Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Education Columnist Scott Parks:

• Thought leaders in public education will abandon the zany notion that all children must be prepared for college. They will refocus on how to provide solid vocational education programs for students who want to start careers after high school.

And spare us new competitiveness initiatives such as 4×4.

• Every student will get a textbook as required by law. Secondary schools will stop withholding textbooks because they fear too many students will lose or damage them.

Maybe even in El Paso

• Lawmakers blinded by the computer hardware and software lobby will stop advocating the idea that laptops should replace textbooks.

You know what’s funny, as computer programmer I probably have more invested in books on programming than the related software.

• Parents will stop jumping to the conclusion that the evil teacher is to blame when little Johnny gets a bad grade or gets disciplined. Instead, they start with the assumption that the teacher is right and go from there.

Well, Parks is from Dallas, land of the wealthy suburban districts so I can see how this would play in his area. Around here I’ve seen too many cases of parents being intimidated by “professional” educators in accepting situations that should never be accepted. It seems to me the parents in question tend to be those expecting their kids to go to college and no teacher is going to stand in their way. The perfect example was the parent who came in to complain about his daughter’s failing grade in her German III class. The parent expected the teacher to change the grade because otherwise she wouldn’t be able to go to A&M. It didn’t matter that the student didn’t lift a finger all semester.

• School board members will reject Texas Association of School Boards brainwashing. They will regularly bypass the superintendent to visit campuses and to speak with teachers and staff to find out what’s really going on in schools.

Ohhh, like the Frisco Board members who never deviated from their support of Rick Reedy in regard to the whole Sydney McGee mess?

• School boards, the elected representatives of the people, will reject the TASB concept that they are on “a team” with the superintendent as “quarterback.” Instead, they will act like bosses and treat the superintendent like a valued employee. The conceptual difference is small but important.

I would argue that the difference is even more important when you consider the financial costs of having a superintendent that isn’t accountable for his or her actions. Or are lawsuit settlements just added into the personnel costs of superintendents?

It’s a good column, definitely worth the time to read.

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Education Columnist Scott Parks:

School board members, especially in the suburbs, are not wily politicos. Most are community volunteers with busy lives and jobs. What they know about district affairs comes from the superintendent and his staff. And that flow of information can be tightly controlled.In the middle of a crisis, the independent investigator serves as a clean source of information for a school board president responsible for preserving the district’s image and credibility.

Frisco ISD should have followed the independent investigator model in the case of Sydney McGee, the elementary school art teacher who claimed that her principal retaliated against her for exposing students to art works of nude people at a Dallas museum.

Essentially, the Frisco district stuck to its story line for too long: “We’re right to want to fire Ms. McGee, and she’s wrong about it having anything to do with the art museum field trip. But we won’t tell you more.”

Ms. McGee and her attorney were allowed to define the story in the public mind, and part of their story was that Frisco administrators were covering up for each other.

Only after the story exploded and went nationwide did the district begin releasing some piecemeal information. Imagine the difference had Frisco ISD announced early on that an independent investigator would be hired. It would have snuffed out the cover-up charge.

Star Community Newspapers:

The April 18 appraisal included a “below expectations” mark on an item titled “policies, procedures and legal requirements.” In a related area of the form titled “Areas to Address,” it states “Appropriate Art substitute plans, specific lesson plans updated weekly. Appropriate monitoring during duty assignments.”While those marks and comments are dated April 18, another document indicates McGee appears to have become aware of her review only after the trip.

Or at least the paperwork part of it anyway.

Star Community Newspapers:

In a May 11 memorandum, McGee states that the “evaluation was conducted April 18.” However, McGee states in the memo that a copy of the report did not reach her until April 28. That was two days after the field trip, according to documents, and one day after McGee was called into principal Nancy Lawson’s office to address the nudity complaint. McGee contends that she was “verbally admonished” by the principal at the meeting.

Even if McGee received it sooner, at this point there is no reason for me to have ever heard of Sydney McGee.

Star Community Newspapers:

On May 4, McGee met with Gonzales and Lawson for the teacher’s yearly “summative appraisal conference,” in which the appraiser discusses the appraisal document with the teacher, according to documents. McGee was informed at this meeting that the administration wanted to place her on a “growth plan” to address areas of concern.McGee has said she viewed the growth plan as a preliminary step to eventual non-renewal of her contract.

