1
Patricia V. Pierce, Esquire (PA ID 23129)
Ronald L. Greenblatt, Esquire (PA ID 50673)
Noah S. Cohen, Esquire (PA ID 313849)
GREENBLATT, PIERCE, FUNT, & FLORES, LLC
123 South Broad Street, 25th Floor
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19109
t. 215-735-1600 f. 215-753-1660 Attorneys for Plaintiff
Jean Wallace
112 Haws Lane
Flourtown, PA 19031
Plaintiff,
vs.
Tacony Academy Charter School
1300 Rhawn Street
Philadelphia, PA 19111
Todd Smith
c/o Tacony Academy Charter School
1300 Rhawn Street
Philadelphia, PA 19111
Thomas Scheid
c/o Tacony Academy Charter School
1300 Rhawn Street
Philadelphia, PA 19111
American Paradigm Schools
8101 Castor Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19152
Gerald Santilli
c/o American Paradigm Schools
8101 Castor Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19152
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
PHILADELPHIA COUNTY
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
TRIAL DIVISION
Term, 2020
Civil Action No. ___________
JURY DEMAND
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Case ID: 200500268
Filed and Attested by theOffice of Judicial Records
05 MAY 2020 04:10 pmA. SILIGRINI
2
AVISO/NOTICE TO DEFENDNOTICE
You have been sued in court. If you wish to
defend against the claims set forth in the
following pages, you must take action
within twenty (20) days after the complaint
and notice are served, by entering a written
appearance personally or by attorney and
filing in writing with the court your
defenses or objections to the claims set forth
against you. You are warned that if you fail
to do so the case may proceed without you
and a judgment may be entered against you
by the court without further notice for any
money claimed in the complaint or for any
other claim or relief requested by the
plaintiff. You may lose money or property
or other rights important to you.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS
PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE.
IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR
CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR
TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH
BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU
CAN GET LEGAL HELP.
PHILADELPHIA BAR ASSOCIATION
Lawyer Referral and Information Service
1101 Market Street, 11th Floor
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107
(215) 238-1701
AVISO
Le han demandado a usted en la
corte. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas
demandas expuestas en las páginas
siguientes, usted tiene veinte (20) dias de
plazo al partir de la fecha de la demanda y
la notificación. Hace falta asentar una
comparencia escrita o en persona o con un
abogado y entregar a la corte en forma
escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones a las
demandas en contra de su persona. Sea
avisado que si usted no se defiende, la
corte tomará medidas y puede continuar la
demanda en contra suya sin previo aviso o
notificación. Además, la corte puede
decidir a favor del demandante y requiere
que usted cumpla con todas las provisiones
de esta demanda. Usted puede perder
dinero o sus propiedades u otros derechos
importantes para usted.
LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN
ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI
NO TIENE ABOGADO O SI NO TIENE
EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR
TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA
O LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA
OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE
ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA
AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE
CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL.
ASOCIACIÓN DE LICENCIADOS DE
FILADELFIA
Servicio De Referencia E Información
Legal
1101 Market Street, 11th Floor
Filadelfia, Pennsylvania 19107
(215) 238-1701
Case ID: 200500268
3
Patricia V. Pierce, Esquire (PA ID 23129)
Ronald L. Greenblatt, Esquire (PA ID 50673)
Noah S. Cohen, Esquire (PA ID 313849)
GREENBLATT, PIERCE, FUNT, & FLORES, LLC
123 South Broad Street, 25th Floor
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19109
t. 215-735-1600 f. 215-753-1660 Attorneys for Plaintiff
Jean Wallace
112 Haws Lane
Flourtown, PA 19031
Plaintiff,
vs.
