Below are several letters of complaint against Highland Hall Waldorf School in Northridge, CA. This is the school I am personally most familiar with. Two of my own letters of complaint are at the end.
July 12,2004
Highland Hall Waldorf School
17100 Superior St.
Northridge, CA 91325
To: Christine Meyer and the College
We waited a few weeks after we received your letter, to try and compose a
reasonable response. Your recent letter indicates that our son is not
allowed to re-enroll and our daughter's enrollment is probational
because there are unnamed people who have blamed us for doing something
unspecific that somehow upset various individuals whose identities we
are not allowed to know. Your letter came as a shock because up until
Christine Leonard was put on a paid leave of absence, various committees
consistently told us that they recognized how diligently we were
following the correct communications protocol.
Before we wrote our January 26 letter we consulted with a member of the
College and a member of the Board. Throughout the process we consulted
with additional Board members plus a member of the Evaluation Committee
all of whom assured us we were correctly attempting to resolve our
concerns. To this date, Joan Newton is the only member of the College
who directly asked for and was genuinely willing to accept an
explanation for any misunderstanding that arose at the May 26 parent
meeting. Because you have given us only vague generalizations, we are
unclear as to what exactly we have done wrong and can only speculate
that your letter may be related to the many times Maura was wrongly
accused of gossiping over the last few months.
For example, on March 23, an Evaluation Committee member told Maura she
had heard that a few kindergarten parents were upset by information
Maura had given them about the Fifth grade. As Maura explained, when a
parent approached us and asked about specific details they had already
heard from other sources, we responded to their questions. We never
provided anyone with information they didn't already have from other
sources.
In late April, a Highland Hall teacher angrily asked Maura why she had
spoken very negatively about the High School to a prospective parent.
Karl, not Maura, actually spoke to the parent and told her the faculty
is wonderful but Olivia left for social reasons.
Unfortunately, the teacher jumped to three false conclusions. First,
that Maura spoke to this prospective parent. Second, that everything
said to this parent was negative. And, third, that this parent must have
chosen not to enroll her child because of all the negative information
she learned. We contacted this parent by e-mail and learned that none
of this is true. And yet, how many of you heard this information and
have not bothered to ask us about it because you feel we deserve to be
blamed?
In May, Ed Eadon and Lori Gardner asked Maura why she had told someone
that Alex Houghton would be the Sixth grade teacher. Again, Maura never
had this conversation. Lori and Ed would not reveal who gave them this
false information. Maura sent a letter to Lori and Ed politely and
specifically requesting that they let her know in writing they had taken
action to clear up this unsubstantiated accusation. Finally, after a
month of waiting, Maura asked why she had not heard anything from either
of them. Ed and Lori both told her that they didn't think it was
necessary to communicate any written or verbal response to her.
At the May 26th meeting, Fifth grade parents were asked what would they
hope to see to prevent the current communication crisis from
reoccurring. The main message Maura tried to convey, (which should be in
the notes) was that there is an inordinate fear of parents talking to
each other. Anyone who says even the slightest criticism, publicly or
privately, no matter how constructive it may be, gets accused of being a
disgruntled hysteric who lacks tact and discretion and only wants to
destroy everything that is good about the school. After eleven years at
Highland Hall, we continue to be grateful for those faculty and parents
who embrace each problem not as if it is a judgement or a threat, but as
a valuable opportunity for learning about ourselves and discovering our
true purpose as a community.
Your letter states that we are not willing "to accept the conclusions of
various committees". This is clearly not true. Our March 25 letter
states that we absolutely accept the Evaluation Committee's conclusion
that we should find another school for our son. We informed the
Business Office in May that Wesley would definitely not be attending
Highland Hall. The College had enough information to officially know
that we were fully complying with the Evaluation committee's
conclusions.
Your letter says that our communication has had "negative effects on
other adults, including the former teacher..." We realize that the
questions we asked were intense. When parents hear about a teacher
handing out pills to control disruptive boys, difficult questions
absolutely must be asked. If Christine's feelings got hurt in the
process, unfortunately, it could not be avoided. In our March 25 letter,
we thanked Christine for the apology she offered to the parents and we
wrote, "In our struggle to protect Wesley, if we have harmed you, we
also wish to sincerely apologize." The day after the April 22 meeting
in which parents who were loyal to Christine shouted at the committee
representatives, Maura privately apologized to a College member who had
attended. He assured her the intensely volatile meeting was not a
result of anything we had done.