Gosh, you think? Anyone who has worked with human resources knows that if you want to fire someone and you want to do it right, you have to some version of a growth plan to allow the person a chance to improve.

Star Community Newspapers:

In her May 11 memorandum, McGee challenged the “below expectations” mark, saying “no negative written documentation was given to me prior with ‘areas to address,’ ” which she said is required by the state administrative code. She also disagreed with the substance of the mark.McGee said she would have expected to see documentation throughout the year had she been doing anything wrong in the classroom.

In fact, it’s not just people who deal with human resources but anyone who understands how evaluations are supposed to work as apparently McGee did.

Star Community Newspapers:

The mark was upgraded to “proficient,” and the growth plan nixed, documents indicate. On May 17, McGee and Gonzales signed a revised appraisal document, with the “below expectations” mark upgraded to “proficient.”Also on May 17, Lawson and McGee met again to discuss her performance, documents indicate. Lawson produced a memorandum May 18 that summarized the discussion.

That memorandum included issues surrounding the museum field trip, including the nudity complaint, as one of five areas of concern about McGee’s performance. It also lays out a list of improvement measures that Lawson expected McGee to meet.

So here is the first sign that Lawson failed to administer her responsibilities properly. Obviously, she must have thought McGee had a point since she changed the evaluation and dumped the growth plan. Apparently, working “verbally” and “informally” to deal with issues as Frisco ISD has repeatedly said was the case, doesn’t meet state administrative code. Since she can’t have a growth plan because she has failed to documented the situation properly, what does Lawson do next? She creates a memo that lists areas for improvement and the infamous parent remark regarding nude statues. And I hear the name McGee and Frisco ISD.

In the meantime, McGee manages to convince the principal of another Frisco ISD school to hire her. The Frisco superintendent, Reedy blocks the transfer so as not to undermine a principal’s authority to discipline an employee. ( I thought this was just about helping a teacher improve her teaching?) We all know what happens next. McGee goes to the press with parent’s complaint.

Why doesn’t anyone think that Lawson and Reedy screwed up as well? If McGee’s job is to have complete lesson plans, isn’t it Lawson’s responsibility to have complete documentation that can stand up to the scrutiny of legal requirements? If it’s McGee’s job to project a professional appearance to maintain standards isn’t it Lawson’s job to appropriately select examples and issues that illustrate an employee’s weakness rather than a parent’s small mindedness? Come on! Everyone is telling me that the nude statue had nothing to do with the situation. Then why did Lawson bother to include it, especially if she had other legitimate concerns? It was a mistake for her to include it.

Then there’s superintendent Reedy. He’s all for supporting Lawson’s authority even though she has failed to administer it properly. I guess he didn’t think it was a big deal that Lawson had to retract her “below expectations” evaluation because, hey, McGee’s just an art teacher and everyone thinks she is a pain to work with anyway? (I would hate to be the social studies teacher that teaches flag burning is a first amendment right or an English teacher discussing race relations in Huckleberry Finn and not be on the good side of the principal.)

Did he try to find out why Lawson’s evaluations differed from her predecessor’s? Did he think that McGee should be concerned about a parent complaining about nude art? (BTW, for all his protests to the contrary, his answer has been a very subtle, yet still very public “yes.”) And finally, he’s settling because he screwed up and recommended “not renewing McGee’s contract” before having the appropriate paperwork. Think about it. The memo wasn’t an actual growth plan. There was no growth plan since Lawson screwed up. To start non-renewal, he would have had to have the same paperwork Lawson was missing. Since it seems unlikely that they were able to come up with a legitimate workplan based on her summer performance, he plowed ahead anyway, contributing to the grounds for a lawsuit.

Will someone tell me who’s evaluating Lawson and Reedy? Where are their growth plans?

Someone has pointed out that taken to extremes that you could use the analogy of a murderer getting off because someone didn’t read him his rights. Yeah, okay. So the police officer not only didn’t read the rights, admits that she didn’t read the rights, presents as a witness someone who swears the person did it because everyone of his “racial epitaph of your choice” does it, and the chief of police says none of this matters because the guy is a murderer. All the officer had to do was to do her job correctly and read the suspect her rights. Because she didn’t do her job, the murderer gets off.