Tacony Academy Charter School
1330 Rhawn Street
Philadelphia, PA 19111
Todd Smith
c/o Tacony Academy Charter School
1330 Rhawn Street
Philadelphia, PA 19111
Thomas Scheid
c/o Tacony Academy Charter School
1330 Rhawn Street
Philadelphia, PA 19111
American Paradigm Schools
8101 Castor Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19152
Gerald Santilli
c/o American Paradigm Schools
8101 Castor Avenue
Philadelphia, PA 19152
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
PHILADELPHIA COUNTY
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
TRIAL DIVISION
Term, 2020
Civil Action No. ___________
JURY DEMAND
Case ID: 200500268
4
COMPLAINT – CIVIL ACTION
Introduction
1. This case is brought to redress Defendants’ retaliatory discrimination, and
constructive discharge of Jean Wallace, a dedicated and inspiring educator and administrator. Ms.
Wallace took a job as a Science Curriculum Advisor at American Paradigm Schools (“APS”) in
September 2019 to employ her more than twenty-years of experience in building and
implementing science curricula in Philadelphia schools to help the students in APS’s Charter
Management Organization (“CMO”). When she discovered that the elementary and middle-school
students at Tacony Academy Charter School (“TACS”) were not provided with a standards-
aligned curriculum, as required by Pennsylvania law in Title 22 Chapter 4 of the Pennsylvania
Administrative Code, regulations propounded thereunder,1 federal law as set forth in legislation
known colloquially as the “No Child Left Behind” Act,2 and on information and belief, the TACS
charter. She reported these regulatory deficiencies numerous times, over more than three months,
to the President and CEO of American Paradigm, Gerald Santilli, and its Chief Academic Officer,
Kristine Magargee.
2. Ms. Wallace also reported these violations in an article in the November 2019
online publication STEM Magazine as part of a series of articles about her work at TACS, which
article was specifically vetted and approved by Defendant Santilli prior to its publication.
3. Following publication of the STEM article and in retaliation therefore, TACS,
through Assistant Principal, Todd Smith, assailed Ms. Wallace’s reputation through an
“anonymous” letter to STEM Magazine publisher Wayne Carley calling her an unprofessional liar,
1 22 Pa. Code § 4.21. 2 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et. seq.
Case ID: 200500268
5
and then refusing to continue their work with her. APS did nothing to ensure that TACS adhered
to the law by providing students with a standards-aligned curriculum after it removed Ms. Wallace
from working with TACS; and did nothing to correct the outlandish and continuing attacks on Ms.
Wallace that were launched by Smith, Scheid and others both within TACS and throughout its
CMO including, but not limited to Lindley Academy Charter School where Ms. Wallace attempted
to continue her role, and despite Ms. Wallace’ repeated demand that Santilli defend her reputation
and findings, thus resulting in Ms. Wallace’s constructive discharge.
Parties
4. Plaintiff Jean Wallace (“Ms. Wallace”) was, formerly, the Science Curriculum
Advisor for APS.
5. From 2004 until 2016 Ms. Wallace dramatically improved Green Woods Charter
School (“GWCS”) of Philadelphia, first as its Academic Officer then shortly thereafter and for the
duration thereof, as its CEO.
6. During Ms. Wallace’s tenure, GWCS’ academic reputation improved dramatically,
and its student population grew from two-hundred and twenty-five to six-hundred and seventy-
five students and as of her separation had a waiting list of over 1,000 students. By any measure,
Ms. Wallace performed her duties to the school superbly. Ms. Wallace introduced an integrated
curriculum at GWCS which is based on the “EIC Model”. The EIC curriculum is highly content
driven and was continually revised by the GWCS professional staff.
7. During her time at Green Woods, Ms. Wallace came to know and worked closely
with Defendant Santilli, who was, at that time, Green Woods’ controller.
8. American Paradigm Schools (“APS”) is a nonprofit corporation organized and
doing business under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. APS is a charter school
Case ID: 200500268
6
management organization that provides financial, personnel and academic oversite and services to
four charter schools in North and Northeast Philadelphia: First Philadelphia Preparatory Charter
School; Lindley Academy Charter School; Memphis Street Academy; and Tacony Academy
Charter School.