Your letter states that we don't trust the school. We trusted that the
College would recognize the validity of our questions, which is why we
asked you for help in January. We appreciate that it took enormous
courage to intervene on behalf of the children. There are at least a
half dozen outraged parents who have publicly stated in meetings and
widely circulated e-mails that they don't trust your reasons for asking
an extremely popular teacher to take a paid leave of absence. Have you
warned them that their lack of trust in the school has compromised their
children's enrollment?
Your letter implies that the College is holding us to a standard that is
not being applied to the parents who tried to start a boycott against
attending school after Christine was removed. Have you sent any kind of
warning to the parents who, at the April 22 meeting, screamed at
Evaluation Committee members to stop lying? Parents hollered at us that
if we didn't like the battered wife song Mrs. Leonard sang, we should
leave the school. None of these parents are told that their
children's enrollment will be revoked since many of them spent their
Spring break organizing ways to interfere with the school's emergency
plan for the class. A few of these same parents viciously gossiped
about Jazmin Ferreccio's motives for teaching the class and thereby
"back-stabbing Christine Leonard". Rather than jeopardizing their
child's enrollment, it is astonishing that some of these same outspoken
parents have been selected to help create guidelines for improving other
parents' conduct.
As soon as Christine was abruptly removed from the class a climate of
mistrust erupted. As much as we were relieved that you asked Christine
to take a break, it was obvious to us that the request profoundly
impacted everyone. There are no winners and there are no victims,
including Christine Leonard. And yet, rather than the College realizing
how we each played a part in this complicated decision, you are
exclusively targeting us by putting our daughter's education at the
mercy of how you (possibly inaccurately) may perceive our actions.
When Cathy Devries was our son's teacher, we used the exact same
communications protocol that we followed this year. In Second grade,
our concerns fortunately matched those of the majority of the Second
grade parents. This year, we have been in the minority of many of those
same parents. We are incredibly frustrated that despite our best
efforts to be conscientious and fair during a brutally exhausting and
confusing process, you see us as wanting to harm this community.
We had hoped to spend the summer preparing to be at Highland Hall
without Wesley for the first time in eleven years. On Wesley's last day
at Highland Hall, Joan Newton told him she would miss him and wished him
well in his new school. We felt her compassionate gesture gave our
family some sense of peacefully moving on.
The adversarial tone of your letter makes it a challenge to simply focus
on the joy of having our youngest child enter First grade. However, we
see no value in starting this next school year with animosity or
apprehension. We would like to say that if we have offended any of you,
we apologize and invite any of you to let us know if we can do anything
to correct any misunderstandings. We agree that following a
communications protocol is essential and would sincerely appreciate if
you could provide any more detailed written clarification as to what
exactly we could do differently in the future.
Sincerely,
Maura Swanson and Karl Haas
Two years later - little had changed and the family was forced out of the school - later filing and winning a lawsuit against Highland Hall:
June 11, 2006
Dear Friends,
We know many of you are deeply upset about the administration's sudden
decision to remove our daughter from class, five days before school is
over. We have heard that there will be a meeting of all concerned
parents on Monday. Because we believe there are always at least two
sides to every story, and we have no other way to publicly speak on our
behalf, we would like to offer our take on what's happened. We
absolutely have no expectation that this will change the decision. If,
at the Monday meeting, you are told "It's very complicated - there are a
lot of details about these parents that you don't know, but are too
difficult to explain", please believe those are the same key details we
don't know about either.
If you are going to take the time to attend the Monday meeting, we hope
you will also take a few minutes to read this letter. If you're really
curious or concerned, this situation does require a prologue.
BRIEF HISTORY:
From June 2003 to January 2004, we repeatedly asked for the school's
help in addressing our mounting concerns with our Fifth grade son's
teacher, Mrs. Leonard. After a long brutal process, we agreed with the
school that our son should not stay in Mrs. Leonard's class, because
there was only one other parent besides us that was willing to come
forward and say that they felt she was doing inappropriate things to the
children. Two days after we came to the conclusion that by Sixth grade
we would find another school for our son, Mrs. Leonard decided to teach
the children a song involving very graphic violence against women
imagery. The College immediately put her on a paid leave of absence.
