The Thad Jesperson case sounds a lot like the Dale Akiki case.
C.A. Overturns Firing of Teacher Accused of Molestation
Metropolitan News-Enterprise
March 27, 2013
The Fourth District Court of Appeal yesterday overturned the firing of a San Diego elementary school teacher who served more than three years in prison before his child molestation convictions were thrown out by an earlier appellate ruling.
Justice Terry O’Rourke, writing for Div. One, said a San Diego Superior Court judge who upheld Thad Jesperson’s termination failed to give the required deference to the conclusion of a commission on professional competence that Jesperson was fit to teach and did not engage in immoral conduct.
Jesperson, who taught second- and third-grade pupils at Toler Elementary School in the Clairemont neighborhood and was by several accounts a popular educator, has fought for 10 years—through three criminal trials and an administrative hearing—to clear himself of accusations that he molested pupils during the 2001-02 and 2002-03 school years. The allegations initially involved eight students, but charges relating to four of them were dropped before trial.
The first trial resulted in his being convicted on one of 13 counts, with a jury deadlock on the remaining charges. At the second trial, he was convicted on one count, with the others resulting in acquittals or further deadlock, but a motion for new trial on the conviction was granted.
At the third trial, he was convicted on seven counts, and he was subsequently sentenced to 15 years to life in prison. All of the convictions, including the one from the first trial, were reversed in 2007, in a 2-1 decision based on juror misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel.
Prosecutors declined to retry the case, and Jesperson requested reinstatement. The school district notified him in November 2008 that he was being formally terminated for unfitness, immoral conduct, and failure to maintain a professional relationship with students.
There was also a civil suit by one of the parents, but it was dismissed as untimely.
Jesperson exercised his right as a tenured teacher to a hearing before a commission on professional competence, made up of two education professionals—one selected by the teacher and one by the district—and an administrative hearing officer assigned by the state.
The commission, following a hearing at which one of the pupils and her mother testified, and criminal trial testimony by those witnesses was read into the record, ruled that the allegations were unproven. While Jesperson had been “physically affectionate” with pupils, including Emily A., as she was identified, “the evidence did not establish that he touched her in the manner to which she testified, or in any other manner that was immoral or a violation of district regulations or that demonstrated an evident unfitness to serve,” the commission said.
Jesperson’s lawyers, in both the criminal and administrative proceedings, contended there was no physical evidence of any wrongdoing, and that the children, who initially denied the teacher had done anything wrong, changed their stories under pressure from parents, police and social workers.
But San Diego Superior Court Judge William Nevitt, citing his three years of experience hearing hundreds of children testify in juvenile court, said he believed Emily’s testimony about being touched inappropriately.
O’Rourke, however, writing for the Court of Appeal yesterday, said Nevitt failed to hold the district “to its burden to convince [the court] that the Commission’s administrative findings were contrary to the weight of the evidence.”
The trial judge, he said, failed to give the required “great weight” to the commission’s findings regarding the implausibility of much of Emily’s testimony, such as statements that the “bad” touching occurred “everyday” and that it occurred in class when all of the students were present. Nevitt also failed to credit, as the commission had, the testimony of Connie Murphy, a special education assistant, who said Jesperson often patted students on the back, or hugged them, as a form of encouragement, that he was a good teacher, and that she never saw any improper conduct.
Murphy also recounted a conversation with a guidance aide, who had reported to the school’s principal that a parent had alleged improper conduct on Jesperson’s part—apparently the first the principal had heard of the accusations. Murphy said the aide had said she “hated” Jesperson and thought he was a bad teacher and wanted him “out of there.”
O’Rourke wrote:
“It is highly improbable that such inappropriate touching could occur on a daily basis for a period of weeks without someone, including Murphy, noticing, given the layout of Jesperson’s classroom and the presence at times of other students waiting in line behind Emily. …Emily admitted she never felt the need to move away from Jesperson and denied that his touching felt ‘weird.’ District presented no evidence that other students were inappropriately touched, or felt uncomfortable around Jesperson. Testimony is properly discarded on a sufficiency of evidence analysis when it is inherently improbable or improbable on its face….”
The case is San Diego Unified School District v. Commission on Professional Conduct (Jesperson), 13 S.O.S. 1522.
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Outcry as teachers at Oldham school use staff training day to attend a wedding
Outcry as teachers at Oldham school use staff training day to attend a wedding
Kim Pilling
Independent
07 November 2012
A headteacher has defended her staff who attended a colleague's wedding after the school closed early for training purposes.
Pupils at St Hilda's School in Oldham, Greater Manchester, were sent home early on the afternoon of October 30.
Parents received a letter which gave a reason of "staff development training".
One of those parents drove past the voluntary-aided school on the training day and noticed the Tilbury Street car park was empty.
He said he later found more than 20 of the teachers at the wedding celebrations in the nearby Grand Venue.
Father-of-two Kamal Hussain told the Oldham Evening Chronicle: "As taxpayers, we pay their wages and now they're being paid to lie to us and go to a wedding.
"I want an inquiry to the bottom of it because it's unfair on the children."
Headteacher Gillian Pursey told the newspaper: "Staff were given that hour and a half of staff development time to research things for our golden jubilee celebrations.
"They could do that research on or off site, and whenever they liked. Some decided to do it straight away, and others decided to do it after the wedding. It was all agreed with the school governors and is all above board."
Kim Pilling
Independent
07 November 2012
A headteacher has defended her staff who attended a colleague's wedding after the school closed early for training purposes.
Pupils at St Hilda's School in Oldham, Greater Manchester, were sent home early on the afternoon of October 30.
Parents received a letter which gave a reason of "staff development training".
One of those parents drove past the voluntary-aided school on the training day and noticed the Tilbury Street car park was empty.
He said he later found more than 20 of the teachers at the wedding celebrations in the nearby Grand Venue.
Father-of-two Kamal Hussain told the Oldham Evening Chronicle: "As taxpayers, we pay their wages and now they're being paid to lie to us and go to a wedding.
"I want an inquiry to the bottom of it because it's unfair on the children."
Headteacher Gillian Pursey told the newspaper: "Staff were given that hour and a half of staff development time to research things for our golden jubilee celebrations.
"They could do that research on or off site, and whenever they liked. Some decided to do it straight away, and others decided to do it after the wedding. It was all agreed with the school governors and is all above board."
Randi Weingarten, president of American Federation of Teachers (AFT), arrested in Philadelphia
Randi Weingarten Arrested For Protesting Philadelphia School Closure Hearing (UPDATE)
Huff Post
03/07/2013
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, was arrested Thursday afternoon for blocking a school reform hearing in Philadelphia, an AFT spokesperson told The Huffington Post.
Weingarten reportedly stood outside the meeting of the Philadelphia School Reform Commission, in which the group was supposed to decide which Philadelphia Public Schools would close. Weingarten, whose AFT is the second-largest teachers' union in the country, made a surprise visit to fight school closures.
AFT spokesman Marcus Mrowka told The Huffington Post that Weingarten was arrested with 18 other community activists for blocking the entrance to the meeting. He added that Weingarten was in handcuffs.
The Philadelphia police department would not confirm the arrest, because the protest was ongoing. "I don't have any information at this point and probably won't until it's all dispersed," Lieutenant John Stanford said when reached by phone.
"There was a rally outside the building and they were probably blocking the entrance for about 20 minutes until police arrested them and escorted them away," Mrowka said. "She's in custody now."
Weingarten and teachers' unions throughout the country have protested school closure as a tool for reforming schools. Currently, the nation's largest cities are deciding which schools to close in a purported effort to save money and improve academic outcomes. But research shows that it's hard for school districts to recoup the closure savings they project, and a study from the University of Chicago's Urban Education Institute found that only 6 percent of students displaced by closed schools performed better in their new academic environments.
Activists have also protested school closures on civil rights grounds, saying that they disproportionately affect black and Hispanic families.v "Kids have suffered cut after cut," Weingarten said at the protest, according to Mrowka's notes. "The powers that be don't care about opportunity for children."
"The people of Philadelphia have come up with a plan to improve schools and it has been ignored," Weingarten said, according to Mrowka.
Chicago, which also employs AFT teachers, is currently considering what would be the largest wave of school closures in its history. On Wednesday, the city's "Commission on School Utilization" issued its final report, which concluded that Chicago Public Schools could shutter about 80 schools. It found that "closing schools and moving students … are only justifiable if, as a result, students are moved into better educational environments," echoing the UEI research. The report also concluded that "CPS has a responsibility to ensure … the safety of students who are being moved."
UPDATE: At around 8:15 p.m., Weingarten tweeted that she had been released from custody, saying: "we must continue the fight for fixing&ensuring great public schools for all kids-in Philly &US."
UPDATE: 9:25 p.m. -- In an interview following her release, Weingarten said she knew blocking the meeting would get her arrested, but she saw it as a last resort. Along with a community group, Weingarten said she had vainly tried to get a meeting with the SRC and Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter.
"They refused to listen and would not even consent to a meeting with us," Weingarten said. (Nutter and the SRC could not be reached late Thursday.) Even during strike conditions in Chicago, Weingarten said she was able to converse with the other side.
Weingarten said she sees the school closure plan as siphoning money away from public schools, since the plan doesn't touch charter schools. "This was really a plan to eliminate public education," Weingarten said. "This is not about how to fix public schools, but to close them -- not how to stabilize but to destabilize public schooling."
Weingarten called the closings immoral. "When the powers that be ignore you and dismiss you, then you don't have any choice but try to resort to civil disobedience to try to confront an immoral act," she said.
So she joined parents and union activists to form a group of 19 people who blocked the entrance to the meeting. She said she intentionally told Philly teachers not to join, lest they lose their teaching certification, and discouraged parents who are undocumented immigrants from participating.
"The road to justice is long and the fight is not over tonight," Weingarten said. "Some schools were saved tonight, but at the end of the day, what I am told is that by all of us doing this together, reflecting on all the four corners of the community, people throughout the country are talking about it."
Huff Post
03/07/2013
Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, was arrested Thursday afternoon for blocking a school reform hearing in Philadelphia, an AFT spokesperson told The Huffington Post.
Weingarten reportedly stood outside the meeting of the Philadelphia School Reform Commission, in which the group was supposed to decide which Philadelphia Public Schools would close. Weingarten, whose AFT is the second-largest teachers' union in the country, made a surprise visit to fight school closures.
AFT spokesman Marcus Mrowka told The Huffington Post that Weingarten was arrested with 18 other community activists for blocking the entrance to the meeting. He added that Weingarten was in handcuffs.
The Philadelphia police department would not confirm the arrest, because the protest was ongoing. "I don't have any information at this point and probably won't until it's all dispersed," Lieutenant John Stanford said when reached by phone.
"There was a rally outside the building and they were probably blocking the entrance for about 20 minutes until police arrested them and escorted them away," Mrowka said. "She's in custody now."
Weingarten and teachers' unions throughout the country have protested school closure as a tool for reforming schools. Currently, the nation's largest cities are deciding which schools to close in a purported effort to save money and improve academic outcomes. But research shows that it's hard for school districts to recoup the closure savings they project, and a study from the University of Chicago's Urban Education Institute found that only 6 percent of students displaced by closed schools performed better in their new academic environments.
Activists have also protested school closures on civil rights grounds, saying that they disproportionately affect black and Hispanic families.v "Kids have suffered cut after cut," Weingarten said at the protest, according to Mrowka's notes. "The powers that be don't care about opportunity for children."
"The people of Philadelphia have come up with a plan to improve schools and it has been ignored," Weingarten said, according to Mrowka.
Chicago, which also employs AFT teachers, is currently considering what would be the largest wave of school closures in its history. On Wednesday, the city's "Commission on School Utilization" issued its final report, which concluded that Chicago Public Schools could shutter about 80 schools. It found that "closing schools and moving students … are only justifiable if, as a result, students are moved into better educational environments," echoing the UEI research. The report also concluded that "CPS has a responsibility to ensure … the safety of students who are being moved."
UPDATE: At around 8:15 p.m., Weingarten tweeted that she had been released from custody, saying: "we must continue the fight for fixing&ensuring great public schools for all kids-in Philly &US."
UPDATE: 9:25 p.m. -- In an interview following her release, Weingarten said she knew blocking the meeting would get her arrested, but she saw it as a last resort. Along with a community group, Weingarten said she had vainly tried to get a meeting with the SRC and Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter.
"They refused to listen and would not even consent to a meeting with us," Weingarten said. (Nutter and the SRC could not be reached late Thursday.) Even during strike conditions in Chicago, Weingarten said she was able to converse with the other side.
Weingarten said she sees the school closure plan as siphoning money away from public schools, since the plan doesn't touch charter schools. "This was really a plan to eliminate public education," Weingarten said. "This is not about how to fix public schools, but to close them -- not how to stabilize but to destabilize public schooling."
Weingarten called the closings immoral. "When the powers that be ignore you and dismiss you, then you don't have any choice but try to resort to civil disobedience to try to confront an immoral act," she said.
So she joined parents and union activists to form a group of 19 people who blocked the entrance to the meeting. She said she intentionally told Philly teachers not to join, lest they lose their teaching certification, and discouraged parents who are undocumented immigrants from participating.
"The road to justice is long and the fight is not over tonight," Weingarten said. "Some schools were saved tonight, but at the end of the day, what I am told is that by all of us doing this together, reflecting on all the four corners of the community, people throughout the country are talking about it."
Sunday, May 19, 2013
14-year-old boy slapped by teacher, has broken eardrum
14-year-old boy slapped by teacher, has broken eardrum
YouTube (Video)
Dec 16, 2007
It is yet another case of extreme punishment in schools. A 14-year-old boy in Jammu now has a ruptured eardrum, after he was repeatedly slapped by his school teacher. The boy, Shubam Manhas is still in shock. The Class VIII student studied in the Army school at Nagrota, 20 kilometers from Jammu.
YouTube (Video)
Dec 16, 2007
It is yet another case of extreme punishment in schools. A 14-year-old boy in Jammu now has a ruptured eardrum, after he was repeatedly slapped by his school teacher. The boy, Shubam Manhas is still in shock. The Class VIII student studied in the Army school at Nagrota, 20 kilometers from Jammu.
Soldier at Fort Hood investigated for sexual assault, Hagel seeks changes to military legal process
Hot on the heels of a similar charge against Air Force Lt. Col. Jeffrey Krusinski, a solider assigned as a Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention program coordinator has been suspended while allegations of "pandering, abusive sexual contact, assault and maltreatment of subordinates" are investigated. See second story below.
Many are wondering what's the point in having investigations if commanders can throw out verdicts.
After sex assault case, Hagel seeks changes to military legal process
By Jim Kavanagh
CNN
April 9, 2013
In response to an Air Force colonel's overturned sexual assault conviction, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is asking Congress to limit military commanders' authority to toss out court-martial verdicts.
"These changes would increase the confidence of service members and the public that the military justice system will do justice in every case," Hagel said in a statement Monday announcing the initiative.
Hagel also wants to require commanders who change court-martial sentences to explain their decisions in writing.
The effort comes in response to the case of Air Force Col. James Wilkerson. The F-16 pilot was freed last year from a Navy brig four months after a court-martial convicted him of sexually assaulting a woman at his home outside Aviano Air Base in Italy.
Acting under the military justice system's Article 60, the Air Force's top commanding officer in Europe, Lt. Gen. Craig Franklin, exercised his power as "convening authority" of the court-martial to overturn the conviction.
Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was among those expressing outrage over the decision.
"As we are trying to send a signal to women ... I question now whether that unit that that man returns to, whether there's any chance a woman who is sexually assaulted in that unit would ever say a word," McCaskill said during a hearing in March.
Lisa Windsor, a former Army Judge Advocate General officer, said any base commander has authority to do what Franklin did, but "I've actually never seen that happen before, that a convening authority would completely overturn the case."
Hagel ordered a review of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and Monday's announcement is the result. The Joint Chiefs of Staff and secretaries of the various services support the changes, he said.
"Despite the attention and efforts of senior leaders throughout the Department of Defense, it is clear the department still has much more work to do to fully address the problem of sexual assault in the ranks," Hagel said. "This crime is damaging this institution. There are thousands of victims in the department, male and female, whose lives and careers have been upended, and that is unacceptable."
About 19,000 men and women suffer sexual assault each year in the military, former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said last year in announcing a Pentagon effort to stop the crime. Panetta noted that only about 3,200 of those assaults were reported. About 10,700 cases -- 56% -- involved male victims in 2010, based on anonymous reporting collected by the military.
CNN's Brian Todd, Josh Levs and Ashley Fantz contributed to this report.
Army investigates sergeant for alleged sexual assault
By Dana Ford
CNN
May 15, 2013
(CNN) -- The Army announced Tuesday that a sergeant first class assigned to an assault prevention program at Fort Hood, Texas, is under investigation for sexual assault.
The soldier, who was not named in an Army statement, has been suspended from all duties.
Specifically, the soldier is under investigation for "pandering, abusive sexual contact, assault and maltreatment of subordinates," the statement said. Special agents from the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command are conducting the probe.
No charges have been filed.
"This is so contrary to everything upon which the Army was built," Secretary of the Army John McHugh said during testimony before the House Appropriations Committee Defense subcommittee, according to the statement. "To see this kind of activity happening in our ranks is really heart-wrenching and sickening."
McHugh spoke generally about sex abuse crimes in the military...
The solider was assigned as a Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention program coordinator when the allegations surfaced. "There is a distinct possibility," that some sort of prostitution-related activity was involved, an administration official told CNN. But investigators have not yet determined the scope of that possibility or the potential criminal misconduct... According to a Pentagon report released last week, the number of service members anonymously reporting a sexual assault grew by more than 30% in the past two years.
The Defense Department estimated that more than 26,000 troops experienced an episode of "unwanted sexual contact," a huge jump from 19,300 in the 2010 report.
The actual number of sexual crimes reported in fiscal year 2012 was 3,374, a 6% increase over the previous year, the report said.
Military officials worry that many victims don't come forward because they fear retaliation. But the numbers might indicate that more victims are willing to report crimes than in the past.
"I am outraged and disgusted by the reports out of Fort Hood today," said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. "Buck" McKeon, calling them the "latest chapter in a long, sordid history of sexual abuse" in the military. The California Republican has a granddaughter in the Army. "I see no meaningful distinction between complacency or complicity in the military's latest failure to uphold their own standards of conduct. Nor do I see a distinction between the service member who orchestrated this offense and the chain of command that was either oblivious to or tolerant of criminal behavior," he said... "To say this report is disturbing would be a gross understatement. For the second time in a week, we are seeing someone who is supposed to be preventing sexual assault being investigated for committing that very act," said U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York. She plans to unveil legislation this week that would remove chain of command influence from the prosecution of such offenses.
Many are wondering what's the point in having investigations if commanders can throw out verdicts.
After sex assault case, Hagel seeks changes to military legal process
By Jim Kavanagh
CNN
April 9, 2013
In response to an Air Force colonel's overturned sexual assault conviction, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is asking Congress to limit military commanders' authority to toss out court-martial verdicts.
"These changes would increase the confidence of service members and the public that the military justice system will do justice in every case," Hagel said in a statement Monday announcing the initiative.
Hagel also wants to require commanders who change court-martial sentences to explain their decisions in writing.
The effort comes in response to the case of Air Force Col. James Wilkerson. The F-16 pilot was freed last year from a Navy brig four months after a court-martial convicted him of sexually assaulting a woman at his home outside Aviano Air Base in Italy.
Acting under the military justice system's Article 60, the Air Force's top commanding officer in Europe, Lt. Gen. Craig Franklin, exercised his power as "convening authority" of the court-martial to overturn the conviction.
Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Missouri, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, was among those expressing outrage over the decision.
"As we are trying to send a signal to women ... I question now whether that unit that that man returns to, whether there's any chance a woman who is sexually assaulted in that unit would ever say a word," McCaskill said during a hearing in March.
Lisa Windsor, a former Army Judge Advocate General officer, said any base commander has authority to do what Franklin did, but "I've actually never seen that happen before, that a convening authority would completely overturn the case."
Hagel ordered a review of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and Monday's announcement is the result. The Joint Chiefs of Staff and secretaries of the various services support the changes, he said.
"Despite the attention and efforts of senior leaders throughout the Department of Defense, it is clear the department still has much more work to do to fully address the problem of sexual assault in the ranks," Hagel said. "This crime is damaging this institution. There are thousands of victims in the department, male and female, whose lives and careers have been upended, and that is unacceptable."
About 19,000 men and women suffer sexual assault each year in the military, former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said last year in announcing a Pentagon effort to stop the crime. Panetta noted that only about 3,200 of those assaults were reported. About 10,700 cases -- 56% -- involved male victims in 2010, based on anonymous reporting collected by the military.
CNN's Brian Todd, Josh Levs and Ashley Fantz contributed to this report.
Army investigates sergeant for alleged sexual assault
By Dana Ford
CNN
May 15, 2013
(CNN) -- The Army announced Tuesday that a sergeant first class assigned to an assault prevention program at Fort Hood, Texas, is under investigation for sexual assault.
The soldier, who was not named in an Army statement, has been suspended from all duties.
Specifically, the soldier is under investigation for "pandering, abusive sexual contact, assault and maltreatment of subordinates," the statement said. Special agents from the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command are conducting the probe.
No charges have been filed.
"This is so contrary to everything upon which the Army was built," Secretary of the Army John McHugh said during testimony before the House Appropriations Committee Defense subcommittee, according to the statement. "To see this kind of activity happening in our ranks is really heart-wrenching and sickening."
McHugh spoke generally about sex abuse crimes in the military...
The solider was assigned as a Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention program coordinator when the allegations surfaced. "There is a distinct possibility," that some sort of prostitution-related activity was involved, an administration official told CNN. But investigators have not yet determined the scope of that possibility or the potential criminal misconduct... According to a Pentagon report released last week, the number of service members anonymously reporting a sexual assault grew by more than 30% in the past two years.
The Defense Department estimated that more than 26,000 troops experienced an episode of "unwanted sexual contact," a huge jump from 19,300 in the 2010 report.
The actual number of sexual crimes reported in fiscal year 2012 was 3,374, a 6% increase over the previous year, the report said.
Military officials worry that many victims don't come forward because they fear retaliation. But the numbers might indicate that more victims are willing to report crimes than in the past.
"I am outraged and disgusted by the reports out of Fort Hood today," said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. "Buck" McKeon, calling them the "latest chapter in a long, sordid history of sexual abuse" in the military. The California Republican has a granddaughter in the Army. "I see no meaningful distinction between complacency or complicity in the military's latest failure to uphold their own standards of conduct. Nor do I see a distinction between the service member who orchestrated this offense and the chain of command that was either oblivious to or tolerant of criminal behavior," he said... "To say this report is disturbing would be a gross understatement. For the second time in a week, we are seeing someone who is supposed to be preventing sexual assault being investigated for committing that very act," said U.S. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-New York. She plans to unveil legislation this week that would remove chain of command influence from the prosecution of such offenses.
Saturday, May 18, 2013
What was the Stroberg family's message to the children of CVESD's Salt Creek Elementary regarding "our God"?
Whatever the Stroberg family intended "our God is mercy" and "the kingdom of our God is near" to mean, it is certainly important that Salt Creek Elementary offer some different views of religion to all students in the near future.
I know that many teachers and principals in Chula Vista Elementary School District misunderstand the law regarding religion, but I agree with CVESD that there was no need for a lawyer to be involved in the Stroberg incident. Of course, CVESD itself has a habit of calling in lawyers unnecessarily. I guess the district doesn't like it when parents borrow a page from CVESD's playbook.
Since religion is a hugely important part of human culture, any school that wants to provide a basic education needs to teach about the various religions of the world. Schools simply may not limit discussion to a single religion.
Here are the lyrics of the song that caused all the commotion at CVESD:
"Our God Is Mercy" by Brenton Brown
Our God is mercy
Our God is mercy
If your heart is heavy
If your soul is thirsty
There is a refuge
A home for the lonely
Our God is near
Our God is near
Our God is near
Our God is near
The kingdom of our God is near
Lift your eyes, lift your eyes
The hope of heaven's drawing near
Lift your eyes, lift your eyes
You're blessed if you've been torn apart
You're blessed if you've a broken heart
'Cause hope is waiting at the door
Salvation's near
Lift up your eyes, lift up your eyes
Lift up your eyes and sing
Lift up your eyes, lift up your eyes
Lift up your eyes and sing
The song is obviously Christian, but at the same time it seems quite universal; it could appeal to Jews, Muslims and anyone else who believes in a higher power that offers help to human beings. I think that Hindus and others who believe in multiple gods would also relate to the sentiments expressed. And Buddhists might simply substitute "nirvana" for "kingdom of our God".
Is this what Brenton Brown meant when he used the term "our God"? Was he talking about all human beings when he said "our"?
Perhaps not. It's possible he wanted to differentiate "our God" from "their God". It's possible he wanted his co-religionists to feel that they are more blessed than people who don't share their beliefs. Perhaps he believes that when "the kingdom of our God" arrives, an event that he describes as occurring in the near future, his kind will be whisked off to heaven while those who don't share his beliefs will be left to the horrors of the end times.
Now that's not a nice thought for school children who don't share Mr. Brown's beliefs.
Whatever Mr. Brown or the Stroberg family intended this song to mean, it is certainly important that Salt Creek Elementary offer some different views of religion to all students in the near future.
Chula Vista mom hires attorney so 6-year-old son could sing song about God at talent show
10 News
05/17/2013
CHULA VISTA, Calif. - The family of a local kindergartner says their son was devastated after he was told he couldn't perform at his school's upcoming talent show because he wanted to sing a song about God.
Six-year-old Austin Stroberg has been practicing hard and planning to perform the song, “Our God Is Mercy,” written by Brenton Brown at his school's talent show.
Following his audition at Salt Creek Elementary School in Chula Vista, Austin's mom, Amanda Stroberg, said she was told he would not be allowed to be in the talent show if he was "going to sing that song."
Then she received an e-mail stating, "The judges really liked him and are agreeing to have him in the show so long as it’s a non-religious song. Star-Spangled Banner or any other song that is non-religious."
Needless to say, that did not sit well.
“We wanted to know what are his rights as a student,” said Stroberg.
Stroberg decided to contact the Pacific Justice Institute.
Shortly after an attorney sent a letter to the principal on Austin's behalf , the minds of the administration at Salt Creek Elementary School quickly changed and Austin was added to the list of this year's talent show performers.
“Really excited,” Austin told 10News.
“We were extremely pleased, we're glad the district was so quick to respond,” said Stroberg.
The four-page letter to Austin's principal stated in part, "The fact that the school allows students to sing Jewish songs and Kwanza songs during holiday celebrations, but refuses to allow this Christian song during the talent show may be a violation of equal protection under the law."
10News Reporter Preston Phillips spoke to Stroberg about the situation and how the family decided to reach out to an attorney to try and resolve the issue.
“Unfortunately, but it seems like a sign of the times,” said Stroberg.
The Chula Vista Elementary School District contacted 10News Thursday night saying Austin's parents went too far and could have simply gone to the district with their complaint instead of contacting an attorney.
“They simply could have contacted the district office with their concern. Really doesn't take an attorney to resolve things amicably,” said Anthony Millican, spokesman for Chula Vista Elementary School District.
The school district says they do not endorse or support Austin's song choice.
Austin's parents and the district say they are pleased the issue has been resolved.
I know that many teachers and principals in Chula Vista Elementary School District misunderstand the law regarding religion, but I agree with CVESD that there was no need for a lawyer to be involved in the Stroberg incident. Of course, CVESD itself has a habit of calling in lawyers unnecessarily. I guess the district doesn't like it when parents borrow a page from CVESD's playbook.
Since religion is a hugely important part of human culture, any school that wants to provide a basic education needs to teach about the various religions of the world. Schools simply may not limit discussion to a single religion.
Here are the lyrics of the song that caused all the commotion at CVESD:
"Our God Is Mercy" by Brenton Brown
Our God is mercy
Our God is mercy
If your heart is heavy
If your soul is thirsty
There is a refuge
A home for the lonely
Our God is near
Our God is near
Our God is near
Our God is near
The kingdom of our God is near
Lift your eyes, lift your eyes
The hope of heaven's drawing near
Lift your eyes, lift your eyes
You're blessed if you've been torn apart
You're blessed if you've a broken heart
'Cause hope is waiting at the door
Salvation's near
Lift up your eyes, lift up your eyes
Lift up your eyes and sing
Lift up your eyes, lift up your eyes
Lift up your eyes and sing
The song is obviously Christian, but at the same time it seems quite universal; it could appeal to Jews, Muslims and anyone else who believes in a higher power that offers help to human beings. I think that Hindus and others who believe in multiple gods would also relate to the sentiments expressed. And Buddhists might simply substitute "nirvana" for "kingdom of our God".
Is this what Brenton Brown meant when he used the term "our God"? Was he talking about all human beings when he said "our"?
Perhaps not. It's possible he wanted to differentiate "our God" from "their God". It's possible he wanted his co-religionists to feel that they are more blessed than people who don't share their beliefs. Perhaps he believes that when "the kingdom of our God" arrives, an event that he describes as occurring in the near future, his kind will be whisked off to heaven while those who don't share his beliefs will be left to the horrors of the end times.
Now that's not a nice thought for school children who don't share Mr. Brown's beliefs.Whatever Mr. Brown or the Stroberg family intended this song to mean, it is certainly important that Salt Creek Elementary offer some different views of religion to all students in the near future.
Chula Vista mom hires attorney so 6-year-old son could sing song about God at talent show
10 News
05/17/2013
CHULA VISTA, Calif. - The family of a local kindergartner says their son was devastated after he was told he couldn't perform at his school's upcoming talent show because he wanted to sing a song about God.
Six-year-old Austin Stroberg has been practicing hard and planning to perform the song, “Our God Is Mercy,” written by Brenton Brown at his school's talent show.
Following his audition at Salt Creek Elementary School in Chula Vista, Austin's mom, Amanda Stroberg, said she was told he would not be allowed to be in the talent show if he was "going to sing that song."
Then she received an e-mail stating, "The judges really liked him and are agreeing to have him in the show so long as it’s a non-religious song. Star-Spangled Banner or any other song that is non-religious."
Needless to say, that did not sit well.
“We wanted to know what are his rights as a student,” said Stroberg.
Stroberg decided to contact the Pacific Justice Institute.
Shortly after an attorney sent a letter to the principal on Austin's behalf , the minds of the administration at Salt Creek Elementary School quickly changed and Austin was added to the list of this year's talent show performers.
“Really excited,” Austin told 10News.