9. As part of its management agreements with member schools, APS provides all
Human Resource recruitment screening, troubleshooting, and investigation, among other services
to member schools, as none of the member schools have their own Human Resource departments.3
10. Tacony Academy Charter School (“TACS”) is a publicly funded Charter School
serving students in Kindergarten through Eighth grade subject to the laws of the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania. TACS also operates a High School.
11. Charter schools in Pennsylvania are independently operated public schools funded
with state, local and federal tax dollars, making TACS a “Public Body” as defined by 43 P.S. §
1422(3). These schools are established under the Pennsylvania Charter School Law – Act 22 of
1997, (“CSL”) to operate as non-profit, non-sectarian corporations that are approved by the local
Board of Education (the “authorizer”) or the State Appeal Board. Each Charter school has its own
Board of Trustees and administrative staff and operates as a separate independent local
Intermediate Unit 26 (IU 26).
12. As a Charter School CEO Defendant Thomas Scheid is a “public official” within
the meaning of the CSL.
13. APS is also a “Public Body” as defined by 43 P.S. § 1422(3) as it receives state,
local and federal tax dollars for the services it provides to its member schools.
3 Member school employees are provided APS Employee Handbooks as they do not have their own Human Resource departments.
Case ID: 200500268
7
14. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Todd Smith was TACS’
Assistant Principal and Defendant Thomas Scheid was TACS’ Interim CEO.
15. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Gerald Santilli was the CEO of
Defendant APS and was a “Public Official” within the meaning of the CSL.
Jurisdiction and Venue
16. The Court has jurisdiction because the causes of action arose out of transactions or
occurrences which took place in whole or in part in the City and County of Philadelphia. Venue is
appropriate in this court pursuant to Pa. R C. P. 1006.
Facts Giving Rise to Causes of Action
I. Plaintiff’s Hire By APS
17. Ms. Wallace began her employment through a formal agreement (letter) contract
with American Paradigm Schools on September 2, 2019 with the job title of Science Curriculum
Advisor.
18. Defendant Santilli offered Ms. Wallace the position of Science Curriculum Advisor
at APS based on his more than a decade of first-hand knowledge of her skills, experience and
tireless efforts in putting students’ wellbeing ahead of adults’ agendas.
19. In a reference letter for Ms. Wallace in 2017, Mr. Santilli states:
Jean Wallace served as CEO of Green Woods Charter School in
Philadelphia. While serving on her team as the Chief Financial
Officer we worked together to create a prize-winning and model K-
8 charter school…
She conducted our collective business with the highest ethical and
pleasant manner, with a wide number of professionals and
stakeholders. Ms. Wallace transformed a sleepy school in the woods
with 225 students to a financially sustainable and award-winning
institution with over 675 students constructed on a state-of-the-art
campus…
Case ID: 200500268
8
In my humble opinion, Jean Wallace has the educational expertise,
organizational talent and diversity of experiences to fully contribute
to any organization. Her high standards and love of children make
her the perfect candidate.
20. Together, and prior to August 26, 2019, when she was presented with an offer for
the position of Science Curriculum Advisor, Ms. Wallace and Mr. Santilli drafted her job
description,4 which includes among other job functions:
a. Review current curriculum alignment/scope and sequence and all science
instruction materials and resources currently being used in TACS K-9 Science
curriculum and instruction; begin to define strengths and identify specific needs of
the K-9 Science/STEM Program at TACS.
b. Based on the standards-aligned scope and sequence, begin to identify resources
necessary to assist TACS/APS and teachers’ in delivering effective instruction to
TACS students, grades K-9.
II. Plaintiff Discovers TACS’ Deficient Science Curriculum
21. In August 2019, Gerald Santilli, the President and CEO of APS, set up a meeting
with Ashley Redfern, Executive Director of (APS), Gerald Santilli, Defendant Scheid, and Ryan
Strasko, Principal of TACS High School, in the office at Tacony Academy Charter High School.
Mr. Santilli, Ms. Redfern and Defendant Scheid all expressed concern over declining Pennsylvania
System of School Assessment (“PSSA”) test scores among the 4th and 8th Grade Science students
at TACS. Soon after being hired, defendant Scheid requested a recommendation from Ms. Wallace
for a 4th and 8th Grade test-prep book.