The rest of the semester was filled with a lot of anguishing meetings
with many of the parents crying and yelling at various members of the
College, insisting Mrs. Leonard didn't deserve the way she was being
treated. Ultimately, Mrs. Leonard could not resolve her issues with the
College, and chose not to return. Less than a week after school ended,
we got a letter from the College telling us that our son could not
attend Highland Hall as punishment for our having violated their
communications protocol. We were warned that if they perceived we were
communicating inappropriately, our daughter would not be allowed to
attend Highland Hall. We responded with a three page letter asking for
the College to tell us exactly what we did wrong, when throughout the
entire process, various committee members had admitted they had made
significant mistakes, and thanked us for carefully following their
protocol, despite how painful the whole experience was for all
concerned. We never got a response to our letter. A few months later,
the President of the Board met with us and told us that he had received a
copy of our letter and felt it was well-written and clearly deserved a
response. Neither he nor Ed Eadon could explain why no one answered us.
This past Friday night, two years later, we finally got a response. At
nine o'clock, a messenger arrived at our house and handed us a letter,
so hastily typed it was not even on school stationery. The letter
stated we had ignored the warning that the College had sent in 2004 and
violated the communications protocol again. Effective immediately, our
daughter is expelled from the class and we are not allowed on campus
without a prearranged escort from Ed Eadon.
Apparently there is a strong belief that we have somehow harmed Ms.
Taylor. Without knowing exactly what we have been accused of doing to
her, we cannot defend or apologize for our alleged actions.
Whoever has decided that we have done something so inappropriate that
our child must be immediately removed from the classroom, has yet to
inform us of exactly how we were a danger to Ms. Taylor or the
community. This time we have been accused of violating a communications
protocol regarding water bottles. We were not shown any incriminating
evidence, or given any proof of violating this protocol, and ultimately,
we have no opportunity to defend ourselves against what we feel is a
false accusation.
We have a paper trail of two years of communicating with appreciation,
respect and deep enthusiasm for Ms. Taylor. There would be no reason
for us to make Ms. Taylor feel threatened by our presence, or the
presence of our daughter in her classroom. And again, we have no idea
who has told her what piece of information to upset her so much that she
cannot tolerate our little girl being in her class for the remaining
five days of the school year. Because we had felt so close to Ms.
Taylor, we have not a clue why, if she feels we have hurt her, she
wouldn't respect us enough to come to us directly to let us know, so we
might have a chance to clear up any kind of misunderstanding.
We can only guess that perhaps Ms. Taylor is too exhausted, after an
extremely busy year, to be aware of the devastating impact on our child,
and the rest of her students. We sympathize with her exhaustion, but
then have to ask, who has advised Ms. Taylor to do such a frighteningly
harsh thing to our daughter? How is it that the Leadership Team does
not need to present us with any scrap of evidence, nor did they offer to
bring us together with Ms. Taylor and facilitate a conflict resolution
that would allow all of us to work towards a mutual understanding that,
according to the handbook, will "result in positive growth for the
individuals involved and for the school as a whole"?
If you attend this meeting on Monday, we hope someone will ask the
Leadership Team where is the evidence; and did you honestly give these
parents a chance to resolve whatever conflict has happened? Who is
supervising the Leadership Team to make sure they have followed some
kind of legitimate process that can warrant such harsh consequences for
an eight year old child?
Our family has invested in this school since 1994 - longer than many
people on the board, the faculty and the administration. About three
weeks ago, our daughter made a book that was all about Ms. Taylor,
complete with illustrations. Ms. Taylor seemed so delighted that she
showed it to many colleagues and asked to borrow it for the weekend. A
month ago, we were profusely thanking Ms. Taylor for an outstanding
evening presentation she gave to the parents. We felt genuinely
connected to her and inspired and grateful for her many efforts, and she
seemed sincerely touched by our enthusiastic response.
We simply do not know what has happened to change this relationship.
We have called Ms. Taylor to ask for clarification, but have yet to
have our phone call returned.
If an anonymous person can secretly accuse our family of doing something
so terrible that it results in our innocent child being expelled, but
we don't even know what specifically is being said, or who said it -
then there is no way we can clear up any miscommunication.