We are a society of rules and laws that apply to everyone, not just the ones we like. And if society’s basic institution for instilling these rights is unable to adequately apply them itself, then there is a problem and blaming it on the press or McGee isn’t going to make it go away.

And I know the answer to the question of the post’s title, for the children’s sake, right? I just wonder if the adults involved have learned anything from this.

FRISCO – The elementary school art teacher entangled in a fight with the Frisco school district turned down the district’s settlement offer Thursday morning.

Sydney McGee’s lawyer said he submitted a counter-proposal to the district, but he declined to discuss the proposal.

Maybe we’ll get to see it all come out in court after all. Naaah, the district would settle before it made it that far, just like McKinney did.

FRISCO – The elementary school art teacher embroiled in a public fight with Frisco ISD has until noon Thursday to approve a settlement deal or the district will start the process to fire her, Superintendent Rick Reedy said Monday night.The proposed agreement calls for Sydney McGee to be paid for the rest of the school year and prevents her from suing the district. It also stops her from working in Frisco ISD in the future.

Dr. Reedy said the deal would eliminate further interruptions for the district, which has been the subject of a national media firestorm in recent weeks.

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Latest News:

The proposed settlement agreement would avoid a formal nonrenewal decision.

I can understand why the district would push for this, the only thing they have to look forward to is more bad press while waiting to formally “non-renew” her contract. In the mean time, it’s just more stress for the teachers and students.

Now someone who might be more skeptical about the district’s offer might note that the agreement serves the districts interests in not having to face a lawsuit and ultimately defend it’s actions. I’m sure they would love to have the opportunity but are only taking this route in the best interest of the student’s well being.

I know, I know, it’s all McGee’s fault and the Lawson and Reedy walk on water so she better shut up and take the money and be grateful.

I’ve been thinking about this and trying to figure out what bugs me about this position. First, let me state again that I am not defending McGee’s professional abilities. She may be as bad as her critics claim.

So what’s the problem with McGee going to the New York Times? As best as I can figure out, it has something to do with going to an “outsider” with no connection to the community. I think to keep her high ground, she was supposed to turn down any request from the New York Times. Because of her interview, Frisco ISD is now having it’s basic values cast in doubt and the student’s education experience suffers.

Now anyone who has been following this realizes that there were plenty of people who found her performance to be less than desirable long before the art museum trip. The principal had plenty of opportunities to document problems with her performance. So what does it mean when the principal provides legitimacy to a parent complaint about nude art by including it in her evaluation? Wasn’t this a “low blow” without possible justification? Didn’t she loose the moral high ground when she included the complaint?

I imagine many would argue that it was only one of the complaints, kind of like the New York Times was just one of the newspapers. And besides, these same people would point out, there are so many people who thought the principal was right. But McGee could make the same point.

The publicity that McGee has generated for the district is not be in the best interest of the children and the teachers. However, I would argue that the student’s, and especially the teacher’s experience will be far more at risk from a prinicipal and district that includes a parent’s suspect complaint in evaluating a teacher.

No one would have ever heard of Frisco or Sydney McGee if the principal had not included the complaint from which the district is trying to distance itself. Who lost the moral high ground?

Timeline Regarding Proposed Non-renewal Of Art Teacher Contract (October 12, 2006)

Due to constraints imposed under State law, public school districts in Texas are at an extreme disadvantage in publicly discussing personnel matters that may involve employee privacy and ethical considerations.

However, since an employee of the district has chosen to express opinions and allegations against the District publicly in a hearing and in the media, Frisco Independent School District has an obligation to its employees, patrons and taxpayers to correct misunderstandings that have been expressed in the media. The information outlined in this timeline is limited to information discussed by the employee in the public hearing or in public statements the employee and/or her attorney have made in the media or information included in the documents disclosed by Mr. Dunn to KRLD Radio. Unfortunately, the District’s efforts to fully respond to the employee’s allegations have been hampered by the continued refusal of the teacher and/or her attorney, Mr. Dunn, to provide written consent from the teacher permitting the District to release the teacher’s records in their entirety.