“We were extremely pleased, we're glad the district was so quick to respond,” said Stroberg.
The four-page letter to Austin's principal stated in part, "The fact that the school allows students to sing Jewish songs and Kwanza songs during holiday celebrations, but refuses to allow this Christian song during the talent show may be a violation of equal protection under the law."
10News Reporter Preston Phillips spoke to Stroberg about the situation and how the family decided to reach out to an attorney to try and resolve the issue.
“Unfortunately, but it seems like a sign of the times,” said Stroberg.
The Chula Vista Elementary School District contacted 10News Thursday night saying Austin's parents went too far and could have simply gone to the district with their complaint instead of contacting an attorney.
“They simply could have contacted the district office with their concern. Really doesn't take an attorney to resolve things amicably,” said Anthony Millican, spokesman for Chula Vista Elementary School District.
The school district says they do not endorse or support Austin's song choice.
Austin's parents and the district say they are pleased the issue has been resolved.
L.A. schools will no longer suspend a student for being defiant
A good teacher knows not to give an order that will be disobeyed, since that disobedience will undermine the teacher's authority. A wise teacher does not engage in a challenge that creates a winner and a loser because the classroom atmosphere is harmed no matter which challenger is the loser.
Teachers preserve their authority in the classroom by not taking the bait offered by defiant students, but rather by giving appropriate consequences. Those consequences do not need to be severe, but they need to be consistent.
L.A. schools will no longer suspend a student for being defiant
The Los Angeles Unified school board voted Tuesday to ban suspensions of defiant students, directing officials to use alternative disciplinary practices instead.
By Teresa Watanabe
LA Times
May 15, 2013
Los Angeles Unified has become the first school district in the state to ban defiance as grounds for suspension.
In a 5-2 vote that was met with cheers, the school board banned suspensions for defiant students, directing officials to use alternative disciplinary practices instead.
The action comes amid mounting national concern that removing students from school is imperiling their academic achievement and disproportionately harming minority students, particularly African Americans.
"Now we'll have a better chance to stay in school and become something," said Luis Quintero, 14, a student at Augustus Hawkins High School in South Los Angeles. He attended the board meeting along with dozens of other students and community activists who have been pushing the proposal by board members Monica Garcia and Nury Martinez.
But the vote came after an impassioned discussion over whether the proposal would give a "free pass" to students and shield them from the consequences of misbehavior. Board member Marguerite LaMotte, who voted no, told students that they needed to pay for their mistakes, while member Richard Vladovic said no student had the right to disrupt learning opportunities for classmates.
"I'm not going to give you permission to go crazy and think there are no consequences," LaMotte said.
Board member Tamar Galatzan voted no without comment, while Vladovic supported it as an experiment, saying he would be "the first to stop it" if it proved disruptive to learning. Garcia, Martinez, Steve Zimmer and Bennett Kayser supported the proposal.
The action marks a decisive step back from "zero tolerance" policies that swept the nation after the Columbine school shooting in Colorado more than a decade ago.
The proposal would ban suspensions of students for "willful defiance," an offense criticized as a subjective catch-all for such behavior as refusing to take off a hat, turn off a cellphone or failing to wear a school uniform. The offense accounted for 48% of 710,000 suspensions issued in California in 2011-12, prompting state and local efforts to restrict its use in disciplinary actions.
School officials will instead focus on positive behavior incentives, which have reduced office discipline referrals by up to 50% in 13,000 schools using them nationwide, according to Fix School Discipline, an initiative of the Public Counsel Law Center of Los Angeles.
Teachers preserve their authority in the classroom by not taking the bait offered by defiant students, but rather by giving appropriate consequences. Those consequences do not need to be severe, but they need to be consistent.
L.A. schools will no longer suspend a student for being defiant
The Los Angeles Unified school board voted Tuesday to ban suspensions of defiant students, directing officials to use alternative disciplinary practices instead.
By Teresa Watanabe
LA Times
May 15, 2013
Los Angeles Unified has become the first school district in the state to ban defiance as grounds for suspension.
In a 5-2 vote that was met with cheers, the school board banned suspensions for defiant students, directing officials to use alternative disciplinary practices instead.
The action comes amid mounting national concern that removing students from school is imperiling their academic achievement and disproportionately harming minority students, particularly African Americans.
"Now we'll have a better chance to stay in school and become something," said Luis Quintero, 14, a student at Augustus Hawkins High School in South Los Angeles. He attended the board meeting along with dozens of other students and community activists who have been pushing the proposal by board members Monica Garcia and Nury Martinez.
But the vote came after an impassioned discussion over whether the proposal would give a "free pass" to students and shield them from the consequences of misbehavior. Board member Marguerite LaMotte, who voted no, told students that they needed to pay for their mistakes, while member Richard Vladovic said no student had the right to disrupt learning opportunities for classmates.
"I'm not going to give you permission to go crazy and think there are no consequences," LaMotte said.
Board member Tamar Galatzan voted no without comment, while Vladovic supported it as an experiment, saying he would be "the first to stop it" if it proved disruptive to learning. Garcia, Martinez, Steve Zimmer and Bennett Kayser supported the proposal.
The action marks a decisive step back from "zero tolerance" policies that swept the nation after the Columbine school shooting in Colorado more than a decade ago.
The proposal would ban suspensions of students for "willful defiance," an offense criticized as a subjective catch-all for such behavior as refusing to take off a hat, turn off a cellphone or failing to wear a school uniform. The offense accounted for 48% of 710,000 suspensions issued in California in 2011-12, prompting state and local efforts to restrict its use in disciplinary actions.
School officials will instead focus on positive behavior incentives, which have reduced office discipline referrals by up to 50% in 13,000 schools using them nationwide, according to Fix School Discipline, an initiative of the Public Counsel Law Center of Los Angeles.
Friday, May 17, 2013
Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz v. Maura Larkins: mysterious missing exhibits are replaced
Back in January I discovered that all the exhibits regarding Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz' Motion to Strike my Answer were missing from the court file. See that post HERE. This should not have happened in an active case. I suspect that Judge Judith Hayes didn't want the Court of Appeal to see the exhibits, since they support my claim that the judge abused her discretion when she granted the motion.
At first I was told by court administrators that nothing could be done. Even worse, court administrators supported the actions of the person who eliminated the exhibits from the file. I was told that there was no proof that plaintiff and I had ever submitted exhibits!
But I pointed out that I did have proof: the judge had referred to one of the exhibits during oral arguments.
(Thankfully, the court was still providing court reporters in civil cases last August. COURT REPORTERS SHOULD BE RESTORED TO CIVIL COURTROOMS!!!!)
Judge Hayes called for both plaintiff and defendant to submit copies of the exhibits, and she determined that my replacement exhibits were true copies of the originals and ordered them placed in the file.
The case is now in the Court of Appeal.
At first I was told by court administrators that nothing could be done. Even worse, court administrators supported the actions of the person who eliminated the exhibits from the file. I was told that there was no proof that plaintiff and I had ever submitted exhibits!
But I pointed out that I did have proof: the judge had referred to one of the exhibits during oral arguments.
(Thankfully, the court was still providing court reporters in civil cases last August. COURT REPORTERS SHOULD BE RESTORED TO CIVIL COURTROOMS!!!!)
Judge Hayes called for both plaintiff and defendant to submit copies of the exhibits, and she determined that my replacement exhibits were true copies of the originals and ordered them placed in the file.
The case is now in the Court of Appeal.
Thursday, May 16, 2013
Reward Offered After Racist Graffiti Targets Black Students at Agoura High Schoo
See also Calabasas student football discrimination.
Reward Offered After Racist Graffiti Targets Black Students at Agoura High School
Racist graffiti targeting black students was found on buildings on Sunday and Wednesday
By Toni Guinyard and Jason Kandel
NBC 4
May 16, 2013
Reward Offered for Hate Crime at Agoura High School
Los Angeles County Sheriff's detectives were investigating who scrawled racist graffiti targeting black students at Agoura High School, found on Sunday, May 12, 2013 and Wednesday, May 15, 2013.
Two cases of racially charged graffiti are being investigated as a hate crime, officials said.
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputies were reviewing surveillance footage and providing extra patrols around Agoura High School where officials found racist graffiti against black students on Sunday and Wednesday.
The scrawls were first discovered on Sunday on several buildings of the campus. Some parents said they were not initially notified about the graffiti that was quickly painted over.
But on Wednesday, school officials found more graffiti on the boys' bathroom that named names and threatened specific students.
“My son’s name showed up on the list,” said Astrid Kastenberg, who received several text messages and calls about the Wednesday incident. "These are the next n------ to die."
School officials said sheriff's detectives told them not to notify parents about the graffiti found on Sunday.
Parent Dorna Hill said she was notified on Wednesday, but she was still uneasy even though officials said they didn't believe students were in danger.
Members of the hate crime unit of the sheriff's department met with parents of students who appeared to be targeted and class was in session as usual on Thursday.
School officials said a $1,000 reward was being offered for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person or people responsible.
Just over 1 percent of the 2,180 students at the school are African American, according to state enrollment data from 2012, the latest statistics available.
Reward Offered After Racist Graffiti Targets Black Students at Agoura High School
Racist graffiti targeting black students was found on buildings on Sunday and Wednesday
By Toni Guinyard and Jason Kandel
NBC 4
May 16, 2013
Reward Offered for Hate Crime at Agoura High School
Los Angeles County Sheriff's detectives were investigating who scrawled racist graffiti targeting black students at Agoura High School, found on Sunday, May 12, 2013 and Wednesday, May 15, 2013.
Two cases of racially charged graffiti are being investigated as a hate crime, officials said.
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s deputies were reviewing surveillance footage and providing extra patrols around Agoura High School where officials found racist graffiti against black students on Sunday and Wednesday.
The scrawls were first discovered on Sunday on several buildings of the campus. Some parents said they were not initially notified about the graffiti that was quickly painted over.
But on Wednesday, school officials found more graffiti on the boys' bathroom that named names and threatened specific students.
“My son’s name showed up on the list,” said Astrid Kastenberg, who received several text messages and calls about the Wednesday incident. "These are the next n------ to die."
School officials said sheriff's detectives told them not to notify parents about the graffiti found on Sunday.
Parent Dorna Hill said she was notified on Wednesday, but she was still uneasy even though officials said they didn't believe students were in danger.
Members of the hate crime unit of the sheriff's department met with parents of students who appeared to be targeted and class was in session as usual on Thursday.
School officials said a $1,000 reward was being offered for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the person or people responsible.
Just over 1 percent of the 2,180 students at the school are African American, according to state enrollment data from 2012, the latest statistics available.
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
Big Banks, not college students, wrecked the economy: Elizabeth Warren's bill calls for same interest rate for both
Last year, I ran for Senate on the idea of sticking up for the little guy against a system rigged for the big guy.
It's outrageous that the Federal Reserve loans money to big banks at 0.75% interest, while interest rates for college loans will be 9 times higher starting July 1. That's why I introduced a bill saying college students should get the same low rate.
I am proud that more than 385,000 Americans have signed a petition to Congress supporting my proposal -- in less than a week.
Can you join them, and add to the momentum? Click here.
...The simple fact is that big Wall Street banks wrecked our economy. College students did not.
Students are the future of our country and our economy, and they should get the same good deals as Wall Street – they shouldn’t be saddled with debt...
Thank you.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren
It's outrageous that the Federal Reserve loans money to big banks at 0.75% interest, while interest rates for college loans will be 9 times higher starting July 1. That's why I introduced a bill saying college students should get the same low rate.
I am proud that more than 385,000 Americans have signed a petition to Congress supporting my proposal -- in less than a week.
Can you join them, and add to the momentum? Click here.
...The simple fact is that big Wall Street banks wrecked our economy. College students did not.
Students are the future of our country and our economy, and they should get the same good deals as Wall Street – they shouldn’t be saddled with debt...
Thank you.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren
Abusing the courts: Prada and others sue an employee for revealing what the employer itself said in court records
Like schools and many other institutions, Prada goes to court to defend its actions against employees. And, like Prada, schools doesn't want the public to know about what happens behind closed doors. But schools are owned by the public, so the rules should be different: the public has a right to know what quasi-governmental agencies are doing. But even though this lawsuit is less egregious than public entity attorney lawsuits against employees for defamation, I still think it was unwise of Prada to file this suit.
"If Prada is concerned about its image, it should definitely stop this stunningly ugly example of corporate bullying."
Rina Bovrisse
Prada: Drop your lawsuit against former-employee Rina Bovrisse
Petition by Barrera Murakami Ayako, Japan
Petitioning Miuccia Prada & Patrizio Bertelli:
Rina Bovrisse, a former employee at Prada in Japan, was shocked when her boss told her to fire scores of coworkers because they were “old, fat, ugly, disgusting or did not have the Prada look.” When Rina spoke out, she was fired. Now, Prada is suing HER for $780,000 for allegedly damaging the Prada brand even though they don’t deny their discrimination.
Prada Japan hired Rina, a Japanese national, in April 2009 as Senior Retail Operations Manager and tasked her with overseeing 500 Prada employees. She moved to Japan with her two year old son, excited about the opportunity ahead.
Almost immediately, Rina began observing evidence of discrimination in Prada’s HR department. She recalls the company’s CEO ordering the demotion and transfer of fifteen female employees (many of them long-serving, top saleswomen) because they were “old, fat, ugly, disgusting or did not have the Prada look.” When she spoke out against this injustice, Rina was criticized for her own appearance, offered a demotion to an entry-level sales staff position, and then urged to resign.
In 2010, Rina and two of her Prada colleagues decided to take a stand. They filed a lawsuit against the luxury fashion label, arguing that Prada’s appearance-based discrimination and harassment violated Japanese law. But in 2012, the judge ruled that Prada’s demonstrated discrimination was acceptable for a luxury fashion label and that a well-compensated female employee should be able to withstand a certain level of harassment.
Now, Prada is taking the outrageous step of countersuing the single mother to the tune of $780,000 for speaking out about the company’s discrimination. It's bad enough Prada is discriminating this way, but to SUE a woman who fought back? That’s unacceptable and Prada must drop the suit.
As a woman and a mother in Japan, I have experienced gender discrimination in employment too. It’s a huge problem in my country where none of the top companies are led by women. Rina has become the symbol of this injustice in Japan and if we let a major company like Prada bully her, other women will be afraid to stand up against discrimination too.
Comments
Steve Guinn EDMONDS, WA
If Prada is concerned about its image, it should definitely stop this stunningly ugly example of corporate bullying.
michael baker LYNN, MA
I am burning everything prada I have because I am old, fat and better than prada.
"If Prada is concerned about its image, it should definitely stop this stunningly ugly example of corporate bullying."
Rina Bovrisse Prada: Drop your lawsuit against former-employee Rina Bovrisse
Petition by Barrera Murakami Ayako, Japan
Petitioning Miuccia Prada & Patrizio Bertelli:
Rina Bovrisse, a former employee at Prada in Japan, was shocked when her boss told her to fire scores of coworkers because they were “old, fat, ugly, disgusting or did not have the Prada look.” When Rina spoke out, she was fired. Now, Prada is suing HER for $780,000 for allegedly damaging the Prada brand even though they don’t deny their discrimination.
Prada Japan hired Rina, a Japanese national, in April 2009 as Senior Retail Operations Manager and tasked her with overseeing 500 Prada employees. She moved to Japan with her two year old son, excited about the opportunity ahead.