Is it possible that there are people on the Leadership Team or the
Faculty or the Administration who still harboring resentment towards us
about issues involving ancient history - absolutely. When you have been
at this school as long as we have, it is inevitable that for every
friend you have made, there's at least one person you've unintentionally
offended, and at least two who have accidentally offended you.
It would be so much easier to believe we actually did something
terrible, because no intelligent person can accept such an irrational
action, especially when it is so deliberately devastating to a young
child. What kind of story will be told to the children to find a
wholesome way to explain this awful situation so that they won't be
frightened? If it can happen to their friend,who they know "has never
had her name on the board or been kicked out of class or caused any
problem", then how does the school reassure the other students and their
parents that this won't happen to them?
We came to this school because we believed that a Waldorf education was
the best way to nurture our children. We are leaving shocked, and
somewhat shattered, but still very grateful for all the wonderful
friends we have met. It is profoundly sad to know our child is not
entitled to properly say good-bye. She is worried that her friends will
think she has done something really bad. It is hard to believe that we
are not allowed to attend next week's graduation of so many children
we've known since Kindergarten, nor may we participate in any future
functions at a place where we spent so much energy building and
contributing to the welfare of the school. What we couldn't always give
in cash, we always gave in sweat equity and we got to know many
wonderful people in the process. Our oldest daughter, Olivia, went from
Kindergarten through Eighth grade here. Just last week, Mrs. Edwards
was trying to help her find summer employment. Olivia loved attending
the plays, concerts, fairs and assemblies and helped decorate for the
Father-Daughter dance, even though she is not enrolled here. She has
been looking forward to being in the audience when her friends and
former classmates will graduate next year. Now she can't step foot on
campus ever again and cannot understand how this could happen. We have
never heard of a community, other than perhaps extreme fundamentalists,
who would abruptly excommunicate an entire family based on
unsubstantiated hearsay.
Thank you to everyone who has called (you possibly violated the
communications protocol by doing so). We truly and deeply found so much
comfort in you reaching out to us. Without your kind words, this would
be almost unbearable.
Until our paths meet again, we wish you many blessings. Your friendship will never be forgotten.
Maura Swanson and Karl, Olivia, Wesley and Lilly Haas
***
Another parent - after molestation incident:
July 5, 2001
To the College of Teachers:
At the meeting held Friday, June 22, 2001 I suggested you be kind to
yourselves in the wake of your decisions regarding how you handled the
Wendy and Jeffrey Wilkins debacle. For those of you not in attendance, I
uncharacteristically went against the angry tide and tried to soothe
your collective pain with, “No one had a crystal ball. You couldn’t
possibly have known what would happen.” I would like to retract that
statement now. After two weeks I have found many new facts that
obliterate my sympathy. With a modicum of effort you could have had a
whole lot of information about the appropriateness of Wendy as a class
teacher and a pretty good guess as to what can happen when sexual
offenders are left unchecked. With one small phone call from one of our
own third grade parents to the Santa Barbara school and one phone call
back, we uncovered not only history of Wendy’s incompetence as a
teacher, but of Jeffrey’s sexual deviance. Wendy’s visa complications
alone due to her admitted misdemeanor for breaking and entering should
have been enough to raise an eyebrow, but by the neglect of the most
obvious step in any hiring process-- running a cursory background check
at even her most previous job where she had been fired, no less -- you
put my children at unfathomable risk.
In January, you again had the opportunity to do the right thing and
failed. When Jeffrey propositioned Cameron, did you then wonder enough
to call the Santa Barbara school to find out about Wendy and her son’s
past? If you didn’t, why not? And if you did and you got the
information that we so easily accessed, God have mercy. You shared with
us that you were given legal counsel to protect Jeffrey because he was a
minor, but what about the other hundreds of children that were at risk
under your care as students of the school? Isn’t that why you sit on the
College? Aren’t you a body set up to look after the well being of the
students? What about the dozens of children who have newly come forward
and will forever bear the scars of those solicitations in the log
cabin, those propositions on the play structure, those lewd images he
passed to them in the library, the graphic and terrible lexicon that he
wove into their games that is now imprinted on their little souls? I
heard some third grade children talk about Wendy leaving Jeffrey alone
in the classroom with them where he dropped his pants. I’ve heard he
whipped it out as well in after-school care. I know that he offered
money and toys in exchange for the children to play his “baby” and
“cream” games and was successful in getting at least one child to touch
his penis, who then in turn challenged the others in attendance to smell
his “stinky hand.” My educated guess would suppose more were a part,
that don’t dare come forward even if their parents are gentle and round
about in their questioning. My daughter absolutely refuses to discuss
with my husband or me something that one of her classmates told her at a
sleepover recently. The pointed threats of secrecy have now made their
way into my daughter’s lifelong openness with me. And there are
others. What about these children bearing the most silent scars?