Within these constraints, the District provides the following timeline of events regarding this matter:

And Frisco still hasn’t said why a parent complaint about a student viewing nude art was included in the memo/evaluation. In fact, it seems to me that the district is trying to move away from acknowledging that the parent complaint ever existed and was used in the context of the teacher’s evaluation. The most recent time line states:

The memorandum summarized the ongoing concerns regarding the teacher’s performance and provided directives for the end of the year and the following school year. The field trip experience was mentioned in one paragraph of the five-page document because it was a recent example of ongoing concerns with issues regarding the teacher’s planning, organization and follow-through.

Where as in his guest editorial to the Dallas Morning News, Reedy states:

One paragraph in the five-page memo discussed concerns regarding the field trip and mentioned the parent complaint. It was included in the memo as a recent example of concerns involving Ms. McGee’s planning, organization and follow-through.

I know, picky, picky, picky.

Some more information has made it to the press concerning McGee’s performance evaluation and it mentions the fact that students were exposed to nude art.

Star Community Newspapers:

The third point of the memo addresses the trip to the art museum. It states that students were exposed to nude statues and other nude art representations.

I ask the same question that has yet to be addressed by the Frisco administration. With so many complaints, why was this one included especially since Frisco would never discipline a teacher because a student saw nude art. Oh, that’s right, I keep forgetting, this in no way had any disciplinary consequences.

Sorry, while there are plenty of people in this country who are willing and even eager to see all issues in black and white that doesn’t mean it’s reality. As far as I’m concerned, no one is off the hook.

Let’s start with the “smoking gun.” McKinney ISD provided McGee with a positive evaluation and a payment if she agreed to leave. What does this prove? McKinney ISD wanted her to leave for a variety of reasons but for some other unknown reason wasn’t going to be able to do it by bringing disciplinary action against her or simply by not renewing her contract. While the district may have had good reasons for wanting McGee to leave, they also did something that put them in the position of allowing McGee to negotiate the terms of her departure. My guess, and please, I know this is only a guess, is that the district somehow screwed up their own personnel policies in dealing with the issue. Just because an employee doesn’t meet standards doesn’t excuse the employers from doing so. Oh wait, oh never mind, I was going to make some broader generalization but that would only get me into trouble.

So McGee comes to Frisco. You could make the argument that is was under suspicious circumstances but then you’ve really got to blame McKinney for not doing it’s job. Furthermore, you could also make the argument that perhaps, (please note that I am once again speculating and freely admit that I could be totally wrong) by applying for an art teacher position, McGee was actually look for a situation that would be more accommodating to her temperament. Perhaps.

In any case, many of the same problems she had at McKinney plague her relationship with other teachers. In recent years, her principal has been making verbal suggestions and even sending informal emails to McGee regarding her performance. Then there is the trip to the museum, the parent complaint, and the performance evaluation.

It’s EITHER about censorship OR about workplace performance. EITHER the principal was strictly addressing workplace issues OR was trying to undermine art appreciation in the community. EITHER McGee is trying to preserve freedom of speech OR undermining the school’s reputation to save her job. How about a little of both on all sides?

It sounds like enough things went wrong with the museum trip to push the principal into taking formal action. There’s a memo and the evaluation. According to Frisco superintendent Reedy,

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Opinion: Viewpoints:

One paragraph in the five-page memo discussed concerns regarding the field trip and mentioned the parent complaint. It was included in the memo as a recent example of concerns involving Ms. McGee’s planning, organization and follow-through.

The parent complaint wasn’t about the hour wait or the problems dealing with the DMA. It was about a piece of nude art a child saw at the DMA. Yet, the district has gone out of it’s way to say that the complaint had nothing to do with censorship or is the reason why the memo was written. Again Reedy states that:

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Opinion: Viewpoints:

No teacher, including Ms. McGee, has ever been fired or reprimanded for taking students to the museum or for a student’s incidental viewing of nude art. No teacher, including Ms. McGee, has ever been fired due to a parent complaint.

I know I’m probably fixating but I can’t help but notice that he never states how the district actually handles such complaints. He continues with the following “but”

We do expect teachers to preview materials through the eyes of students, the parents of the student and through the expectations of our community. We expect teachers to plan, prepare and communicate accordingly. A poorly planned and organized field trip is a failed learning experience.