Almost immediately, Rina began observing evidence of discrimination in Prada’s HR department. She recalls the company’s CEO ordering the demotion and transfer of fifteen female employees (many of them long-serving, top saleswomen) because they were “old, fat, ugly, disgusting or did not have the Prada look.” When she spoke out against this injustice, Rina was criticized for her own appearance, offered a demotion to an entry-level sales staff position, and then urged to resign.
In 2010, Rina and two of her Prada colleagues decided to take a stand. They filed a lawsuit against the luxury fashion label, arguing that Prada’s appearance-based discrimination and harassment violated Japanese law. But in 2012, the judge ruled that Prada’s demonstrated discrimination was acceptable for a luxury fashion label and that a well-compensated female employee should be able to withstand a certain level of harassment.
Now, Prada is taking the outrageous step of countersuing the single mother to the tune of $780,000 for speaking out about the company’s discrimination. It's bad enough Prada is discriminating this way, but to SUE a woman who fought back? That’s unacceptable and Prada must drop the suit.
As a woman and a mother in Japan, I have experienced gender discrimination in employment too. It’s a huge problem in my country where none of the top companies are led by women. Rina has become the symbol of this injustice in Japan and if we let a major company like Prada bully her, other women will be afraid to stand up against discrimination too.
Comments
Steve Guinn EDMONDS, WA
If Prada is concerned about its image, it should definitely stop this stunningly ugly example of corporate bullying.
michael baker LYNN, MA
I am burning everything prada I have because I am old, fat and better than prada.
Sunday, May 12, 2013
College president wasn't paid all that money to obey his conscience
Ex-Penn St head was top paid among public colleges
By CAROLYN THOMPSON
Associated Press
May 12, 2013
BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) — Former Penn State President Graham Spanier became the highest paid public college president of 2011-12 when he was forced out over his handling of the sex abuse scandal involving former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, according to a survey released Sunday.
The Chronicle of Higher Education's annual ranking of public college presidents' earnings said Spanier's $2.9 million pay, which included $1.2 million in severance and $1.2 million in deferred compensation, put him well ahead of his peers when he left Penn State in November 2011.
Spanier, who led the college for 16 years, is awaiting trial on criminal charges of perjury, obstruction, endangering the welfare of children, failure to properly report suspected child abuse and conspiracy stemming from administrators' handling of sex abuse allegations against Sandusky. Spanier has vigorously denied the charges.
Sandusky was convicted in 2012 of abusing 10 boys and sentenced to 30 to 60 years in prison.
Former Florida A&M University President James Ammons also saw his place on the earning list rise amid scandal. He ranked 11th at $781,000 after collecting $422,000 in severance and bonuses when he resigned in the wake of the hazing death of a marching band member.
While the median compensation for public college presidents was $441,392, a 4.7 percent increase over 2010-11, Spanier was one of four chief executives to surpass the $1 million threshold in 2011-12, one more than the previous year. The others were Auburn University President Jay Gogue, who received $2.5 million; E. Gordon Gee of Ohio State University, who earned $1.9 million; and now-retired George Mason University's Alan Merten, whose total pay plus benefits and deferred compensation totaled $1.87 million.
Deferred compensation plans, meant as retention incentives, give executives a lump sum after a specified number of years on the job.
Ball State University's Jo Ann Gora collected $500,000 in deferred pay on top of $431,000 in base pay, launching her into the top five earners, with a total of $985,000. She was one of two women in the top 10, ranking just above Mary Sue Coleman of the University of Michigan, who earned $919,000. Coleman was the lone woman among last year's top 10.
Ammons, who is black, was the highest earning minority among the college presidents.
Gee, who topped the 2010-11 earnings list and became the first public college president in the million-dollar club in 2007-08, had the highest base salary last year: $830,439. That was more than double the median base salary, which inched up 2 percent to $373,800.
A separate analysis of the pay of private college presidents released by the Chronicle in December found 36 leaders received $1 million or more in 2010. The numbers are older because of lag time in the release of the federal tax information on which they are based.
The public college data is based on a survey of institutions. It analyzed compensation of 212 presidents at 191 public research institutions. The leaders outnumbered institutions because the survey included those whose tenures began or ended during the fiscal year.
By CAROLYN THOMPSON
Associated Press
May 12, 2013
BUFFALO, N.Y. (AP) — Former Penn State President Graham Spanier became the highest paid public college president of 2011-12 when he was forced out over his handling of the sex abuse scandal involving former assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, according to a survey released Sunday.
The Chronicle of Higher Education's annual ranking of public college presidents' earnings said Spanier's $2.9 million pay, which included $1.2 million in severance and $1.2 million in deferred compensation, put him well ahead of his peers when he left Penn State in November 2011.
Spanier, who led the college for 16 years, is awaiting trial on criminal charges of perjury, obstruction, endangering the welfare of children, failure to properly report suspected child abuse and conspiracy stemming from administrators' handling of sex abuse allegations against Sandusky. Spanier has vigorously denied the charges.
Sandusky was convicted in 2012 of abusing 10 boys and sentenced to 30 to 60 years in prison.
Former Florida A&M University President James Ammons also saw his place on the earning list rise amid scandal. He ranked 11th at $781,000 after collecting $422,000 in severance and bonuses when he resigned in the wake of the hazing death of a marching band member.
While the median compensation for public college presidents was $441,392, a 4.7 percent increase over 2010-11, Spanier was one of four chief executives to surpass the $1 million threshold in 2011-12, one more than the previous year. The others were Auburn University President Jay Gogue, who received $2.5 million; E. Gordon Gee of Ohio State University, who earned $1.9 million; and now-retired George Mason University's Alan Merten, whose total pay plus benefits and deferred compensation totaled $1.87 million.
Deferred compensation plans, meant as retention incentives, give executives a lump sum after a specified number of years on the job.
Ball State University's Jo Ann Gora collected $500,000 in deferred pay on top of $431,000 in base pay, launching her into the top five earners, with a total of $985,000. She was one of two women in the top 10, ranking just above Mary Sue Coleman of the University of Michigan, who earned $919,000. Coleman was the lone woman among last year's top 10.
Ammons, who is black, was the highest earning minority among the college presidents.
Gee, who topped the 2010-11 earnings list and became the first public college president in the million-dollar club in 2007-08, had the highest base salary last year: $830,439. That was more than double the median base salary, which inched up 2 percent to $373,800.
A separate analysis of the pay of private college presidents released by the Chronicle in December found 36 leaders received $1 million or more in 2010. The numbers are older because of lag time in the release of the federal tax information on which they are based.
The public college data is based on a survey of institutions. It analyzed compensation of 212 presidents at 191 public research institutions. The leaders outnumbered institutions because the survey included those whose tenures began or ended during the fiscal year.
Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz fails to file response in Court of Appeal even after 46-day extension
"There is no legal basis that the court would need" Part 2
by Maura Larkins
(See Part 1 HERE.)
I filed an appeal regarding Judge Judith Hayes' recent ruling on an unconstitutional injunction in the Stutz v. Larkins case, but instead of filing a response, Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz asked the Court of Appeal to ignore my Opening Brief!
No, I'm not kidding. Last month school attorney Paul Carelli filed this motion in the Court of Appeal regarding his law firm's defamation case against me. There are no codes or case law offered to justify the request. Once again, Stutz law firm feels that "there is no legal basis that the court would need."
Paul Carelli asked the Court to allow me only ONE opening brief for TWO separate appeals.
Here is my opposition to Mr. Carelli's motion. And here is Mr. Carelli's declaration. Happily for Mr. Carelli, the other case that he discusses in his declaration has been continued to November, so Mr. Carelli will have lots of time to work on opposing my opening brief.
Mr. Carelli is certified by the Legal Specialization Board of the California State Bar as a specialist in Appellate Law. I have no idea what measures the State Bar uses to determine who is a specialist in Appellate Law.
The Court of Appeal denied Mr. Carelli's motion, but gave him an extra 30-day extension in addition to its previous 46-day extension. We should be seeing a response from Stutz sometime in June.
by Maura Larkins
(See Part 1 HERE.)
I filed an appeal regarding Judge Judith Hayes' recent ruling on an unconstitutional injunction in the Stutz v. Larkins case, but instead of filing a response, Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz asked the Court of Appeal to ignore my Opening Brief!
No, I'm not kidding. Last month school attorney Paul Carelli filed this motion in the Court of Appeal regarding his law firm's defamation case against me. There are no codes or case law offered to justify the request. Once again, Stutz law firm feels that "there is no legal basis that the court would need."
Paul Carelli asked the Court to allow me only ONE opening brief for TWO separate appeals.
Here is my opposition to Mr. Carelli's motion. And here is Mr. Carelli's declaration. Happily for Mr. Carelli, the other case that he discusses in his declaration has been continued to November, so Mr. Carelli will have lots of time to work on opposing my opening brief.
Mr. Carelli is certified by the Legal Specialization Board of the California State Bar as a specialist in Appellate Law. I have no idea what measures the State Bar uses to determine who is a specialist in Appellate Law.
The Court of Appeal denied Mr. Carelli's motion, but gave him an extra 30-day extension in addition to its previous 46-day extension. We should be seeing a response from Stutz sometime in June.
Who's watching the "investigators"? Air Force's sexual assault prevention chief arrested for sexual assault
So, exactly how shocked are we? Not much. How often is the fox in charge of the hen house? More often than not, I suspect. In CVESD, Superintendent Libia Gil appointed Rick Werlin to investigate himself.
Lt. Col. Jeff Krusinski / Arlington County Police Dept
Air Force's sexual assault prevention chief arrested for sexual assault
By David Martin
CBS News
May 6, 2013
The mug shot of Lt. Col. Jeff Krusinski shows signs of struggle on his face. The police report alleges that a drunken Krusinski "approached a female victim in a parking lot and grabbed her breasts and buttocks." The victim fought the suspect off as he attempted to touch her again and alerted police.
News of the incident in the Virginia suburbs of Washington broke the day before the Pentagon is scheduled to release new figures showing a continuing rise in sexual assaults in the military: A six-percent increase from 3,192 to 3,374 reports of sexual assault in fiscal year 2012 compared to the previous year.
Estimates of the actual numbers of what is a notoriously underreported crime go much higher. According to the Pentagon figures, an estimated 26,000 servicewomen experienced unwanted sexual contact, up from 19,300 two year ago -- a number the pentagon says is "unacceptable."
Krusinski has been removed from his job, but that will not change the reality that the Pentagon's own figures show sexual assaults are on the rise in the military.
Lt. Col. Jeff Krusinski / Arlington County Police Dept
Air Force's sexual assault prevention chief arrested for sexual assault
By David Martin
CBS News
May 6, 2013
The mug shot of Lt. Col. Jeff Krusinski shows signs of struggle on his face. The police report alleges that a drunken Krusinski "approached a female victim in a parking lot and grabbed her breasts and buttocks." The victim fought the suspect off as he attempted to touch her again and alerted police.
News of the incident in the Virginia suburbs of Washington broke the day before the Pentagon is scheduled to release new figures showing a continuing rise in sexual assaults in the military: A six-percent increase from 3,192 to 3,374 reports of sexual assault in fiscal year 2012 compared to the previous year.
Estimates of the actual numbers of what is a notoriously underreported crime go much higher. According to the Pentagon figures, an estimated 26,000 servicewomen experienced unwanted sexual contact, up from 19,300 two year ago -- a number the pentagon says is "unacceptable."
Krusinski has been removed from his job, but that will not change the reality that the Pentagon's own figures show sexual assaults are on the rise in the military.
PIRG: States Lose $40 Billion a Year to Offshore Tax Havens
PIRG: States Lose $40 Billion a Year to Offshore Tax Havens
AFL-CIO
02/11/2013
A new report from the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) reveals that state governments lost $39.8 billion in revenues because corporations and wealthy individuals are using offshore tax havens to avoid paying their statutory tax rates. We've seen the devastating effects that offshoring jobs have had on America's workers, and offshoring has long been talked about in terms of lost federal revenue, where $150 billion a year goes unpaid, but little focus has been given to state losses from the practice. Federal and state tax laws allow companies to claim that at least some portion of their profits were earned in other countries, particularly those whose tax rates are low or nonexistent.
According to PIRG, such offshoring is both damaging to the states and unfair:
Tax haven abusers benefit from our markets, infrastructure, educated workforce and security, but they pay next to nothing for these benefits. Ultimately, taxpayers must pick up the tab, either in the form of higher taxes, cuts to public spending priorities or increased national debt.
While the federal government is gridlocked and has little chance for changing these tax laws right now, PIRG says it is much easier for the states to attempt to recapture this lost revenue and offers up several legislative options that could make state revenue collection more fair:
1. States can “decouple” their tax system from the federal tax system.
2. States can require worldwide combined reporting for multinational corporations.
3. States should urge their federal representatives to reject a “territorial” tax system, which would further erode state revenue.
4. States can require increased disclosure of financial information about corporations’ business presence in other countries and how they price their transfers with their own foreign subsidiaries; as well as to explain why large disparities exist between the profits corporations report to shareholders and tax authorities.
5. States could withhold taxes as part of federal FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliant Act) withholding.
AFL-CIO
02/11/2013
A new report from the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) reveals that state governments lost $39.8 billion in revenues because corporations and wealthy individuals are using offshore tax havens to avoid paying their statutory tax rates. We've seen the devastating effects that offshoring jobs have had on America's workers, and offshoring has long been talked about in terms of lost federal revenue, where $150 billion a year goes unpaid, but little focus has been given to state losses from the practice. Federal and state tax laws allow companies to claim that at least some portion of their profits were earned in other countries, particularly those whose tax rates are low or nonexistent.
According to PIRG, such offshoring is both damaging to the states and unfair:
Tax haven abusers benefit from our markets, infrastructure, educated workforce and security, but they pay next to nothing for these benefits. Ultimately, taxpayers must pick up the tab, either in the form of higher taxes, cuts to public spending priorities or increased national debt.
While the federal government is gridlocked and has little chance for changing these tax laws right now, PIRG says it is much easier for the states to attempt to recapture this lost revenue and offers up several legislative options that could make state revenue collection more fair:
1. States can “decouple” their tax system from the federal tax system.
2. States can require worldwide combined reporting for multinational corporations.
3. States should urge their federal representatives to reject a “territorial” tax system, which would further erode state revenue.
4. States can require increased disclosure of financial information about corporations’ business presence in other countries and how they price their transfers with their own foreign subsidiaries; as well as to explain why large disparities exist between the profits corporations report to shareholders and tax authorities.
5. States could withhold taxes as part of federal FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliant Act) withholding.
Slaying the Mythical Tax-Fattened Hog
"...[S]tate and local government employees earn less total compensation than their private sector counterparts with similar education, training, and work experience."
Slaying the Mythical Tax-Fattened Hog
August 12, 2010
by Stephanie Rozsa
Cities Speak.org
National League of Cities
Big headlines come across my desk each morning, but none more sensational than this one from Wednesday: “Bloated public sector needs a crash diet” (The Examiner). As I skimmed the article, I read: “While much of the private sector has laid off workers, frozen pay and cut capital investment, public sector employees have lived high on the tax-fattened hog.” This editorial is just one of many causing a stir about public compensation as the recession tightens its grip. The most infamous story came from Bell, California, where the city of 37,000 paid several top employees egregious salaries, including $800,000 to the chief administrative officer. While this kind of abuse is out of the ordinary, it does raise a fair question about public compensation.
