Us vs Them and Vice Versa
Contributed by Shaina Lopez-McKeown
Reference; Matanuska School Board Policy: Public Complaints Concerning School Personnel
“The School Board places trust in its employees and desires to support their actions in such manner that employees are freed from unwarranted, spiteful or negative criticisms and complaints. The Superintendent or designee shall develop procedures, which will permit the public to lodge criticism against staff members, assure full consideration, and protect the rights of the staff members and the district.” Policy adopted in 1995.
As parents of students within the Matanuska School District, can we openly ask the district to further define the verbage “assure full consideration”?
I ask because when I attempted to report to in-school staff an incident of physical harm committed by a district employee onto my elementary student, I was met with silence as a response. When I escalated my concerns, which had begun to multiply in the absence of accountability, into a mediation meeting with district representatives; I took the opportunity to ask their lead investigator point blank, “Why was my initial concern of harm not acknowledged?”
From the recollection of my understanding, it was explained to me that parents are encouraged to bring complaints or concerns to the in-school Principal, whether verbally or by email. Once received by the principal, the investigative procedures that may take place will occur internally and become confidential. I pointed out that my complaint had never been acknowledged as received nor had I received any sort of follow-up communication concerning the complaint. I believe it was then inferred that the principal may choose to acknowledge the complaint or not acknowledge the complaint; that no obligation to communicate with parents regarding the outcome is outlined by district policy.
In my opinion and resounding experience, this says: “We can choose to ignore you.”
At this point, I asked if the district documents parent complaints to establish behavior patterns of offense by staff over time. The district responded that the matter is confidential. Although I make it a personal practice to leave room for wonder, child safety was never to be the expendable factor.
Further down the line, after mediation with the district, circumstances changed in such a way that I was advised by a special needs advocate to pursue a Conflict Resolution form. A conflict resolution form is a formal way of submitting a complaint to the Superintendent, who then formally acknowledges the complaint and assigns an investigation. I was surprised by this because in my quest for options, I had contacted several district employees asking how to pursue the safety concerns surrounding my special needs student and no one had suggested this form to me.
When the advocate had made this suggestion, I was already in the middle of a discussion with the same lead investigator who’d attended the mediation. I decided to send them an email asking if filing a conflict resolution form would be in my best interest as a parent. They then stopped responding. Obviously, they utilized their given right to ignore me.
Once the investigation for the filed Conflict Resolution was fulfilled, determined upon and closed, I was then faced with a new circumstance of concern: retaliation by in school staff via public publishing onto social media directed at me and my elementary student that included unfounded accusations and the intentional reiteration of a specific racist remark that I had previously complained about.
While the First Amendment protects the Freedom of Speech for both staff and the public to openly criticize the school district and even engage each other in doing so, employees do face a range of limitations concerning the confidentiality of students.
In addition to this, investigations into concerns surrounding discrimination and misconduct are considered protected activities and retaliation in connection to these complaints or investigations can be considered unlawful.
Thirdly, on ed.gov it reads, “Recipients of federal funds are prohibited from intimidating, threatening, coercing, or discriminating against any individual for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by the statues that the OCR enforces.”
Because the final closure form of the Conflict Resolution investigation by the district stated this addendum, “Finally, the District does not allow any reprisals or retaliation as a result of individuals forwarding concerns or complaints. If you believe you are subject to these please notify me (district employee) right away”; I took a screenshot of the district employee’s retaliatory publication and emailed it to the district. The district responded, “Thank you for the information. Take care.”
I do not believe there is an appropriate response a parent can type to such casual dismissal, but I can say that I do not believe I have been treated as the policy dictates to have received the assured full consideration. I would wish you to have better luck in your dealings with the district, but we both know luck should not be at play where the safety of our children is concerned.
“An absence of effective communication will ultimately lead to conflict.” -John Hoover