22. The purpose of the meeting was for Plaintiff to hear TACS’ concerns relative to
their science teaching and learning methods, and their desire to improve PSSA science test scores.
4 A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Job Description is attached as Exhibit 1.
Case ID: 200500268
9
In a 2018-2019 evaluation, TACS’ did not meet the Pennsylvania standard for Academic Growth
in either it’s 4th or 8th grade PSSA Science exam outcomes.5
23. Specifically, Ms. Wallace was asked to do an inventory of needs to identify the
gaps in science content knowledge at TACS; the reasons for those gaps; to design a plan to
effectively address the gaps, and to identify resources to assist TACS in structuring science
teaching and learning across grades Kindergarten through Eighth grade.
24. Mr. Santilli asked her to conduct this inventory because of her stellar reputation
and integrity, decades of experience in education, and expertise in standards-aligned science
curriculum development and implementation as well as her years of award-winning work in school
leadership, teacher professional development, standards-based programming, and resource
development.
25. Prior to holding a meeting with TACS teachers, Ms. Wallace decided to confirm
her understanding of then current Pennsylvania Department of Education approved assessment
criteria.
26. On September 21, 2019, Plaintiff contacted David Bauman at the Pennsylvania
Department of Education:
Hi Dave,
I’m revisiting alignment and currently working with a K-8 team to
create a structured science scope and sequence that aligns with
tested eligible content and assessment anchors.
I realize that there is a push for NGSS and STEM; all good for the
future. For now, am I correct that the most recent PSSA Grade 4 and
Grade 8 assessments are still aligned to the early 2000s Science and
Technology and Environment and Ecology standards, and the 2007
anchor documents?
5 A true and correct copy of the TACS’ 2018-19 School Progress Report attached as Exhibit 2 at pg. 4.
Case ID: 200500268
10
There is still confusion out here and I want to be sure I am
communicating the correct information to this team as it is today,
with the goal to create a structure that will allow for flexibility in the
future, but also be aligned to the present.
Thank you so much for your help.
Jean Wallace
27. Mr. Bauman responded:
HI Jean .... here you go!
The 4th grade and 8th grade PSSA is based on the 2007 Assessment
Anchors and Eligible Content.
The AA/EC is based on the 2002 Academic Standards.
The PA Framework is aligned to the AA/EC. It is also aligned to
NGSS.
Does that help?
Dave
28. After confirming that K-8 science instruction in Pennsylvania was still aligned with
specific standards previously established by the Commonwealth, Plaintiff proceeded to meet with
both APS and TACS personnel; interviewed TACS teachers; reviewed data; created a strategy to
address the identified issues and documented and then communicated her findings through bi-
weekly, detailed summaries submitted directly to Gerald Santilli.
29. In her summary for October 7th through 18th, she states, “I also mentioned my
ongoing challenge to get any type of documents from TACS that speak to what is currently (or
was ever) taught in science.”
30. She goes on to state,
I met with the TACS middle school team on Friday.
…
There is no curriculum map, no scope and sequence, no textbooks,
resource books, they totally wing it. Other than doing a specific
Case ID: 200500268
11
activity on Fridays, they are not, in their words, close to being a
STEM School. The Insectarium is the only community partner in
science and most teachers don’t teach about insects. I look forward
to talking strategies with Jerry on how to begin to fix so much of
this. Without a curriculum map, time, instructional leadership
support, and the resources they need to teach, these teachers will
continue to wing it.
31. After the October 18, 2019 meeting with the TACS middle-school science teachers,
Plaintiff and Defendant Santilli, who had also attended the meeting, had this text exchange:
Ms. Wallace - The meeting confirmed all of my suspicions and concerns. I’m happy you
heard some of it. So much going on there. I need to talk strategies with you. I can fix it but it
will take time.
Mr. Santilli – They have no science program!!!