You made Wendy sign a contract that her son would be under close and
constant supervision when visiting campus. What were you thinking?
Wendy sent our children unescorted to the lower parking lot to retrieve
items from her truck. She sent them up into trees twenty feet above
ground by the amphitheater without an adult in sight. Daily she sent
students outside the door for punishment with Jeffrey often hanging
close by. How in heaven’s name did you think she could keep an eye on
her teenage son? And what if the poor dear had to use the rest room
while at school? Did you really think she’d escort him in there too?
Is your world so insulated that you’ve never heard of children being
molested time and again in the “privacy” of public restrooms? And then I
heard at the June 22nd meeting that you hadn’t even told the rest of
the school staff so that they could keep an eye on Jeffrey even if Wendy
couldn’t? You couldn’t even trust your peers with your information.
That seems awfully telling.
We heard tale in the meeting that Wendy was visibly upset when Jeffrey
showed up at the school without her knowing that he was coming, but I’m
beginning to feel it was more out of fear that her job would be
jeopardized rather than that our children’s safety might be compromised.
I first wondered if maybe this woman was working on a grave plane of
denial, but let’s look at the facts. This is the woman who invited the
children of her colleagues, as was shared at our own third grade
meeting, to come to her house to “rest” between school and the evenings’
activities (namely our third grade play) and was left alone to play
with Jeffrey. This is much deeper than denial. This is entrapment.
But whether she was setting up to test her son’s mettle or our
children’s survival skills really doesn’t matter. Her gross culpability
has been clearly drawn and those children will never be the same.
I can’t begin to guess what part of you chose to ignore the enormous red
flags to first bring in Mrs. Wilkins and then later to have her sign an
impossibly generous contract rather than risk a libel suit, but I’m
guessing it was not the heart to which I was drawn when I first came
here. As the mother of a nine year-old, a six year-old and a seven
month old, you may think that my association with Highland Hall is
brief, but it was more than fifteen years ago I came to this school to
do research for a play I was writing. I was so swept up by all the
beauty that I encountered in this haven I vowed that if I was blessed
with children someday; they would come here for their education. At
that time I was recovering from my own wounds of a stalking, kidnapping,
and abuse at the hands of a sexually deviant man, and I was heartened
by the promise that here was a place far away from the violence and fear
that had pulsed within my breast each day since the initial assault.
Clearly, I was mistaken.
No place can offer complete sanctuary from the holds of a world gone
wrong, but never again will I blindly put my children in a place that
doesn’t make every effort to keep them protected when I can’t be there
to do it myself. I take full responsibility for that classic dilemma of
a victim/survivor; a desire to empathize and over trust to make all the
hurt and pain go away as expediently as possible. But I would like to
warn you, if you think these children that have been left in Jeffrey’s
wake are “just fine,” or unaffected by what he has done to them, I
caution you to rethink the impact of Cameron’s statement shared
tearfully by his mother, Merrie, at the June 22nd meeting. Upon
learning that Wendy’s contract had been terminated because “she needed
to take care of Jeffrey”, Cameron said, “Oh, Mommy, if that boy that
hurt Jeffrey only knew how much pain he’s caused, he would feel so bad!”
Cameron feels anguish for Jeffrey and his alleged first perpetrator
and the pain goes on and on and on. I’ve also seen this misplaced
concern in the letter that you were offering a severance package to
Wendy. Stop this madness. Isn’t it time to take care of the real
victims here?
Please step up now and acknowledge the harm you have done to our
children by your negligence and fear. Stop looking at how the school
can grow out (into new buildings) and look at how you might grow inside
from this horrible ordeal. And to that end I offer this from Ralph
Waldo Emerson, from his essay “Self Reliance.”
These are the voices which we hear in solitude, but they grow faint
and inaudible as we enter into the world. Society everywhere is in
conspiracy against the manhood of everyone of its members. Society
is a joint-stock company, in which members agree, for the better
securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty
and the culture of the eater. The virtue in most request is conformity.
