know enough about the merits of either case to say what would have been the appropriate outcome, but it seems that whenever the district makes a tough decision, it should come with fine print that says "we can change this at any time if people are upset by it."
That doesn't seem like a great practice from either a legal or operational standpoint.
Stoughton said:
That's correct, particularly #2. I don't know enough about the merits of either case to say what would have been the appropriate outcome, but it seems that whenever the district makes a tough decision, it should come with fine print that says "we can change this at any time if people are upset by it."
And bold print that says, “Pending the pull of other agendas.”
No policy decisions should be made hurriedly to appease popular hysteria but it happens all the time.
DaveSchmidt said:
Stoughton said:
That's correct, particularly #2. I don't know enough about the merits of either case to say what would have been the appropriate outcome, but it seems that whenever the district makes a tough decision, it should come with fine print that says "we can change this at any time if people are upset by it."
And bold print that says, “Pending the pull of other agendas.”
DaveSchmidt said:
Stoughton said:
That's correct, particularly #2. I don't know enough about the merits of either case to say what would have been the appropriate outcome, but it seems that whenever the district makes a tough decision, it should come with fine print that says "we can change this at any time if people are upset by it."
And bold print that says, “Pending the pull of other agendas.”
Understatement.
Side note: there appears to have been a second (one-day) suspension in addition, though by my read of Ficarra’s comments can’t tell it that’s still continuing or was a one-off, related to the teacher complaints or not, confusing also because of the interim now in place.
.... but it seems that whenever the district makes a tough decision, it should come with fine print that says "we can change this at any time if people are upset by it."
That doesn't seem like a great practice from either a legal or operational standpoint.
You may have hit on somethin' here. Athenian democracy was limited by the number of peeps that could fit into the Agora. That's why deciders were decided by lottery. Now we have court tv and internet voting.
We can open jury cases to the public at large. Watch when you want to and vote if you want to. It will save paying jurors and our taxes will go down.
Tom_R said:
yahooyahoo said:And, LOL is offensive in what universe?
No one said the photo was offensive. It was the comment that went WITH the photo that was offensive.
Tom_R said:
It's nice to read that somebody is not going to jump to a conclusion, which thus far, has no traction.
peteglider said:
To be fair, I found her to be a fantastic teacher. And from my conversations with other SPED parents, when she was still a teacher, they felt that way as well. I hope this works out well for her.
TomR
P.s., I still haven't seen the offensive photo. Has anybody?
TomR
We're supposed to believe that's a serious question, instead of a troll comment?
LOL.
Hard to think of a non offensive photo with LOL as a comment in these circumstances. You really have to stretch. Sounds pretty clear cut offensive and stupid to me. Not acting like an adult at the very least and more like a bully.
Regarding the first and second suspension, it's possible the second suspension was for some action the Principal took in response to the fallout from the text.
Didn’t think of that, though I could come up with some theoretical rationales for it in retrospect. Interestingly, the jury is still out on investigation #3 (or #2 if one doesn’t count the second suspension).
i don't believe this principal's conduct was as described in this thread. Agree with everyone above that context is important, ie, was the text part of a long back snd forth, with the LoL part perhaps referencing something other than the photo of the teacher?
I don't know what info is missing, but what we know is not adding up for me. Would this woman really commit professional suicide by "laughing" at the teacher's smallness? I find it hard to believe that.
Well, everyone is capable of a moment of supreme stupidity, I guess. When and where that occurs can mean the difference between a self-deprecating story you confess to at Thanksgiving, or end your career.
You don't read in the paper or see on the TV news every day people doing inexplicably stupid, self-destructive things?
People seem especially immune to the realization that emails an texts stick around. They are not like whispering an off color comment in someone's ear.
brealer said:
i don't believe this principal's conduct was as described in this thread. Agree with everyone above that context is important, ie, was the text part of a long back snd forth, with the LoL part perhaps referencing something other than the photo of the teacher?
I don't know what info is missing, but what we know is not adding up for me. Would this woman really commit professional suicide by "laughing" at the teacher's smallness? I find it hard to believe that.
brealer said:
i don't believe this principal's conduct was as described in this thread. Agree with everyone above that context is important, ie, was the text part of a long back snd forth, with the LoL part perhaps referencing something other than the photo of the teacher?
I don't know what info is missing, but what we know is not adding up for me. Would this woman really commit professional suicide by "laughing" at the teacher's smallness? I find it hard to believe that.
Impulses can overwhelm rational thought. Learning disabilities, personality disorders, and mental illness can each, separately, cause uncontrollable impulses.
Don't know this person, don't want to tag her with pathologies. The conduct as described is unacceptable. I'm just saying the description feels to me like it's incomplete.
brealer said:
Don't know this person, don't want to tag her with pathologies. The conduct as described is unacceptable. I'm just saying the description feels to me like it's incomplete.
Some people are impulsive and don't think things through. Some people think they are so powerful that they are immune from consequences. I don't know this person, but you asked why someone would throw away her career by doing something crazy as described. People do have irrational moments.
It seems tonight the Board will be deciding whether to reappoint her (as well as a bunch of other district staff). She's been serving as a principal "on special assignment" in the Board office for the last few months. It will be interesting if she is reinstated in her current position or moved to one of the other schools.
If they send her to my kids school we are going to be there at 8:00 AM with a picket line. This woman needs to spend a good long time in the unemployment line.
This is a tough one and you bring up great points. Lots of moving pieces. There was something about making faces in the teachers room. Is that the additional info or is it something else? I’m guessing that the principal probably has a lot to offer and could lead a school, but maybe not that particular school. Too much of a distraction at this point and apparently too many staff complaints have been revealed. And what about the student teacher? Does she stay there given the embarrassing circumstances?