32. In her summary for October 21st through November 1st, Plaintiff states,
After last Friday’s meeting with the TACS Middle School team, I
wanted to find something that might help them begin to see how a
school curriculum framework could be structured. On Monday, after
doing some research, I shared examples from a PA School District’s
curriculum framework for 5-8 grade science and 5th and 6th grade
social studies with the TACS team, Tom (Defendant Scheid) and
Todd (Defendant Smith) and cc’d Kristine (CAO Magargee). What
I sent is aligned to PA Standards and allows TACS to see how to
begin to think in terms of standards alignment.
33. In her summary for November 4th through 16th, Plaintiff states,
I met with Kristine (CAO Magargee) on Tuesday, November 12th.
Debbie Smith joined us in our meeting. We talked about the
challenges at TACS and strategies for addressing them. Kristine
confirmed that Science was not a focus for APS in the past and that
there is no curriculum or alignment in place for science at TACS
or APS schools. We also spoke about the challenges we face at APS
when it comes to addressing identified needs, and the importance of
building capacity in our schools. For example, I shared my concern
for using Study Island at this time for science benchmarking. We
all agreed on the purpose for benchmarking and for all assessments
and how they need to be aligned to actual instruction – rather than
in a vacuum. We agreed that the 4th grade teacher and 8th grade
teacher at TACS cannot be responsible for making up deficits in
Case ID: 200500268
12
science content, and that PSSA prep books are not the way to make
up for these deficits.
III. Plaintiff’s STEM Articles
34. As Ms. Wallace began her inventory of TACS’ science curriculum in September
2019, Wayne Carley, the publisher of STEM Magazine asked her if she had any articles for
publication for the October 2019 publication. STEM Magazine is a monthly electronic
subscription publication available to educators, students, parents, schools and school districts.
35. She suggested doing a series of articles chronicling her work with TACS and APS.
36. At a full APS staff meeting Mr. Santilli gave her permission to prepare the articles,
deeming it good publicity for APS.
37. The first in the series of articles, outlining the purpose for her work, was published
in the October 2019 STEM Magazine. The article received high praise from APS and TACS and
was highlighted by APS in a post on LinkedIn and copies of the article were copied and shared
with the APS Board.
38. On Thursday, October 17, 2019, Defendant Scheid emailed Ms. Wallace directly
telling her that her first article was “wonderful” and that TACS’ middle-school science teachers
were looking forward to meeting with her on Friday.
39. The second article in the series, published in the November 2019 edition of STEM
Magazine, identified some of the more specific needs at TACS: Including the gaps in content, the
resources that could be utilized, such as collaborations with: Acorn Naturalists, an organization
working with Ms. Wallace to develop grade-level, science content-specific literacy kits, and Dr.
Macalalag, Associate Professor of STEM Education at Arcadia University in training STEM
Teacher Leaders throughout the APS network, and the very specific need to create a standards-
Case ID: 200500268
13
aligned, K-8 curriculum for science. The draft article was e-mailed to Gerald Santilli. He requested
one specific change – that Plaintiff remove any reference to “declining test scores.”
40. Ms. Wallace complied with Mr. Santilli’s request and removed that reference
41. The article, published November 12, 2019, titled Shifting the Paradigm,6 contained
the following statements:
a. I requested all TACS teachers, K-8, fill in a simple Year-at-a-Glance template
showing the months of the year and a brief description of the content taught
each month. I was concerned when I didn’t receive any responses, and after
meeting with the TACS teachers, it became clear as to why.
b. [T]hey have not had time to plan together and map out exactly what content is
being taught in each grade. Instead of planning as a team to teach the span of 5-
8 content and, together, prepare students for the 8th grade state assessment, they
are planning in isolation.
c. They also understood the benefits of a curriculum map, but were unfamiliar
with the process of developing one. They could see the need for structure across
K-8 science, and acknowledged that this structure doesn’t currently exist.
d. [I]t became clear that what TACS needs most is a cohesive alignment across
the K-8 science program.