Self-reliance is its aversion. It loves not realities and creators, but
names and customs.
Whoso would be a man, must be a nonconformist. He who
would gather immortal palms must not be hindered by the name of
goodness, but must explore if it be goodness. Nothing is at last
sacred but the integrity of your own mind.
I would have given my right arm for just one of you to have been brave
enough to listen to your heart when it shouted back in January that it
was wrong, that a crime had been committed against one of your
colleague’s own little boys, and stood up to say it was dishonest and
dangerous allowing that secret to remain so closely guarded. I, too,
was advised by the police, the District Attorney, and various counsels
not to press charges against my attacker because he was a well connected
man in this town with a future as bright as my own. And like you
having to hold the hurt of those children in your heart, I bear the
scars of a bad decision when I heard my attacker had gone on to rape
more beyond me; people whose lives would forever after be marred but a
heinous act of violence. But you, unlike I, still have the opportunity
in your statute of limitations to at least stop this pain from going
further. You must do right by those children that were already hurt and
you must stop counseling your peers to keep quiet. You must ask them
to share with others the horrible acts that have unfolded so that it may
never, ever happen again. You must help them find the way to report it
to the proper authorities and insist that Jeffrey be given counseling
and stick with it and that every school that he attends from here on out
have record of his propensity toward sexual inappropriateness. You
must also find a way to keep Wendy from ever putting children at risk
again. And then you must again, most finally and no less importantly,
return your attention to the children left in your care or let someone
else into your inner sanctum that can do the job as it should be done.
It’s not enough to pray this away. It’s time for you do the right
thing.
And I must now do what I consider the right thing for my children too. I
have no trust left for my initial instincts in entrusting you with my
children. Kai and Ruby graduated blissfully from the dreamy world of
Janet, Liis, and Laura. And you have taken away the only other two at
the school that I have utterly loved, when you sent Andrew away against
our class’ protest and shuffled Christine to put out the other fire. So
now, I have no desire to keep them on the once hallowed grounds of my
naive dreams at Highland Hall with an impossible hope that this time
you’ll get it right. I can assure you Kai will be devastated not to go
up the hill with the rest of the little kings in his class, to not join
in the rose ceremony and someday play for the Hawks as he and his
friends have vowed. Ruby’s dreams of growing into the big yard, being
in the school musical, playing in the orchestra, helping her little
sister Violet up the hill will be dashed as well, but I simply cannot
bring my children back to a place that seems to have forgotten what
brought us all together in the first place ... the children.
I am so sorry that this is where we go our separate ways. I have never
fancied myself as a quitter, but for my children, I will do anything to
give them the world of hope, trust and safety that was torn from me far
too young. I bid you well in your journey of healing.
Sincerely,
Jane Sibbett
***
The following letter was drawn up and circulated by several parents
in an attempt to reform Highland Hall after they broke mandated
reporting laws to cover up inappropriate sexual contact by the son of
Waldorf teacher Wendy Wilkins.
June 26, 2001
College of Teachers & Board of Directors DRAFT
Highland Hall Waldorf School
17100 Superior St.
Northridge, CA 91325
Dear Members of the College & Board:
On Friday, June 22, 2001, we participated in (or have been told about) a
meeting held at school that covered many difficult issues surrounding
actual and potential exposure to inappropriate/harrassing sexual
commentary and propositions that a number of the children at our school
experienced from Jeffrey Wilkins, the teenage son of then 3rd Grade
Teacher, Wendy Wilkins. It is our understanding that Ms. Wilkins will
no longer be teaching at Highland Hall and that efforts are being made
to help Ms. Wilkins and her son get the professional help that they and
their family need.
The meeting lasted four hours and only ended because people became
exhausted. All acknowledged the need to continue to discuss the various
issues that these events have raised. Understanding that the College
of Teachers has spent enormous amounts of time and personal energy
dealing with this situation, and hearing an appeal for help in leading
the community through this difficult time, we have taken it upon
ourselves to outline some potential next steps for the College and Board
to consider:
1. Investigation & Discovery and Recovery: Many people felt that
before they would be able to contemplate the future, it is critical to
understand more fully what actually happened, to the extent it can be
learned. Also, in order to improve our process for dealing with, and
ideally preventing, incidents of this nature, we must understand what
was done this time, what reasoning went into the decisions that were
made and the results of the choices that we collectively made.