In a series of articles, USA Today (most recently on August 10, 2010) similarly asserts that public sector employees are overcompensated compared with their private sector counterparts. Their analysis compares the salaries of similar occupations in each sector, accountants to accountants, for example. While this approach may seem logical, a new report, commissioned by the Center for State and Local Government Excellence (CSLGE) and the National Institute on Retirement Security, declares that the reality is that 80 percent of private positions do not have direct public sector equivalents.
For the 20 percent of occupations that allow comparison, then, USA Today relays only the raw salary differences that suggest higher earnings for state and local workers. This means that their analysis fails to factor in other qualifying factors of comparison between employees, like education level, years of experience, training, and skill sets. So while both USA Today and the new CSLGE report confirm that public employees do, in fact, earn more on average than private sector workers, the public sector workforce earns this higher average salary because the average employee is better educated and has more experience. Once these factors are included in compensation calculations, the latter explains that state and local government employees earn less total compensation than their private sector counterparts with similar education, training, and work experience.
In fact, the CSLGE report discovered that state and local sector employees are twice as likely as their private sector counterparts to have a college or advanced degree. The major driver in this pattern is that government workers have jobs that demand more education, like teachers, university professors, nurses, and social workers. In other words, state and local government employees earn less than they would if they took their skills to the private sector.
How much less?...With benefits factored in, state and local employees still earned an average of nearly 7 percent and 7.4 percent less, respectively...
Slaying the Mythical Tax-Fattened Hog
August 12, 2010
by Stephanie Rozsa
Cities Speak.org
National League of Cities
Big headlines come across my desk each morning, but none more sensational than this one from Wednesday: “Bloated public sector needs a crash diet” (The Examiner). As I skimmed the article, I read: “While much of the private sector has laid off workers, frozen pay and cut capital investment, public sector employees have lived high on the tax-fattened hog.” This editorial is just one of many causing a stir about public compensation as the recession tightens its grip. The most infamous story came from Bell, California, where the city of 37,000 paid several top employees egregious salaries, including $800,000 to the chief administrative officer. While this kind of abuse is out of the ordinary, it does raise a fair question about public compensation.
In a series of articles, USA Today (most recently on August 10, 2010) similarly asserts that public sector employees are overcompensated compared with their private sector counterparts. Their analysis compares the salaries of similar occupations in each sector, accountants to accountants, for example. While this approach may seem logical, a new report, commissioned by the Center for State and Local Government Excellence (CSLGE) and the National Institute on Retirement Security, declares that the reality is that 80 percent of private positions do not have direct public sector equivalents.
For the 20 percent of occupations that allow comparison, then, USA Today relays only the raw salary differences that suggest higher earnings for state and local workers. This means that their analysis fails to factor in other qualifying factors of comparison between employees, like education level, years of experience, training, and skill sets. So while both USA Today and the new CSLGE report confirm that public employees do, in fact, earn more on average than private sector workers, the public sector workforce earns this higher average salary because the average employee is better educated and has more experience. Once these factors are included in compensation calculations, the latter explains that state and local government employees earn less total compensation than their private sector counterparts with similar education, training, and work experience.
In fact, the CSLGE report discovered that state and local sector employees are twice as likely as their private sector counterparts to have a college or advanced degree. The major driver in this pattern is that government workers have jobs that demand more education, like teachers, university professors, nurses, and social workers. In other words, state and local government employees earn less than they would if they took their skills to the private sector.
How much less?...With benefits factored in, state and local employees still earned an average of nearly 7 percent and 7.4 percent less, respectively...
Saturday, May 11, 2013
Lynne Varner says Seattle teacher protests against testing are focused on the wrong problem
You would think that smarter kids would do better in school, right?
Wrong--and least not for poor black kids.
The fact is that any child of average intelligence can succeed in school--as long as he/she has a rich environment of verbal interactions, a wide variety of experiences, a safe home, preparation for kindergarten and full support for emotional, physical and educational success. Of course, all these things also contribute to a higher IQ.
If your parent or parents are away working at two jobs, or, in a worst-case scenario, abusing drugs and hanging out with gangs, you aren't likely to develop anything approaching your full potential.
A brilliant child with a bad home situation and intellectually impoverished environment will not do anywhere near as well in school as a child with a plodding, low-average intellect who is raised to be a success.
This is true of all races, but the statistics show that a much higher percentage of white and Asian kids are groomed for success. The situation among poor blacks is so bad that the benefits of high intelligence are completely wiped out, statistically speaking. A lot of good brains are being wasted.
The high cost of wasted educational opportunity — now that’s worth a teacher protest
Boycotting a Seattle Schools standardized test is small potatoes. But don’t worry. There’s plenty in education to get riled up over.
By Lynne K. Varner
Seattle Times
February 7, 2013
I remain unconvinced the Garfield High School teachers’ boycott of the Measures of Academic Progress test is anything more than adult hubris.
For one, nearly all Seattle Public Schools have begun administering the required test, despite differing views about its value. For another, the test is unlikely to survive as a ninth-grade requirement. The case to keep it is stronger for middle and elementary grades, but even there pilots of new tests by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium may yield better options.
The push for more sophisticated tests has good intent. But the boycott and its attendant protest rallies — designed to pressure Superintendent José Banda into making a decision a mere three months before he plans to anyway — is overkill.
I’ll give boycotters something to protest.
Let’s start with dismal news that African-American, Latino and Native American elementary students still lag white students in core subjects, such as math and reading. We know this from results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress test given to fourth- and eighth-graders across the nation.
Sure, Washington state as a whole posts test scores above the national average on the NAEP, but that’s far from the case for brown children and those from low-income families. Here’s a chant: “Education, not academic stagnation!”
I’m a parent and I’ve also written about education long enough to become as frustrated as the Garfield teachers and parents. I’m frustrated that despite the $13 billion spent every two years on the K-12 system, students still graduate from high school who don’t read well or understand basic math.
Who’s going to take to the streets about that?
Seattle is a city that prides itself on progressive values but I see a regressive bent in some corners, particularly the obsession over education reforms.
I remember the outrage in 2011 when a Seattle high-school principal was fired from a school that had only 5 percent of African-American students, 16 percent of Latino students and 3 percent of bilingual students passing the district’s standardized math test.
The principal was reinstated and the furor died down. But I’ve wondered what happened to the students with the abysmal scores. Our attention waned because the school’s overall test scores are quite good.
How are those students surviving without basic math skills? Is their future what we would want for our own children?
Schools, teachers and parents are working harder than ever. I see it when I’m out reporting but I also see the efforts reflected in data. Between 2000 and 2010, the percentage of college degrees going to blacks, Hispanics and Asian/Pacific Islanders went up. That’s progress.
But I worry about high-school students and young adults because they are most likely to get caught on the wrong side of the growing mismatch between skills required for available jobs and the skills they actually have.
If the skills gap is not addressed, attention toward picket lines will soon be directed toward growing unemployment lines.
Critics of the MAP and other standardized tests point out their cost. They aren’t cheap. But neither is a poor education.
My next point puts this into context: Eliminating the achievement gap would have boosted by $240 million the earnings of currently working African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans, according to the Washington state Policy and Budget Center.
Protesting standardized tests is not so much wrong as it is misdirected.
The high cost of wasted educational opportunity is the bigger problem and far worthier of a rally or two.
Wrong--and least not for poor black kids.
The fact is that any child of average intelligence can succeed in school--as long as he/she has a rich environment of verbal interactions, a wide variety of experiences, a safe home, preparation for kindergarten and full support for emotional, physical and educational success. Of course, all these things also contribute to a higher IQ.
If your parent or parents are away working at two jobs, or, in a worst-case scenario, abusing drugs and hanging out with gangs, you aren't likely to develop anything approaching your full potential.
A brilliant child with a bad home situation and intellectually impoverished environment will not do anywhere near as well in school as a child with a plodding, low-average intellect who is raised to be a success.
This is true of all races, but the statistics show that a much higher percentage of white and Asian kids are groomed for success. The situation among poor blacks is so bad that the benefits of high intelligence are completely wiped out, statistically speaking. A lot of good brains are being wasted.
The high cost of wasted educational opportunity — now that’s worth a teacher protestBoycotting a Seattle Schools standardized test is small potatoes. But don’t worry. There’s plenty in education to get riled up over.
By Lynne K. Varner
Seattle Times
February 7, 2013
I remain unconvinced the Garfield High School teachers’ boycott of the Measures of Academic Progress test is anything more than adult hubris.
For one, nearly all Seattle Public Schools have begun administering the required test, despite differing views about its value. For another, the test is unlikely to survive as a ninth-grade requirement. The case to keep it is stronger for middle and elementary grades, but even there pilots of new tests by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium may yield better options.
The push for more sophisticated tests has good intent. But the boycott and its attendant protest rallies — designed to pressure Superintendent José Banda into making a decision a mere three months before he plans to anyway — is overkill.
I’ll give boycotters something to protest.
Let’s start with dismal news that African-American, Latino and Native American elementary students still lag white students in core subjects, such as math and reading. We know this from results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress test given to fourth- and eighth-graders across the nation.
Sure, Washington state as a whole posts test scores above the national average on the NAEP, but that’s far from the case for brown children and those from low-income families. Here’s a chant: “Education, not academic stagnation!”
I’m a parent and I’ve also written about education long enough to become as frustrated as the Garfield teachers and parents. I’m frustrated that despite the $13 billion spent every two years on the K-12 system, students still graduate from high school who don’t read well or understand basic math.
Who’s going to take to the streets about that?
Seattle is a city that prides itself on progressive values but I see a regressive bent in some corners, particularly the obsession over education reforms.
I remember the outrage in 2011 when a Seattle high-school principal was fired from a school that had only 5 percent of African-American students, 16 percent of Latino students and 3 percent of bilingual students passing the district’s standardized math test.
The principal was reinstated and the furor died down. But I’ve wondered what happened to the students with the abysmal scores. Our attention waned because the school’s overall test scores are quite good.
How are those students surviving without basic math skills? Is their future what we would want for our own children?
Schools, teachers and parents are working harder than ever. I see it when I’m out reporting but I also see the efforts reflected in data. Between 2000 and 2010, the percentage of college degrees going to blacks, Hispanics and Asian/Pacific Islanders went up. That’s progress.
But I worry about high-school students and young adults because they are most likely to get caught on the wrong side of the growing mismatch between skills required for available jobs and the skills they actually have.
If the skills gap is not addressed, attention toward picket lines will soon be directed toward growing unemployment lines.
Critics of the MAP and other standardized tests point out their cost. They aren’t cheap. But neither is a poor education.
My next point puts this into context: Eliminating the achievement gap would have boosted by $240 million the earnings of currently working African Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans, according to the Washington state Policy and Budget Center.
Protesting standardized tests is not so much wrong as it is misdirected.
The high cost of wasted educational opportunity is the bigger problem and far worthier of a rally or two.
Thursday, May 09, 2013
Goal of common core math standards: teach less, but teach it in greater depth
American students tend to graduate from high school with less understanding of math than other students, even though they may have covered a huge curriculum. So much information is crammed into their heads so quickly that they can't develop a deep understanding of math.
The common core math standards discussed in this video make a lot of sense. The message of the developers is "Teach less, learn more." Currently far too many teachers think that "higher standards" means getting as far as possible through the curriculum. Experts note that this approach leaves kids with less understanding than if the teachers had gone into greater depth regarding fewer concepts.
Neal McCluskey argues at the end of the video that there should be more leeway in standards so teachers can tailor their approaches to suit individual students. But taking individual students into account is simply common sense, and teachers shouldn't need to be told to do this. They should be able to teach a concept to faster and slower students at the same time. It's good for advanced students to deepen their understanding of basic concepts at the same time that their fellow students might be grasping the concept for the first time. Teachers can do this by simply asking the faster students more difficult questions on the same topic.
Click below to see video:
Neal McCluskey discusses common standards on The Teaching Channel--Video
August 29, 2012
The common core math standards discussed in this video make a lot of sense. The message of the developers is "Teach less, learn more." Currently far too many teachers think that "higher standards" means getting as far as possible through the curriculum. Experts note that this approach leaves kids with less understanding than if the teachers had gone into greater depth regarding fewer concepts.
Neal McCluskey argues at the end of the video that there should be more leeway in standards so teachers can tailor their approaches to suit individual students. But taking individual students into account is simply common sense, and teachers shouldn't need to be told to do this. They should be able to teach a concept to faster and slower students at the same time. It's good for advanced students to deepen their understanding of basic concepts at the same time that their fellow students might be grasping the concept for the first time. Teachers can do this by simply asking the faster students more difficult questions on the same topic.
Click below to see video:
Neal McCluskey discusses common standards on The Teaching Channel--Video
August 29, 2012
Monday, May 06, 2013
The Manuel Paul transcript that Dan Shinoff and Art Palkowitz didn't want voters and taxpayers to see
Click HERE to see Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz request for protective order and transcript of Manuel Paul deposition. The last 23 pages of the PDF file contain the rough draft transcript of the deposition, in which Mr. Paul was represented by Gil Abed.
Judge Denton ruled against Mr. Shinoff.
Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz has claimed in court that this blogger defamed it by writing that Dan Shinoff conceals events in schools. So what would be the purpose of the requested order other than to conceal the actions of school officials? Why keep depositions of school officials and employees secret from the voters and taxpayers?
Judge Denton ruled against Mr. Shinoff.
Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz has claimed in court that this blogger defamed it by writing that Dan Shinoff conceals events in schools. So what would be the purpose of the requested order other than to conceal the actions of school officials? Why keep depositions of school officials and employees secret from the voters and taxpayers?
Monday, April 29, 2013
UCLA chemistry professor ordered to stand trial in fatal lab fire
Sheri SangjiIt isn't just the Medical Center at UCLA that hires lawyers to help it avoid responsibility for unnecessary deaths. The Chemistry Department does it, too.
UCLA chemistry professor ordered to stand trial in fatal lab fire
By Kim Christensen
LA Times
April 26, 2013
UCLA chemistry professor Patrick Harran has been ordered Friday to stand trial on felony charges stemming from a laboratory fire that killed staff research assistant Sheharbano “Sheri” Sangji more than four years ago.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Lisa Lench denied a defense motion to dismiss the case, which is believed to be the first such prosecution involving a U.S. academic lab accident.
Harran is charged with willfully violating state occupational health and safety codes and faces up to 4 1/2 years in prison if convicted.
DOCUMENTS: Report finds fault in death of lab assistant
"We fully expect to vindicate Professor Harran,” his attorney, Thomas O’Brien, said after the hearing. “This was an accident, a tragic accident. We have always maintained that, as the University of California has, and we expect him to be vindicated.”
Sangji, 23, was not wearing a protective lab coat Dec. 29, 2008, when a plastic syringe she was using to transfer t-butyl lithium from one sealed container to another came apart, spewing a chemical compound that ignites when exposed to air. She suffered extensive burns and died 18 days later.
Harran, 43, is accused of failing to correct unsafe work conditions in a timely manner, to require clothing appropriate for the work being done and to provide proper chemical safety training.
From the outset, he and UCLA have cast Sangji’s death as an accident and said she was an experienced chemist who was trained in the experiment and chose not to wear a protective lab coat.
Harran’s lawyers sought to bolster those contentions during a preliminary hearing that spanned several days late last year and in a written motion to dismiss the felony charges or have them reduced to misdemeanors.