IV. Defendant Smith’s “Anonymous” Letter
42. On November 14, 2019, after the second STEM Magazine article was released,
Wayne Carley sent Ms. Wallace an e-mail asking if she knew someone named Todd Smith. When
she confirmed that she did, she was forwarded the following e-mail from Wayne Carley:
Subject: Article Concern
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:37:06 +0000 From: Todd Smith
[email protected]> To:[email protected]
Hello Kind Sir,
I am writing with grave concerns regarding a recent article in your magazine by Jean
Wallace, “Shifting the Paradigm.” It is unfortunate that I have to express that many of her
statements were not accurate. I work in the same APS network as Mrs. Wallace and her lack of
6 Article attached as Exhibit 3.
Case ID: 200500268
14
professionalism is astonishing. The management agency is supposed to support the school, but
her points were detrimental.
She wrote negative statements about Tacony Academy Charter School without taking the
time to understand their entire curriculum. She based her arguments on one meeting, with four
teachers. Tacony has 19 teachers that teach math! She didn’t take any time to explore their very
comprehensive STEAM program. She didn’t include our specialist teacher that teaches a
Problem-Solving class to grades K-8. There is no mention of the many scientific partnerships
like the Tesla Science Foundation, and Philadelphia Insectarium. Mrs. Wallace based some very
specific and injurious conclusions that are being regarded as defamation.
I hope you can see why I respectfully ask you to have this article removed from your
magazine.
Respectfully, Anonymous
V. APS’ Refusal to Remedy Plaintiff’s Reputation
43. Upon receiving this e-mail, Plaintiff immediately texted Mr. Santilli:
I’m going to forward an email to you. If Todd Smith wants to
threaten me with defamation, he’d better understand the meaning of
the term, the serious nature of such a threat, and the ridiculousness
of his claim. I’m glad you sat in on the meeting with the TACS
teachers to hear their struggles from their own mouths.
He needs to retract his email and apologize to me in writing.
44. Through text and e-mail, Plaintiff requested a meeting with Mr. Santilli to address
the need for Defendant Smith to retract his e-mail to STEM Magazine and to apologize to her in
writing.
45. On November 20, 2019, Mr. Santilli met Plaintiff at the Country Club Diner on
Cottman Avenue in Philadelphia and told Plaintiff that her work with TACS was officially over.
46. He said he met with Defendant Scheid, and that Defendant Scheid refused to
address Plaintiff’s request for a retraction and an apology, and that he did not want her help at
TACS to continue in the future.
Case ID: 200500268
15
47. Plaintiff expressed concern about her professional reputation and ability to be
effective in her work at APS going forward. Specifically, she asked Mr. Santilli to send a memo
from him, to all APS personnel stating that Plaintiff’s article was not only truthful, but that he was
aware of the needs at TACS and agreed with her findings and approach as outlined in the article.
He stated he could not do that. When he said he would not do that, Plaintiff specifically requested
they meet with Scott Kramer, APS’ Chief Talent Officer, to find a solution, but Santilli was
emphatic in his refusal to participate himself or to allow her to contact Kramer on her own.
48. In her summary for November 16th through 22nd, Plaintiff states,
Recall that at our August 20th meeting I was asked to conduct an
inventory at TACS and find the gaps in learning that are affecting
PSSA scores, to make recommendations on how to close the
identified gaps, and to build bridges to partnerships (university and
community) to help support those recommendations. Where some
may protest that the job of APS is not to reveal problems, but only
to be a support to its schools, it is impossible to solve an underlying
problem without uncovering it. APS has a responsibility to kids to
intervene, where necessary, and especially when it comes to their
learning. Teaching to PA Academic Standards isn’t a suggestion;
it is the law. For a CMO, stepping in to ensure schools are aligned
to standards is the most responsible kind of support possible to both
students and teachers. There is empirical evidence for the need to
structure the K-8 science program at TACS to standards and to
support teachers in teaching to standards. This need is confirmed by
direct contact, student assessments, and data analyses by the APS
Data Team.