As follow-up to the guidelines suggested by the Valley Trauma Center, we
recommend that a meeting be set to which all people who have since
spoken with their child and who have direct knowledge concerning
incidents involving Jeffrey and their child that could be shared to the
benefit of others would be encouraged to attend. The meeting should be
facilitated by the Valley Trauma Center personnel. The purpose of the
meeting would be to create a timeline of events that is as complete and
accurate as possible. These events would include incidents involving
Jeffrey, parents notifying school authorities of such incidents, the
school’s communication(s) with Ms. Wilkins regarding the situation and
any other actions taken in regards to the situation. People with such
direct knowledge who are unable to attend in person would be encouraged
to provide whatever information they had to offer in writing prior to
the meeting.
In order for the meeting to be most productive and to try and limit the
potential for a raging forest fire of hearsay, we suggest that every
family and faculty/staff member be sent a letter explaining the purpose
of the meeting and a description of the recommended process for
discussing the situation with their children. It would probably make
sense to enclose the handout from the Valley Trauma Center. The
emphasis would be on calmly eliciting the facts, reassuring the children
if they need to share difficult or embarrassing information and helping
the children affirm their own power for any potential future incidents
of this nature. The goal is to avoid the inadvertent creation of
misinformation in the quest for the needed information to allow healing
to be assisted and improved processes to be developed.
The following people are willing to help with drafting the mailing to
the community, arranging the meeting time in coordination with the
Valley Trauma Center personnel and arranging the logistics for the
meeting: (please let me know if you would like your name added here)
2. New 4th Grade Teacher Search & Future Teacher Searches: Many
parents in the upcoming 4th Grade feel that it would enhance the process
of selecting the next teacher for the class if the College had the
benefit of parent opinion, as well as all of the other factors the
College takes into consideration when selecting a new teacher. We
recommend that a new Search Advisory Committee be selected by the
College from a pool of volunteer parents from throughout the school.
This Advisory Committee would review the resume and any other
information available on any teacher candidate under serious
consideration by the College, interview the candidate from the
perspective of parents, rather than colleagues, and give its impression
and any areas of recommended further investigation back to the College
as part of the College’s due diligence process. We would recommend
that Advisory Committee members recuse themselves when the teacher
candidate is for their own child’s class.
The following people are willing to work with whomever the College
mandates to do whatever letter writing, recruiting and other legwork
necessary to bring the formation of this committee about: Alex Wright,
David Cohen (please let me know if you would like your name added
here)
3. Changes to Current Community Practices to Better Protect the
Children Under the School’s Care: In order to realize the opportunity
inherent in these unfortunate and painful events, we as a community need
to grow and change. Many questions and ideas have been put forth
regarding notification, education, faculty/staff training, etc. In
order for these questions and ideas to be more fully discussed and lead
to actual changes in the practices of our school community, we recommend
that a committee from the broad community be formed to discuss these
issues in depth, solicit ideas from professional resources, such as the
Valley Trauma Center and/or other communications facilitators, and
discuss with College members what kinds of guidelines and principals
govern College decisions. With this education and opportunity for
discussion, the committee would formulate and present recommendations to
the Board and College for consideration.
The following people are willing to work with whomever the College
mandates to do whatever letter writing to the community and other
legwork necessary to bring the formation of this committee about: Alex
Wright, Lynne Moses (please let me know if you would like your name
added here)
We all appreciate that Highland Hall is more than a school, that it is a
social community for the families that make up the students, parents,
faculty, staff, College and Board of the school. We also recognize that
much of the work that is typically handled by a larger administration
in other schools is instead handled by faculty members volunteering to
serve on the College at Highland Hall. Therefore, the work of those in
positions of authority in running the school extends far beyond the
usual demands of school governance. For this reason, we recognize that
we all need to do our part in bringing about social change and
supporting the College and Board in your work. We sincerely hope that
these suggestions are taken in that spirit of responsibility and loving
support.
Sincerely,
David Cohen
Ayelet Cohen
Alex Wright
Ben Moses
Lynne Moses
(Please let me know if you would like to add your name here)
cc: Parent Association
***
Below are two of my own letters. You can read lots more of my communications with Highland Hall on my other blog Waldorf Awareness.