Uhmm, so what does this have to do with not reprimanding teachers for a student’s incidental viewing of nude art? It wasn’t incidental? It wasn’t planned? It was planned?

Given all the problems the principal apparently had with McGee, why even bring up this one parent complaint? If no teacher is fired because of a parent complaint, why include it in the memo? Why was it given any credibility at all?

The principal could have very easily accomplished her task without including the parent complaint. The fact that she included it indicates that she gave it some importance. I’m still waiting to hear from the district that the parent wasn’t just complaining about the nude art but rather that the teacher did not prepare the students for viewing the art or provide a meaningful context for it’s viewing. Pretty quiet.

“Aw come on,” you say. That’s just one thing she did wrong, McGee did plenty more. Actually, any supervisor who waits for a crisis situation to start documenting employee issues, has not been doing her job. The district has talked about some principals preferring “informal” means. And informal means can be great when they work. But then when the principal prepares a very negative evaluation in writing, shouldn’t the teacher be worried? She’s not being informal, so why wouldn’t an employee perceive this as a version of a “work improvement plan” and a sign that her job is in jeopardy?

Maybe because of her basic personality, McGee doesn’t belong in the public school system. However, that does not mean she was treated fairly by the district. Nor does it mean that the district wouldn’t use parent complaints in evaluating teachers. (Think about it, no one is going to care if a bunch parents started complaining that a teacher allows her students to spend all their time in “free reading” while she’s talking on her cell phone?) According the Reedy, the facts are that the complaint was part of the memo. Someone complained about “naked” art and it was given legitimacy.

Now the district is taking the side of the principal and acknowledges no lapses on its part. At this point, the district is sort of stuck in an either or situation much in the same way that McGee is. McGee wants to make sure she can get another job and getting everyone to believe that she was fired for nude art is a great way to compensate any negative evaluations she may have. And the district really wants to get rid of a teacher for some legitimate reasons and doesn’t want the bad press it’s getting.

In a way, it really does come down to how the principal handled the parent complaint. If it had never been mentioned, what would McGee have gone to the press with? However, since it had been mentioned, the district is being forced to defend its actions in public. At some point, the fact that a 5th grader saw nude art in the DMA made a difference.

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Collin County Education:

McKinney ISD in 1998 to end her employment as a second grade teacher at Glen Oaks Elementary School. Under the arrangement, Ms. McGee received a positive recommendation from the district. McKinney officials declined to comment on the report Wednesday.

Of course, it’s not the McGee story anymore but rather the local paper pointing out the limitations of that shrine of liberal media, the New Times. The Dallas Morning News wins either way.

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Collin County Education:

Jennifer King said Wednesday she and other fifth-grade teachers who went on the field trip later told their principal it was chaotic and disorganized.

Now why couldn’t they find out this information two weeks ago? Was it that hard to find someone who was on the field trip who had negative things to say about it?

Congratulations to McKinney ISD which apparently managed to buy its way out of a problem and dump it on another district rather than going through the trouble of actually addressing it.

Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Collin County Education:

The records show that Ms. McGee signed a settlement agreement for nearly $8,300 with McKinney ISD in 1998 to end her employment as a second grade teacher at Glen Oaks Elementary School.Under the arrangement, Ms. McGee received a positive recommendation from the district. McKinney officials declined to comment on the report Wednesday.

The records do not indicate the reason behind the settlement agreement, but her file contains letters from parents who asked that their children be removed from her class because of personality and learning issues.

Her file also contains complaints from unidentified teachers about planning and field trip preparation issues.

Personality conflicts and disparities between a teacher’s teaching style and a student’s learning style are certainly a headache for any administration. Yet, half of all homeschoolers will tell you that it doesn’t necessarily get a teacher fired. But then there’s the planning and field trip issues again. Addressing such issues in a meaningful way is time consuming and stressful. So if someone were to do a cost benefit analysis, it was probably worth it to cough up the money and have McGee go away quietly. Think about it, if you calculated the time of all the people who would have to deal with this issue at $100 an hour, that’s two weeks of work. Halve that and it’s a month of time spent on one teacher.