Where APS has a commitment to support its schools, the certified
educators within the APS network are required by law and APS
policy to adhere to the professional standards of educators. Not
uncovering the student learning gaps at TACS enables the gaps in
content to widen. TACS’ leadership accusing me of lying, of being
unprofessional, and even threatening me for revealing these gaps,
must be immediately addressed by APS. As an APS Academic
Team we often discuss the need to build instructional capacity in our
Case ID: 200500268
16
schools. There is a vast difference between the perception of student
achievement through self- reporting, and the sustainable and
structured student learning that is our responsibility, as certified
educators, to deliver through a standards-aligned curriculum and
scope and sequence. In 2016, in my position as the CAO of APS, I
requested these same curriculum documents from TACS and I was
told they did not exist then and, through my inventory, have learned
that they do not exist now. How deeply have the gaps widened in
more than three years? Stop-gap measured to fill the void in content
using PSSA prep books and interventions does not solve the
underlying concerns and, most importantly, does not result in
meaningful learning for students. TACS’ leadership should move
from protest to progress and take the time necessary to create this
critical foundation for learning science, and then provide the
instructional training and resources to teachers needed to support
them in the implementation of a standards-aligned science
curriculum. Doing so will not only align TACS with state
requirements and the law, but will showcase what is possible,
empower teachers, support students, celebrate the sustainable
success in science learning that can be achieved, and even realize its
own mission to master Pennsylvania standards.
49. After Defendant Scheid refused to permit Ms. Wallace to work with TACS, she
realized she would not be able to do her job as the law requires.
50. In her December 2nd through December 6th summary, Ms. Wallace states,
While everyone certainly understands the need to structure science
teaching and learning, the realization of fitting a multi-year strategy
for science into an already packed schedule in our schools has been
challenging. The most important and sustainable approach, to
align curriculum to standards, was rejected and even challenged
as untruthful. A revised strategy was developed and approved that
would have begun to teach science content, to both teachers and
students through literacy. It was the best approach, for now, to reach
the most teachers and students. Unfortunately, this too, will not go
forward.
51. A week later, in her December 9th through December 13th summary, Ms. Wallace
states,
Case ID: 200500268
17
Kristine suggested that my work, now, should focus on me drafting
a scope and sequence for Lindley [Academy Charter School]. I have
concerns for this process since doing the alignment – as a team – is
where learning happens for teachers…
I reminded Kristine that I was told at an August meeting at TACS
HS that TACS is (or would like to be) aligned to NGSS [Next
Generation Science Standards]. From my inventory, TACS isn’t
aligned to either set of standards at this point in time.7 Whether
NGSS or PA Science Standards, Schools need to align what they
are teaching to one set of standards or the other; preferably to a
set that is enacted by law and assessed by PDE.
52. In her December 30, 2019 through January 10, 2020 summary Ms. Wallace states,
On Monday the 6th I worked remotely. Jerry [Santilli] and I
scheduled time to meet on Friday to discuss my role now and in the
future. After 5 months of being sent in various directions, I have
spent a good amount of time, as well as network capital, planning
strategies that couldn’t be realized.
53. A week later, on January 13, 2020, Ms. Wallace received an email from Margery
Covello, the CEO of Lindley Academy Charter School, declaring that Ms. Wallace would not
publicize anything about Lindley without prior approval.
54. Ms. Wallace spoke to Scott Kramer the same day, who told her that APS’ failure to
denounce Todd Smith’s email amounted to tacit approval and support of its content.
55. Ms. Wallace realized that she would not be able to continue as APS’ Science
Curriculum Advisor absent APS condemning Defendant Smith’s email. As a consequence, Ms.
Wallace was forced to tender her resignation.
7 See Exhibit 2.
Case ID: 200500268
18
COUNT I
Jean Wallace v. All Defendants
Pennsylvania Whistleblower Law
43 PA. CONS. STAT. § 1421, et. seq.
56. Ms. Wallace incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this complaint
as if set forth fully and at length.