4/24/2004
Dear Evaluation Committee,
I'm sure you may have noticed by now that Mrs. Leonard is supported by
some very rude, pushy and controlling parents who are acting out of
their strong emotions and ultimately their denial of what has transpired
with Mrs. Leonard. They claim to be the majority of the class. By
now, I suppose they are. The many parents who removed their children or
were pushed out by Mrs. Leonard have not been considered in their
calculations. Many people have already removed their children from this
school because of Mrs. Leonard's actions. Others still intend to.
The facts and Mrs. Leonard's actions speak for themselves. The safety
and well-being of the children is at risk and I believe each and every
one of you knows this. You made the right decision when you suspended
Mrs. Leonard. It was a difficult decision made from your hearts, not
based on numbers or opinions. When she defiantly sang the "abuse" song,
over the objections of some parents, you knew in your hearts that she
had done something too wrong to be overlooked. I am told some people
suggested that the school could "gummy bear" the song by suggesting that
it is somehow brings "archetypal" images to the class. You all have
read the song, what do you think?
I know it took courage to come to your decision, and particularly in
light of the fact that I pointed these things out publicly. I openly
and publicly applauded your courage when you made the right decision.
Now, on the verge of a possible reversal of your decision, I ask you to
summon the same courage - to do what is right.
Please don't let a bunch of hot-headed parents blur your common sense.
You have a primary obligation to the CHILDREN, not to the parents or the
teachers. You are educators - start acting like it. Shame on you if
you cannot muster the courage to stand up and say "This is wrong and it
will not be tolerated."
The children, I am told, have accepted Mrs. Ferreccio wholeheartedly.
She is the continuity they need right now. She is a loving and warm
teacher who challenges the children intellectually and who is responsive
to their needs. She can heal this class and easily take them through
the end of the year. Bringing Mrs. Leonard back now would be extremely
harmful and painful to the children and would continue to divide the
parents and the school. Let's heal this now. Please stick to your
decision to suspend Mrs. Leonard and let's please move on. It is, after
all, the right thing to do.
Thank you,
Pete Karaiskos
5/10/2004
Dear Evaluation Committee,
First, let me say that I am waiting to hear from someone representing
Highland Hall that my son Christopher was sent home last week. I
shouldn't have to insist that the school inform me of incidents
involving my own children but, nonetheless, I am having to do this.
This has happened often enough that I suspect people at Highland Hall
are deliberately withholding information from me regarding my children
and in some instances I know this to be fact. I am weary of hearing
about things like this second-hand and would encourage the school to
share information pertaining to my children with me freely and promptly.
I have discussed the events surrounding Christopher's suspension with
him, with other children in his class who witnessed the events and with
his teacher, Mrs. Knight. I am convinced that the circumstances under
which he was sent home are, at the very least, suspect. Everyone I have
spoken to insists that Christopher did nothing extrodinary that would
suggest that he should be sent home for the day and was, rather, the
recipient of the specialty teacher's emotions over a bad day. I would
like to hear from this committee what the circumstances were and what he
did that warranted his suspension. Furthermore, and on a much larger
scale, I would like this committee to review with me the school's policy
of permitting specialty teachers to send children home.
I fully acknowledge that specialty teachers have a difficult job and
that often children prove to be a handful for them. I am painfully
aware of how difficult it is to find teachers who will perform well
under the challenge of personal problems or difficult children. This
is, however, their job and they have a responsibility to the children,
to the parents and to the school to do their job well. Specialty
teachers are responsible for their class and I don't want to devalue
that responsibility. However, the children's class teacher is, by
intent, the teacher who is supposed to be the best judge of the
children's overall behavior, their struggles in their own personal
growth and other challenges they my be facing in their personal lives.
The class teacher is the one who knows what is on the child's mind (that
may be manifesting in poor behavior) and it is the class teacher should
be the one who decides whether a child should be sent home. A
specialty teacher is not, and should not be, in a position to decide on
this form of discipline. Certainly, they should be able to dismiss a
child from their class, but a child sent home by a specialty teacher
will miss all their studies for the entire day. Quite frankly, I would
be happier to have Christopher miss a year of eurythmy than a day of
math. Undoubtedly, this is far to much responsibility for the specialty
teacher to have and ultimately it hurts the children and reflects
poorly on the school.
I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Pete Karaiskos