Among other things, they argued that Harran believed that Sangji, who had graduated just five months earlier from Pomona College in Claremont with a bachelor’s degree in chemistry, was adequately trained by a previous employer and by a senior researcher in Harran’s lab.
Prosecutors countered that there is no evidence that Harran or anyone else trained Sangji in the handling of the chemicals that set her clothing ablaze, causing severe burns over nearly half her body.
“The bottom line with regard to the lack of training provided by defendant Harran is that, if victim Sangji had been properly trained ... victim Sangji would be alive today,” they wrote in court papers.
Deadly UCLA lab fire leaves haunting questions
Problems at UCLA went unfixed for two months before a young researcher was burned in a chemical accident.
By Kim Christensen
LA Times
March 1, 2009
UCLA's Molecular Sciences Building was mostly closed for the holidays on Dec. 29 as research assistant Sheri Sangji worked on an organic chemistry experiment.
Only three months into her job in the lab, the 23-year-old Pomona College graduate was using a plastic syringe to extract from a sealed container a small quantity of t-butyl lithium -- a chemical compound that ignites instantly when exposed to air.
As she withdrew the liquid, the syringe came apart in her hands, spewing flaming chemicals, according to a UCLA accident report. A flash fire set her clothing ablaze and spread second- and third-degree burns over 43% of her body.
Eighteen excruciating days later, Sangji died in a hospital burn unit.
"It is horrifying," said her sister Naveen, 26, a Harvard medical student. "Sheri wasn't out doing something stupid. She was working in a lab at one of the largest universities in the world. She gets these horrific injuries and loses her life to these injuries and we still don't know how it happened or why it wasn't prevented."
Sangji's death was more than a tragic workplace accident. It also raised serious questions about the university's attention to laboratory safety.
"It was totally preventable," said Neal Langerman, a San Diego consultant and former head of the American Chemical Society's Division of Chemical Health and Safety, whose members were given a detailed account of the incident by a University of California safety official.
"Poor training, poor technique, lack of supervision and improper method. This was just not the right way to transfer these things," Langerman said. "She died, didn't she? It speaks for itself."
Two months earlier, UCLA safety inspectors found more than a dozen deficiencies in the same lab, Molecular Sciences Room 4221, according to internal investigative and inspection reports reviewed by The Times. Among the findings: Employees were not wearing requisite protective lab coats, and flammable liquids and volatile chemicals were stored improperly.
Chemical Safety Officer Michael Wheatley sent the inspection report to the researcher who oversees the lab, professor Patrick Harran, as well as to the head of the Chemistry and Biochemistry Department and a top UCLA safety official. The report directed that problems be fixed by Dec. 5.
But the required corrective action was not taken, records show, and on Dec. 29 all that stood between Sangji's torso and the fire that engulfed her was a highly flammable, synthetic sweater that fueled the flames.
Under scrutiny
The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health is investigating, as are the Office of the State Fire Marshal, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board. A spokeswoman for Cal/OSHA, the lead agency, said she could not comment on the investigation...
Patrick HarranFacing felony charges in lab death of Sheri Sangji, UCLA settles, Harran stretches credulity
By Janet D. Stemwedel
Scientific American
July 31, 2012
There have been recent developments in the criminal case against UCLA and chemistry professor Patrick Harran in connection with the fatal laboratory accident that resulted in the death of Sheri Sangji (which we’ve discussed here and here). The positive development is that UCLA has reached a plea agreement with prosecutors. (CORRECTION: UCLA has reached a settlement agreement with the prosecutors, not a plea agreement. Sorry for the confusion.) However, Patrick Harran’s legal strategy has taken a turn that strikes me as ill-advised.
From the Los Angeles Times:
Half of the felony charges stemming from a 2008 lab accident that killed UCLA research assistant Sheri Sangji were dropped Friday when the University of California regents agreed to follow comprehensive safety measures and endow a $500,000 scholarship in her name.
“The regents acknowledge and accept responsibility for the conditions under which the laboratory operated on Dec. 29, 2008,” the agreement read in part, referring to the date that Sangji, 23, suffered fatal burns.
Charges remain against her supervisor, chemistry professor Patrick Harran. His arraignment was postponed to Sept. 5 to allow the judge to consider defense motions, including one challenging the credibility of the state’s chief investigator on the case. …
UCLA and Harran have called her death a tragic accident and said she was a seasoned chemist who chose not to wear a protective lab coat. …
In court papers this week, Harran’s lawyers said prosecutors had matched the fingerprints of Brian Baudendistel, a senior special investigator who handled the case for the state Division of Occupational Safety and Health, with the prints of a teenager who pleaded no contest to murder in Northern California in 1985.
The defense contends that the investigator, whose report formed the basis for the charges, is the same Brian A. Baudendistel who took part in a plot to rob a drug dealer of $3,000 worth of methamphetamine, then shot him. Another teenager admitted to pulling the trigger but said it was Baudendistel’s shotgun.
Baudendistel told The Times this week that it is a case of mistaken identity and that he is not the individual involved in the 1985 case.
Cal/OSHA defended the integrity of the investigation in a statement issued Friday by spokesman Dean Fryer.
“The defendants’ most recent attempt to deflect attention from the charges brought against them simply does not relate in any way to the circumstances of Ms. Sangji’s death or the actual evidence collected in Cal/OSHA’s comprehensive investigation,” it read.
Deborah Blum adds:
Should chemist-in-training approach hazardous chemicals with extreme caution? Yes. Should she expect her employer to provide her with the necessary information and equipment to engage in such caution? Most of us would argue yes. Should chemistry professors be held to the standard of employee safety as, say, chemical manufacturers or other industries? The most important “yes” to that question comes from Cal/OSHA senior investigator Brian Baudendistal.
Baudendistal concluded that the laboratory operation was careless enough for long enough to justify felony charges of willful negligence. The Sangji family, angered by those suggestions that Sheri’s experience should have taught her better, pushed for prosecution. Late last year the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office officially brought charges against Harran, UCLA, and the University of California system itself. …
[Harran's] lawyers have responded to the Baudendistal report in part by focusing on Baudendistal himself. They claim to have found evidence that in 1985 he and two friends conspired to set up the murder of a drug dealer. All three boys were convicted and although, since they were juveniles, the records were sealed, attorneys were able to identify the killers through press coverage at the time. Although Baudendistal has insisted that Harran’s defense team tracked down the wrong man, they say they have a fingerprint match to prove it. They say further that a man who covers up his past history is not credible – and therefore neither is is report on the UCLA laboratory.
I am not a lawyer, so I’m not terribly interested in speculating on the arcane legal considerations that might be driving this move by Harran’s legal team. (Chemjobber speculates that it might be a long shot they’re playing amid plea negotiations that are not going well.)
As someone with a professional interest in crime and punishment within scientific communities, and in ethics more broadly, I do, however, think it’s worth examining the logic of Patrick Harran’s legal strategy.
The strategy, as I understand it, is to cast aspersions on the Cal/OSHA report on the basis of the legal history of the senior investigator that prepared it — specifically, his alleged involvement as a teenager in 1985 in a murder plot.
Does a past bad act like this serve as prima facie reason to doubt the accuracy of the report of the investigation of conditions in Harran’s lab? It’s not clear how it could, especially if there were other investigators on the team, not alleged to be involved in such criminal behavior, who endorsed the claims in the report.v Unless, of course, the reason Harran’s legal team thinks we should doubt the accuracy of the report is that the senior investigator who prepared it is a habitual liar. To support the claim that he cannot be trusted, they point to a single alleged lie — denying involvement in the 1985 murder plot.
But this strikes me as a particularly dangerous strategy for Patrick Harran to pursue.
Essentially, the strategy rests on the claim that if a person has lied about some particular issue, we should assume that any claim that person makes, about whatever issue, might also be a lie. I’m not unsympathetic to this claim — trust is something that is earned, not simply assumed in the absence of clear evidence of dishonesty.
However, this same reasoning cannot help Patrick Harran’s credibility, given that he is on record describing Sheri Sangji, a 23-year-old with a bachelor’s degree, as an experienced chemist. Many have noted already that claiming Sheri Sangji was a experienced chemist is ridiculous on its face.
Thus, it’s not unreasonable to conclude that Patrick Harran lied when he described Sheri Sangji as an experienced chemist. And, if this is the case, following the reasoning advocated by his legal team, we must doubt the credibility of every other claim he has made — including claims about the safety training he did or did not provide to people in his lab, conditions in his lab in 2008 when the fatal accident happened, even whether he recommended that Sangji wear a lab coat.
If Patrick Harran was not lying when he said he believed Sheri Sangji was an experienced chemist, the other possibility is that he is incredibly stupid — certainly too stupid to be in charge of a lab where people work with potentially hazardous chemicals.Some might posit that Harran’s claims about Sangji’s chemical experience were made on the advice of his legal team. That may well be, but I’m unclear on how lying on the advice of counsel is any less a lie. (If it is, this might well mitigate the “lie of omission” of an investigator advised by his lawyers that his juvenile record is sealed.) And if one lie is all it takes to decimate credibility, Harran is surely as vulnerable as Baudendistel.
Finally, a piece of free advice to PIs worrying that they may find themselves facing criminal charges should their students, postdocs, or technicians choose not to wear lab coats or other safety gear: It is perfectly reasonable to establish, and enforce, a lab policy that states that those choosing to opt out of the required safety equipment are also opting out of access to the laboratory.
Saturday, April 27, 2013
Friday, April 26, 2013
Daniel Shinoff's client, school Superintendent Manuel Paul, pleads the fifth in civil suit against San Ysidro School District
Manuel Paul will not be allowed to testify at the trial because he refused to be deposed before the trial. The legal theory behind this is that neither side is supposed to surprise the other side with new claims at the trial when opponents have not had the chance to investigate those claims. Mr. Paul is no longer a party to the suit.
See the last 23 pages of this PDF for the transcript of Mr. Paul's deposition.
Former San Ysidro schools chief Manuel Paul won’t speak
Pleads Fifth, avoids self-incrimination
By Susan Luzzaro
San Diego Reader
April 24, 2013
In an April 17, 2013, deposition, former San Ysidro School District superintendent Manuel Paul pleaded the Fifth 43 times in less than an hour in a breach-of-contract lawsuit filed against the district by EcoBusiness Alliance/Manzana Energy. The district has asserted in court documents that Paul is a key witness. If Paul cannot participate in the discovery process, what can this mean for the district’s case?
The lawsuit stemmed from a 2008 contract between Ecobusiness Alliance/Manzana Energy and the San Ysidro School District, which agreed to allow the company to build solar panels on school sites and sell the electricity generated by the panels back to the district over a 25-year period for a fee of $18.9 million.
No solar panels were built by the time the district terminated the contract in October 2011, and the district had not expended any money on the venture.
Art Castañares, a partner in the solar-panel company, said in a recent interview that, 15 days into a 30-day termination notice, his company’s contract was terminated. According to him, the contract called for “good faith negotiations and binding arbitration."
Castañares has asserted in court documents that the husband of a San Ysidro trustee asked him to buy a house for him and his trustee wife — between the time the energy contract was in place and the time it was canceled. Castañares refused to, and asserts, “We didn’t play the pay-to-play game and we believe that’s why the district canceled our contract.”
Prior to the April 17 deposition, attorneys from the law firm of Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, the corporation that represents San Ysidro, sought a protective order, among other things, to limit the line of questioning from the plaintiff’s (Ecobusiness) attorney.
At the time the request was filed, Paul faced indictment for alleged “pay-to-play” corruption in the South Bay. (Paul was subsequently indicted on April 12 along with 14 other representatives from three South County school districts. The defendants pleaded innocent to the charges.)
San Ysidro’s request for a protective order argued that “If [Paul] asserts the Fifth Amendment to questions due to the pending criminal matter, the District will not be able to introduce evidence with the Superintendent’s knowledge, thus impeding the District’s ability to defend against the Plaintiff’s allegations.”
In August of last year Wendy Fry, a journalist for NBC7, reported that former superintendent Paul, during a previous deposition in the solar-energy case, admitted to receiving $2500 in the parking lot of a Chula Vista steak house.
According to Fry’s report, Paul stated that Loreto Romero, a local contractor allegedly hoping for work in the San Ysidro district, gave him the cash as a campaign contribution for San Ysidro board member Yolanda Hernandez. (Hernandez was indicted in the alleged corruption cases as well.)
The allegations of corruption in the South Bay school districts and the San Ysidro energy-contract case have common players: Romero is the brother of Hector Romero. They own HAR construction company, which had contracted with the Sweetwater Union High School District and had allegedly hoped to work in San Ysidro.
According to 2011 district attorney documents, along with wining and dining some Sweetwater trustees and former superintendent Jesus Gandara, Hector Romero reported being with Gandara in Mexico when Gandara contacted Seville Group, Inc., and solicited a $20,000 contribution to Sweetwater Union High School trustee Jim Cartmill’s campaign.
Dan Shinoff, attorney for the San Ysidro district, was contacted by email on April 23. There was no response.
See the last 23 pages of this PDF for the transcript of Mr. Paul's deposition.
Former San Ysidro schools chief Manuel Paul won’t speak
Pleads Fifth, avoids self-incrimination
By Susan Luzzaro
San Diego Reader
April 24, 2013
In an April 17, 2013, deposition, former San Ysidro School District superintendent Manuel Paul pleaded the Fifth 43 times in less than an hour in a breach-of-contract lawsuit filed against the district by EcoBusiness Alliance/Manzana Energy. The district has asserted in court documents that Paul is a key witness. If Paul cannot participate in the discovery process, what can this mean for the district’s case?
The lawsuit stemmed from a 2008 contract between Ecobusiness Alliance/Manzana Energy and the San Ysidro School District, which agreed to allow the company to build solar panels on school sites and sell the electricity generated by the panels back to the district over a 25-year period for a fee of $18.9 million.
No solar panels were built by the time the district terminated the contract in October 2011, and the district had not expended any money on the venture.
Art Castañares, a partner in the solar-panel company, said in a recent interview that, 15 days into a 30-day termination notice, his company’s contract was terminated. According to him, the contract called for “good faith negotiations and binding arbitration."
Castañares has asserted in court documents that the husband of a San Ysidro trustee asked him to buy a house for him and his trustee wife — between the time the energy contract was in place and the time it was canceled. Castañares refused to, and asserts, “We didn’t play the pay-to-play game and we believe that’s why the district canceled our contract.”
Prior to the April 17 deposition, attorneys from the law firm of Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz, the corporation that represents San Ysidro, sought a protective order, among other things, to limit the line of questioning from the plaintiff’s (Ecobusiness) attorney.
At the time the request was filed, Paul faced indictment for alleged “pay-to-play” corruption in the South Bay. (Paul was subsequently indicted on April 12 along with 14 other representatives from three South County school districts. The defendants pleaded innocent to the charges.)
San Ysidro’s request for a protective order argued that “If [Paul] asserts the Fifth Amendment to questions due to the pending criminal matter, the District will not be able to introduce evidence with the Superintendent’s knowledge, thus impeding the District’s ability to defend against the Plaintiff’s allegations.”
In August of last year Wendy Fry, a journalist for NBC7, reported that former superintendent Paul, during a previous deposition in the solar-energy case, admitted to receiving $2500 in the parking lot of a Chula Vista steak house.
According to Fry’s report, Paul stated that Loreto Romero, a local contractor allegedly hoping for work in the San Ysidro district, gave him the cash as a campaign contribution for San Ysidro board member Yolanda Hernandez. (Hernandez was indicted in the alleged corruption cases as well.)