Congratulation to McGee for knowing her rights and continuing to teach the way she wants without regard to her fellow employees and supervisors. It would appear that she took a calculated risk that the administration wouldn’t go through the trouble of actually pursuing her shortcomings in a meaningful way so she just focused on her art. As I’ve stated before, she can be a great art teacher but still have problems dealing with the administrative responsibilities. Also, all teachers should realize that no matter what they think about her abilities, if it happened to her, it can happen to you. As for going to the New York Times, I might consider doing that as well while thinking about my next mortgage payment.

And finally congratulations to Frisco ISD for not ever having to answer exactly how did the administration handled the parent complaint. The district must also be saving the tax payers’ money by reducing the time and money it spends on creating a meaningful message.

Update to Request to Disclose Records of Ms. McGee (October, 2006):

Ms. McGee continues to be an employee of the District and receives her full salary and benefits.

See, they have not actually fired her. They’ve got another art teacher but they didn’t fire her.

Update to Request to Disclose Records of Ms. McGee (October, 2006):

but in fact, it is merely all about her overreaction to a memo that she received last spring from her principal which expressed valid and ongoing concerns about her job performance, but which sought no disciplinary action.

And the memo wasn’t disciplinary in nature. It only told her exactly what she would have to do otherwise she would be fired, oops sorry, her contract would not be renewed.

There are times that I feel sorry for the principal. I don’t think she followed procedures in dealing with the workplace issues regarding McGee. She’s probably used to people taking verbal direction and for people to back down when she confronts them with her authority. But then I think about how she obviously did not stand up for education principles with regard to the parent complaint about a nude statue and that feeling goes away.

FRISCO — The Frisco school district wants to open an art teacher’s personnel file to the public to defend itself against her claim that she was reprimanded for allowing a fifth-grade student to see nude art.

Frisco district wants to open art teacher’s personnel file:

Superintendent Rick Reedy sent a letter to McGee on Tuesday asking for permission to open her personnel file so the district could respond to criticism over her case.”

I believe some of the information being disseminated to the press is not true and is misleading, especially the allegation that the district has disciplined a teacher for exposing students to nude art,” Reedy said in a prepared statement. “I think we can all agree that the facts should be made available for full review and open discussion.”

Well of course it’s not going to be in the files since the district has already stated that all previous warnings were verbal. That’s part of the problem. It may just be a bluff but apparently McGee is willing to open her file if the district is willing to open “theirs.”

Frisco district wants to open art teacher’s personnel file:

Dunn said he is likely to deny the district’s request unless it also agrees to open the personnel files of Reedy and Nancy Lawson, the principal of Fisher Elementary School.

I think it may be a little late for the district to come “clean” since it has already stated multiple times that the other problems weren’t formally documented since principals often like to operate “informally” to try to solve their problems.

So what are the possibilities?

The file contains previous evaluations that indicate McGee had been warned about problems before. Then why has the district been going on about verbal evaluations?

The file contains documentation regarding the parental complaint. Not likely because the district already said it wasn’t an issue and the district has been going on about verbal evalutions. I can just see some spokesperson pointing to an open file and saying, “see, no complaint!” Duh.

At this point, anything the district decides to show that would document problems with McGee would have to contridict two weeks worth of statements that the performance directives were only put into writing at McGee’s request. Granted, the file may show that McGee’s previous evaluations weren’t as great as she made them out to be. However, if that’s the case then there should be documents that show what the principal did to improve the situation. Otherwise, it’s essentially, “gosh, Syndey, you really need to work on those lesson plans” and then a year later, the principal states, “you know, you really haven’t worked on those lesson plans yet.” As I’ve said before, the question is would the principal have begun to act on the problems if there hadn’t been a complaint?

So my guess is that the district has a file that shows McGee’s evaluations weren’t all that great and certain problems had been identified before. But I bet it also shows that the principal didn’t “formally” address these issues other than in the evaluations. Now why isn’t she being disicplined for failure to maintain adaquate personnel files if McGee is being disciplined for failure to maintain adaquate lesson plans?

And as for Reedy’s file? Maybe he’s behind on evaluating and giving written direction to principals?