The allegations of corruption in the South Bay school districts and the San Ysidro energy-contract case have common players: Romero is the brother of Hector Romero. They own HAR construction company, which had contracted with the Sweetwater Union High School District and had allegedly hoped to work in San Ysidro.
According to 2011 district attorney documents, along with wining and dining some Sweetwater trustees and former superintendent Jesus Gandara, Hector Romero reported being with Gandara in Mexico when Gandara contacted Seville Group, Inc., and solicited a $20,000 contribution to Sweetwater Union High School trustee Jim Cartmill’s campaign.
Dan Shinoff, attorney for the San Ysidro district, was contacted by email on April 23. There was no response.
Stutz Artiano Shinoff & Holtz doesn't think public should be allowed to see school superintendent pleading the fifth
See Stutz law firm's request for protective order and the deposition transcript at issue. The transcript is included as an exhibit at the end of the PDF.
Judge Denies Request to Seal San Ysidro Docs
WENDY FRY
NBC San Diego
04/26/2013
A San Diego Superior Court judge shot down a motion filed on behalf of the San Ysidro school district requesting a protective order on materials and documents from a deposition in an $18 million lawsuit.
Judge Steven Denton ruled Thursday morning that the district was seeking to seal documents related to discovery materials that are not currently records of the court.
"Sealing only pertains to records of the court," Denton explained to the district's legal counsel Arthur Palkowitz. "I am not authorized to issue an order preventing counsel from discussing the case with anyone they want."
In a motion filed yesterday, Palkowitz asked the court to seal a transcript and a video from a deposition taken April 17. The video features former San Ysidro Superintendent Manuel Paul invoking his constitutional right against self-incrimination (or "pleading the fifth") and declining to answer any questions.
In the approximately 26 minute video, the former superintendent, who is facing criminal charges, answered the same way 41 times:
"On the advice of my attorney, I assert my Fifth Amendment privilege and respectfully decline to answer.
Palkowitz mentioned in the courtroom Thursday a concern about Paul's constitutional rights, but didn't specify which rights were being impacted by a public review of the documents.
Judge Denton raised questions about why the district's taxpayer-funded attorney was in court arguing on behalf of the constitutional rights of a former party to the lawsuit and a former superintendent of the district.
"Right now, his status in this case is as a dismissed party and he's being represented by the same counsel as is representing the district," the judge said.
In court papers, Palkowitz wrote that the deposition material "contains sensitive information that should not be openly disseminated to the public by plaintiff's to gain an advantage in litigation."
The lawsuit stems from the district's cancellation of a services contract with Eco Business Alliance to install solar power systems at district campuses. Because no solar panels were ever installed, no district funds were ever spent on the endeavor.
In a prior deposition, Paul said under oath that he accepted $2,500 in cash from a different, unrelated contractor in the parking lot of a Chula Vista steak house. He said the money was for campaign signs for a San Ysidro board member.
That admission has become the subject of a federal investigation. Paul was also among 15 South County school officials and contractors who have pleaded "not guilty" on corruption charges. He is facing charges of perjury and accepting gifts over the legal limit...
Judge Denies Request to Seal San Ysidro Docs
WENDY FRY
NBC San Diego
04/26/2013
A San Diego Superior Court judge shot down a motion filed on behalf of the San Ysidro school district requesting a protective order on materials and documents from a deposition in an $18 million lawsuit.
Judge Steven Denton ruled Thursday morning that the district was seeking to seal documents related to discovery materials that are not currently records of the court.
"Sealing only pertains to records of the court," Denton explained to the district's legal counsel Arthur Palkowitz. "I am not authorized to issue an order preventing counsel from discussing the case with anyone they want."
In a motion filed yesterday, Palkowitz asked the court to seal a transcript and a video from a deposition taken April 17. The video features former San Ysidro Superintendent Manuel Paul invoking his constitutional right against self-incrimination (or "pleading the fifth") and declining to answer any questions.
In the approximately 26 minute video, the former superintendent, who is facing criminal charges, answered the same way 41 times:
"On the advice of my attorney, I assert my Fifth Amendment privilege and respectfully decline to answer.
Palkowitz mentioned in the courtroom Thursday a concern about Paul's constitutional rights, but didn't specify which rights were being impacted by a public review of the documents.
Judge Denton raised questions about why the district's taxpayer-funded attorney was in court arguing on behalf of the constitutional rights of a former party to the lawsuit and a former superintendent of the district.
"Right now, his status in this case is as a dismissed party and he's being represented by the same counsel as is representing the district," the judge said.
In court papers, Palkowitz wrote that the deposition material "contains sensitive information that should not be openly disseminated to the public by plaintiff's to gain an advantage in litigation."
The lawsuit stems from the district's cancellation of a services contract with Eco Business Alliance to install solar power systems at district campuses. Because no solar panels were ever installed, no district funds were ever spent on the endeavor.
In a prior deposition, Paul said under oath that he accepted $2,500 in cash from a different, unrelated contractor in the parking lot of a Chula Vista steak house. He said the money was for campaign signs for a San Ysidro board member.
That admission has become the subject of a federal investigation. Paul was also among 15 South County school officials and contractors who have pleaded "not guilty" on corruption charges. He is facing charges of perjury and accepting gifts over the legal limit...
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Perspective on the 12 Indicators: 'Quality Teaching'
Perspective on the 12 Indicators: 'Quality Teaching'
Voice of San Diego
Apr 23, 2013
By OSCAR RAMOS
I’m working my way through San Diego Unified’s leaked draft of their 12 indicators for quality schools. Since this document apparently hadn’t been shared out with other stakeholders (the union, parent groups, the general community, etc.), I imagine it’s going to go through a lot of changes.
But that doesn’t stop us from basing our discussion on the assumptions this document makes, so I’ll go ahead and dive in. For now I'm only going to focus on the first indicator of school quality (Quality Teaching). I'll delve into the rest of the document in the future.
I was surprised that Objective 1.1 (Engaging and supporting all students in learning) was such a large proportion of the rating system (40 percent), given that student achievement represents a comparatively much smaller percentage (it’s there, though, as I’ll get to later).
One problem with giving so much importance to Objective 1.1 is that the evidence it describes needs to happen every day in the classroom, but the principal usually only observes teachers a couple of times a year (sometimes only once). For the ratings in this category to be mean anything, the principal would need to observe teachers constantly. One way to improve this measurement would be to expand the responsible party to include a student feedback component, or even a parent/community feedback component.
Now, I don’t like the idea of people randomly walking into my classroom unannounced, looking specifically to find faults in my instruction. I can imagine such a situation bordering on teacher harassment in a worst-case scenario. But it is possible to create a healthy school culture in which teachers are comfortable with people visiting their classes. The Preuss School, where I teach, has many visitors who want to learn about our instructional practices, and many of our teachers are accustomed to a steady stream of visitors. Nurturing a culture of constructive, open observations requires a lot of cooperation and trust between principals and teachers.
Another important prerequisite for frequent observations is principals who are well-versed in instructional practices and who are their schools’ education leaders. This may sound obvious, but I’m concerned that many in the current wave of self-designated education reformers from the business sector don’t value school leadership that is capable of engaging on the instructional level with teachers. They seem to favor data managers as school leaders.
Peter Orszag (President Obama’s former director of the Office of Management and Budget, and current vice chairman of corporate and investment banking at Citigroup) has written about this concern.
[The Gates Foundation researchers] found that teacher analysis could be done without having observers make random visits to the classroom; allowing a teacher to submit a self-selected set of videos from the classroom worked just as well, because even the best classes conducted by bad teachers were worse than those from better teachers. I’m not anti-data. Data is an important tool for guiding teacher instruction, and for assessing whether teachers are responding to their students’ strengths and weaknesses. I don’t think it should be used primarily as a punitive tool, especially given that students don’t have a stake in these assessments. As a reader for the AP European History exam last year, I had the pleasure of reading all kinds of nonsensical letters written by students who sat for the exam but didn’t attempt to answer the essay question I was grading — a few actually wrote that they were too tired to write the essay. Granted, it’s a long exam, but I wouldn’t want their teacher’s livelihood to depend on whether a student had enough energy to complete an exam that has little to no bearing on his/her future (some colleges won’t even give credit for high AP scores).
I would use test scores (in the case above, AP scores) to assess whether a teacher is updating his or her lesson plans to address student deficiencies, as measured by a variety of data. I think this is a critical component of teacher quality assessment, but it is currently under-weighted in this draft of Quality Teaching.
The way I’m reading the document, there is a section dedicated to student achievement: Indicator 1.5.2, which is under Objective 1.5: Assessing Student Learning (10 percent). Being able to adapt lesson plans to target individual and group weaknesses is the mark of a good teacher. Even a great teacher can have a group of students that doesn't respond to his or her lessons because of a glaring underlying weakness, be it academic or personal. That teacher is going to have to develop new approaches in order for students to succeed. That’s going to require collaboration with colleagues, research on content and teaching techniques and developing new lesson plans.
I had such an experience at one point in my career, a few years back. I had just finished a successful school year with a group of students that had responded well to the academic supports I had implemented that year, so I was pretty happy. It became immediately clear the next year, however, that my lesson plans weren’t working on my new students. They were dealing with motivational issues — something my lesson plans didn’t account for. I worked with my colleagues to address my class's needs throughout the year, and I feel better-equipped to address those sorts of issues in the future. But I may get a group of kids with issues I’ve never dealt with before, and I’ll need to work quickly in order to address their needs.
It’s like a batter who hits home runs every time the pitcher throws a fastball. That’s great, as long as he keeps getting fastballs. But pitchers are going to discover his weakness (let’s say it’s the slider), and then throw that. The mark of a good hitter is one who can make the necessary adjustments and learn to hit sliders for extra bases. It takes time for good teachers to develop new tools and techniques to adapt to their students' academic needs.
The catch, though, is that teachers actually need to put in the work to make those adjustments and get better results. Indicator 1.5.2 means collecting data on student achievement. It means that teachers have to learn how to adjust to shifting circumstances in their classrooms. It also means that principals (currently the responsible party for this indicator) have to work with teachers to help them make those adjustments and assess whether those changes are appropriate. It also means that we need to have accurate metrics by which to assess student learning. That’s a whole lot of effort for something that counts for only 10 percent.
Voice of San Diego
Apr 23, 2013
By OSCAR RAMOS
I’m working my way through San Diego Unified’s leaked draft of their 12 indicators for quality schools. Since this document apparently hadn’t been shared out with other stakeholders (the union, parent groups, the general community, etc.), I imagine it’s going to go through a lot of changes.
But that doesn’t stop us from basing our discussion on the assumptions this document makes, so I’ll go ahead and dive in. For now I'm only going to focus on the first indicator of school quality (Quality Teaching). I'll delve into the rest of the document in the future.
I was surprised that Objective 1.1 (Engaging and supporting all students in learning) was such a large proportion of the rating system (40 percent), given that student achievement represents a comparatively much smaller percentage (it’s there, though, as I’ll get to later).
One problem with giving so much importance to Objective 1.1 is that the evidence it describes needs to happen every day in the classroom, but the principal usually only observes teachers a couple of times a year (sometimes only once). For the ratings in this category to be mean anything, the principal would need to observe teachers constantly. One way to improve this measurement would be to expand the responsible party to include a student feedback component, or even a parent/community feedback component.
Now, I don’t like the idea of people randomly walking into my classroom unannounced, looking specifically to find faults in my instruction. I can imagine such a situation bordering on teacher harassment in a worst-case scenario. But it is possible to create a healthy school culture in which teachers are comfortable with people visiting their classes. The Preuss School, where I teach, has many visitors who want to learn about our instructional practices, and many of our teachers are accustomed to a steady stream of visitors. Nurturing a culture of constructive, open observations requires a lot of cooperation and trust between principals and teachers.
Another important prerequisite for frequent observations is principals who are well-versed in instructional practices and who are their schools’ education leaders. This may sound obvious, but I’m concerned that many in the current wave of self-designated education reformers from the business sector don’t value school leadership that is capable of engaging on the instructional level with teachers. They seem to favor data managers as school leaders.
Peter Orszag (President Obama’s former director of the Office of Management and Budget, and current vice chairman of corporate and investment banking at Citigroup) has written about this concern.
[The Gates Foundation researchers] found that teacher analysis could be done without having observers make random visits to the classroom; allowing a teacher to submit a self-selected set of videos from the classroom worked just as well, because even the best classes conducted by bad teachers were worse than those from better teachers. I’m not anti-data. Data is an important tool for guiding teacher instruction, and for assessing whether teachers are responding to their students’ strengths and weaknesses. I don’t think it should be used primarily as a punitive tool, especially given that students don’t have a stake in these assessments. As a reader for the AP European History exam last year, I had the pleasure of reading all kinds of nonsensical letters written by students who sat for the exam but didn’t attempt to answer the essay question I was grading — a few actually wrote that they were too tired to write the essay. Granted, it’s a long exam, but I wouldn’t want their teacher’s livelihood to depend on whether a student had enough energy to complete an exam that has little to no bearing on his/her future (some colleges won’t even give credit for high AP scores).
I would use test scores (in the case above, AP scores) to assess whether a teacher is updating his or her lesson plans to address student deficiencies, as measured by a variety of data. I think this is a critical component of teacher quality assessment, but it is currently under-weighted in this draft of Quality Teaching.
The way I’m reading the document, there is a section dedicated to student achievement: Indicator 1.5.2, which is under Objective 1.5: Assessing Student Learning (10 percent). Being able to adapt lesson plans to target individual and group weaknesses is the mark of a good teacher. Even a great teacher can have a group of students that doesn't respond to his or her lessons because of a glaring underlying weakness, be it academic or personal. That teacher is going to have to develop new approaches in order for students to succeed. That’s going to require collaboration with colleagues, research on content and teaching techniques and developing new lesson plans.
I had such an experience at one point in my career, a few years back. I had just finished a successful school year with a group of students that had responded well to the academic supports I had implemented that year, so I was pretty happy. It became immediately clear the next year, however, that my lesson plans weren’t working on my new students. They were dealing with motivational issues — something my lesson plans didn’t account for. I worked with my colleagues to address my class's needs throughout the year, and I feel better-equipped to address those sorts of issues in the future. But I may get a group of kids with issues I’ve never dealt with before, and I’ll need to work quickly in order to address their needs.
It’s like a batter who hits home runs every time the pitcher throws a fastball. That’s great, as long as he keeps getting fastballs. But pitchers are going to discover his weakness (let’s say it’s the slider), and then throw that. The mark of a good hitter is one who can make the necessary adjustments and learn to hit sliders for extra bases. It takes time for good teachers to develop new tools and techniques to adapt to their students' academic needs.
The catch, though, is that teachers actually need to put in the work to make those adjustments and get better results. Indicator 1.5.2 means collecting data on student achievement. It means that teachers have to learn how to adjust to shifting circumstances in their classrooms. It also means that principals (currently the responsible party for this indicator) have to work with teachers to help them make those adjustments and assess whether those changes are appropriate. It also means that we need to have accurate metrics by which to assess student learning. That’s a whole lot of effort for something that counts for only 10 percent.
Tuesday, April 09, 2013
It's Not the Test That Made Them Cheat
It's ridiculous to say that teachers and administrators in Georgia and elsewhere committed crimes only because they had to give high-stakes tests to students.
The Georgia indictments are, in fact, just the tip of the iceberg of White Chalk Crime in schools.
The indicted educators tried to get rewards that they had no right to, and to take them away from those who deserved them. This happens all the time in schools. It's the reason the education system is failing. The wrong people are in charge of most districts, and too many of the wrong people are teaching kids.
If we had a system for correctly evaluating teachers, like this one, we wouldn't need to test kids so much, and we would save billion dollars a year. We could trust the teachers to do their job, and part of that job is to know exactly what each child knows and how each child learns best. Standardized testing could go back to its original purpose: to make an official determination of which kids are most advanced academically.
It's Not the Test That Made Them Cheat
By Michael J. Feuer
Edweek.org.
April 9, 2013
News came down, or up, earlier this month about the indictment of the former Atlanta schools chief Beverly Hall and 35 other current and former officials for their alleged roles in a massive cheating scandal that has rocked the city for the past three years.
The best coverage of this story is by Atlanta Journal-Constitution reporter Heather Vogell and her colleagues, whose fine journalism uncovered the muck.
There is nothing good to say about cheating on tests, which, in this extraordinary case, involves allegations of tampering with student answers, racketeering, theft, influencing witnesses, conspiracy, and making false statements. It’s wrong, period, and if Ms. Hall et al. are found guilty, they will hopefully use their time in jail to think about the damage they have caused to the kids, to the system, and to the public’s trust in schools and in the measures we use to gauge their quality.
Still, some of the reactions to the scandal have been surprising, if not scandalous in their own right. The most troubling response comes from people opposed to standardized testing generally and to current federal policy specifically. They somewhat gleefully use this sorry episode as the ultimate smoking gun, the perfect we-told-you-so case that clinches their claims about the evils of testing, and, by extension, the entire reform movement. It’s a big nail, they hope, in the coffin of test-based accountability.
"Shall we excuse individual or group criminality because certain social institutions create pressures for greed and misconduct?"
Among the more remarkable statements is one posted by William C. Ayers on Valerie Strauss’ Washington Post blog. For Bill Ayers, an education professor emeritus from the University of Illinois at Chicago, the Atlanta story proves that “teaching toward a simple standardized measure and relentlessly applying state-administered (but privately developed and quite profitable) tests to determine the ‘outcomes’ both incentivizes cheating and is a worthless proxy for learning.”
Mr. Ayers goes further. Not only does he attribute the alleged cheating to the testing policy, thereby essentially absolving Ms. Hall and her colleagues of their own ethical and professional lapses, but he uses the example to issue a sprawling condemnation of the U.S. Department of Education, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, and even the president. As he puts it, “the road to the massive cheating scandal in Atlanta runs right through the White House.”
I have four problems with this logic (echoed in other commentaries, such as Jason Stanford’s bold assertion in the Huffington Post that “high-stakes testing makes cheating inevitable”; and FairTest’s pronouncement in an Atlanta Journal-Constitution op-ed last year that “[t]hese scandals are the predictable result of overreliance on test scores”).
First, shifting the blame for egregious mischief away from the perpetrators and onto the system strikes me as morally and politically bankrupt. Here’s an analogy to consider: Do we react to the worst instances of tax evasion by condemning the concept of taxation rather than by prosecuting the evaders? I assume that Mr. Ayers would not call for abolition of the graduated income tax as a way to finance public goods and redistribute wealth just because the system has its imperfections and because some people lie on their tax returns. Shall we excuse individual or group criminality because certain social institutions create pressures for greed and misconduct? Banking executives accused of fraud will be delighted.
Second, even if one could make an evidence-informed case that testing “inevitably” leads to illegal behavior—as if high-stakes testing overwhelms the human capacity for moral choice—there is the added problem of guilt by association. Pinning the responsibility for the Atlanta disaster on the White House is an extravagant example of misdirected blame. Maybe current federal policies lead to unwanted outcomes, such as narrowing of the curriculum and teaching to the test, but that’s a far cry from the outright fraud of the sort listed in the Atlanta indictment. Nothing in the No Child Left Behind law requires states or districts to use test scores to fire teachers and principals or to protect and reward those who achieve targets by tampering with answer sheets. In any case, there’s no evidence that federal policy causes cheating, or that “cheating is inevitable.”
Third, indicting testing, rather than cheating, undermines the possibility for reform in the design and uses of tests. The compelling logic in Campbell’s Law—“The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decisionmaking, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures ...” —is supported by abundant empirical evidence on the effects of overreliance on tests for accountability.
But what’s often ignored in the popular frenzy against testing, especially in the wake of cheating scandals, is the benefits side of the argument: Tests can help gauge individual learning, give teachers additional information about their students’ progress, provide objective indicators of student achievement, and expose inequalities in the allocation of educational resources.
We may never be able to completely “overturn” Campbell’s Law, but what’s needed is a sensible approach to assessing the ratio of benefits to costs and to the design of mechanisms meant to keep the ratio strongly positive.
Fourth, it turns out that in Atlanta there were schools, and kids, that actually did improve during Ms. Hall’s tenure, according to data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress. As U.S. Commissioner of Education Statistics Sean P. “Jack” Buckley noted, “There were obviously rampant violations of testing integrity going on there, but there were also schools there that were legitimately improving.”
We shouldn’t allow score gains inflated from cheating to be misconstrued as evidence that any measured improvement in student learning—especially among poor and minority children—must always be the result of cheating or other mischief. This kind of smoking-gun logic saps the morale of educators, parents, and policymakers working in behalf of our most disadvantaged students and provides free ammunition to those who believe investments in public education are essentially futile. Just when we education researchers and social scientists are facing increasingly mean-spirited political challenges to our profession, Bill Ayers’ and others’ evidence-free diatribes further erode public confidence in the credibility of our work. One can only hope that the temptations of guilt by association won’t prevail, and that the research community as a whole won’t be blamed for the shoddy logic of some of its members.
Michael J. Feuer is a professor of education policy, the dean of the graduate school of education and human development at the George Washington University, and president-elect of the National Academy of Education.
The Georgia indictments are, in fact, just the tip of the iceberg of White Chalk Crime in schools.
The indicted educators tried to get rewards that they had no right to, and to take them away from those who deserved them. This happens all the time in schools. It's the reason the education system is failing. The wrong people are in charge of most districts, and too many of the wrong people are teaching kids.
If we had a system for correctly evaluating teachers, like this one, we wouldn't need to test kids so much, and we would save billion dollars a year. We could trust the teachers to do their job, and part of that job is to know exactly what each child knows and how each child learns best. Standardized testing could go back to its original purpose: to make an official determination of which kids are most advanced academically.
It's Not the Test That Made Them Cheat
By Michael J. Feuer
Edweek.org.
April 9, 2013
News came down, or up, earlier this month about the indictment of the former Atlanta schools chief Beverly Hall and 35 other current and former officials for their alleged roles in a massive cheating scandal that has rocked the city for the past three years.
The best coverage of this story is by Atlanta Journal-Constitution reporter Heather Vogell and her colleagues, whose fine journalism uncovered the muck.
There is nothing good to say about cheating on tests, which, in this extraordinary case, involves allegations of tampering with student answers, racketeering, theft, influencing witnesses, conspiracy, and making false statements. It’s wrong, period, and if Ms. Hall et al. are found guilty, they will hopefully use their time in jail to think about the damage they have caused to the kids, to the system, and to the public’s trust in schools and in the measures we use to gauge their quality.
Still, some of the reactions to the scandal have been surprising, if not scandalous in their own right. The most troubling response comes from people opposed to standardized testing generally and to current federal policy specifically. They somewhat gleefully use this sorry episode as the ultimate smoking gun, the perfect we-told-you-so case that clinches their claims about the evils of testing, and, by extension, the entire reform movement. It’s a big nail, they hope, in the coffin of test-based accountability.
"Shall we excuse individual or group criminality because certain social institutions create pressures for greed and misconduct?"
Among the more remarkable statements is one posted by William C. Ayers on Valerie Strauss’ Washington Post blog. For Bill Ayers, an education professor emeritus from the University of Illinois at Chicago, the Atlanta story proves that “teaching toward a simple standardized measure and relentlessly applying state-administered (but privately developed and quite profitable) tests to determine the ‘outcomes’ both incentivizes cheating and is a worthless proxy for learning.”
Mr. Ayers goes further. Not only does he attribute the alleged cheating to the testing policy, thereby essentially absolving Ms. Hall and her colleagues of their own ethical and professional lapses, but he uses the example to issue a sprawling condemnation of the U.S. Department of Education, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, and even the president. As he puts it, “the road to the massive cheating scandal in Atlanta runs right through the White House.”
I have four problems with this logic (echoed in other commentaries, such as Jason Stanford’s bold assertion in the Huffington Post that “high-stakes testing makes cheating inevitable”; and FairTest’s pronouncement in an Atlanta Journal-Constitution op-ed last year that “[t]hese scandals are the predictable result of overreliance on test scores”).
First, shifting the blame for egregious mischief away from the perpetrators and onto the system strikes me as morally and politically bankrupt. Here’s an analogy to consider: Do we react to the worst instances of tax evasion by condemning the concept of taxation rather than by prosecuting the evaders? I assume that Mr. Ayers would not call for abolition of the graduated income tax as a way to finance public goods and redistribute wealth just because the system has its imperfections and because some people lie on their tax returns. Shall we excuse individual or group criminality because certain social institutions create pressures for greed and misconduct? Banking executives accused of fraud will be delighted.
Second, even if one could make an evidence-informed case that testing “inevitably” leads to illegal behavior—as if high-stakes testing overwhelms the human capacity for moral choice—there is the added problem of guilt by association. Pinning the responsibility for the Atlanta disaster on the White House is an extravagant example of misdirected blame. Maybe current federal policies lead to unwanted outcomes, such as narrowing of the curriculum and teaching to the test, but that’s a far cry from the outright fraud of the sort listed in the Atlanta indictment. Nothing in the No Child Left Behind law requires states or districts to use test scores to fire teachers and principals or to protect and reward those who achieve targets by tampering with answer sheets. In any case, there’s no evidence that federal policy causes cheating, or that “cheating is inevitable.”
Third, indicting testing, rather than cheating, undermines the possibility for reform in the design and uses of tests. The compelling logic in Campbell’s Law—“The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decisionmaking, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures ...” —is supported by abundant empirical evidence on the effects of overreliance on tests for accountability.
But what’s often ignored in the popular frenzy against testing, especially in the wake of cheating scandals, is the benefits side of the argument: Tests can help gauge individual learning, give teachers additional information about their students’ progress, provide objective indicators of student achievement, and expose inequalities in the allocation of educational resources.
We may never be able to completely “overturn” Campbell’s Law, but what’s needed is a sensible approach to assessing the ratio of benefits to costs and to the design of mechanisms meant to keep the ratio strongly positive.
Fourth, it turns out that in Atlanta there were schools, and kids, that actually did improve during Ms. Hall’s tenure, according to data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress. As U.S. Commissioner of Education Statistics Sean P. “Jack” Buckley noted, “There were obviously rampant violations of testing integrity going on there, but there were also schools there that were legitimately improving.”
We shouldn’t allow score gains inflated from cheating to be misconstrued as evidence that any measured improvement in student learning—especially among poor and minority children—must always be the result of cheating or other mischief. This kind of smoking-gun logic saps the morale of educators, parents, and policymakers working in behalf of our most disadvantaged students and provides free ammunition to those who believe investments in public education are essentially futile. Just when we education researchers and social scientists are facing increasingly mean-spirited political challenges to our profession, Bill Ayers’ and others’ evidence-free diatribes further erode public confidence in the credibility of our work. One can only hope that the temptations of guilt by association won’t prevail, and that the research community as a whole won’t be blamed for the shoddy logic of some of its members.
Michael J. Feuer is a professor of education policy, the dean of the graduate school of education and human development at the George Washington University, and president-elect of the National Academy of Education.
Saturday, April 06, 2013
Charges filed regarding a third child molestation victim of Chula Vista Elementary School District teacher Raymond Kinloch
John Raymond Kinloch remains employed by Chula Vista Elementary School District. CVESD has a long history of NOT investigating complaints about teachers, even when other teachers report that they fear the teacher will come to school and shoot everybody.
See all posts re John Raymond Kinloch.
New Charges for Wolf Canyon Teacher John Kinloch
On Thursday, prosecutors charged Kinloch with six additional lewd act charges involving a third alleged victim
By R. Stickney
NBC News
Apr 5, 2013
A Chula Vista elementary school teacher, accused of child molestation and possessing child pornography, was charged Thursday with new criminal charges involving a third possible victim officials said.
John Kinloch, 41, was arrested in November 2012 as part of a nationwide child pornography investigation by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
He is accused of posing as a 13-year-old girl to befriend boys ages 12 to 16 through a website known as “MeetMe.”
Kinloch allegedly tried to convince the boys to share nude photos over the Internet according to investigators with the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force. He was also accused of selling and or sending obscene materials to others.
Since his arrest, the first grade teacher at Wolf Canyon Elementary School has been charged with several allegations of child molestation or lewd acts with children ranging from 8 to 15 years old.
Prosecutor Enrique Camarena said the defendant took advantage of an 8 or 9-year-old boy in 2004 when he was a teacher at Feaster Charter School. The alleged victim was a boy with whom the teacher had developed a close relationship with inside and outside the classroom Camarena said.
In February, 12 counts of lewd acts with a child under the age of 18 were added involving a second alleged victim occurring between August and December of 2012. This alleged victim was under the age of 13 and not a student according to Camarena.
Then on Thursday, prosecutors charged Kinloch with six additional lewd act charges involving a third victim. Camarena said the alleged victim was 14 or 15 between 1996 and 1998 when he alleges inappropriate contact. The incident allegedly occurred when Kinloch was 24 or 25 and was not working as a teacher...
See all posts re John Raymond Kinloch.
New Charges for Wolf Canyon Teacher John Kinloch
On Thursday, prosecutors charged Kinloch with six additional lewd act charges involving a third alleged victim
By R. Stickney
NBC News
Apr 5, 2013
A Chula Vista elementary school teacher, accused of child molestation and possessing child pornography, was charged Thursday with new criminal charges involving a third possible victim officials said.
John Kinloch, 41, was arrested in November 2012 as part of a nationwide child pornography investigation by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
He is accused of posing as a 13-year-old girl to befriend boys ages 12 to 16 through a website known as “MeetMe.”
Kinloch allegedly tried to convince the boys to share nude photos over the Internet according to investigators with the Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force. He was also accused of selling and or sending obscene materials to others.
Since his arrest, the first grade teacher at Wolf Canyon Elementary School has been charged with several allegations of child molestation or lewd acts with children ranging from 8 to 15 years old.
Prosecutor Enrique Camarena said the defendant took advantage of an 8 or 9-year-old boy in 2004 when he was a teacher at Feaster Charter School. The alleged victim was a boy with whom the teacher had developed a close relationship with inside and outside the classroom Camarena said.
In February, 12 counts of lewd acts with a child under the age of 18 were added involving a second alleged victim occurring between August and December of 2012. This alleged victim was under the age of 13 and not a student according to Camarena.
Then on Thursday, prosecutors charged Kinloch with six additional lewd act charges involving a third victim. Camarena said the alleged victim was 14 or 15 between 1996 and 1998 when he alleges inappropriate contact. The incident allegedly occurred when Kinloch was 24 or 25 and was not working as a teacher...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)