57. Ms. Wallace is a protected employee as defined by 43 P.S. § 1422.
58. APS and TACS are covered employers as defined by 43 P.S. § 1422.
59. APS and TACS acted in concert to punish her for exposing TACS’ violations of
standards.
60. Ms. Wallace made a good faith report of “wrongdoing or waste” as defined by 43
P.S. § 1422. Ms. Wallace reported to Defendant Santilli that TACS, and by extension, APS, are
not adhering to the law because TACS is not providing a standards-aligned science curriculum to
TACS students. Specifically, Ms. Wallace complained to Santilli that
a. APS has a responsibility to kids to intervene, where necessary, and
especially when it comes to their learning. Teaching to PA
Academic Standards isn’t a suggestion; it is the law.8
b. Whether NGSS or PA Science Standards, Schools need to align
what they are teaching to one set of standards or the other; preferably
to a set that is enacted by law and assessed by PDE.9
61. Ms. Wallace was discriminated and retaliated against for her good faith report of
wrongdoing or waste as defined by 43 P.S. § 1423.
8 Plaintiff’s November 22, 2019 report to Defendant Santilli. 9 Plaintiff’s December 13, 2019 report to Defendant Santilli.
Case ID: 200500268
19
62. Monies provided by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have in the past and are
currently being wasted by TACS’ and APS’ wrongdoing in failing to ensure an appropriate
education and standards-based curriculum.
63. Curriculum is defined as “a series of planned instruction aligned with the academic
standards in each subject that is coordinated and articulated and implemented in a manner designed
to result in the achievement at the proficient level by all students. 22 Pa. Code § 4.3.10
64. Ms. Wallace was retaliated against and discharged in violation of the Pennsylvania
Whistleblower Law for reporting detailed violations of legislative and regulatory academic
standards to her Employer, APS, of TACS’ violations of:
a. 22 Pa. Code § 4.21(b): “Curriculum and instruction in the primary program must
be standards-based and focus on introducing young children to formal education,
developing an awareness of the self in relation to others and the environment, and
developing skills of communication, thinking and learning…”
b. 22 Pa. Code § 4.21(f): “Planned instruction in the following areas shall be provided
to every student every year in the intermediate level program. Planned instruction
may be provided as a separate course or as an instructional unit within another
course or other interdisciplinary instructional activity:
…
(3) Science and technology, including instruction about agriculture and agricultural
science.; And,
10 See Allen v. Dumaresq, 2015 WL 5446488 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2015) (overruling defendant’s objections in holding that the elimination of physical education and reduction of foreign language courses directly implicate deficiencies in curriculum as defined by 22 Pa. Code § 4.3.).
Case ID: 200500268
20
c. 22 Pa. Code § 4.22(b): “Curriculum and instruction in the middle level program
must be standards-based and focus on mastery of academic subjects, the
development of critical and creative thinking, information literacy, good health and
encourage active participation in the school and community.”
65. Ms. Wallace repeatedly reported APS’ and TACS’ violations of 22 Pa. Code § 4.21
and § 4.22 including but not limited to making the following written complaints:
a. There is no curriculum map, no scope and sequence, no textbooks, resource books,
they totally wing it. Other than doing a specific activity on Fridays, they are not, in
their words, close to being a STEM School.11
b. They also understood the benefits of a curriculum map, but were unfamiliar with
the process of developing one. They could see the need for structure across K-8
science, and acknowledged that this structure doesn’t currently exist.12
c. Kristine confirmed that Science was not a focus for APS in the past and that there
is no curriculum or alignment in place for science at TACS or APS schools.13
d. TACS isn’t aligned to either set of standards at this point in time.14
WHEREFORE, Ms. Wallace prays for the following relief:
(a) An award of damages to compensate her for her economic loss;
(b) An award of compensatory damages to compensate her for her non-economic
losses;
(c) An award of punitive damages;
(d) An award of costs, including reasonable attorney fees and witness fees; and
(e) Such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.
COUNT II
11 Plaintiff’s October 18, 2019 report to Defendant Santilli. 12 See Exhibit 3. 13 Plaintiff’s November 16, 2019 report to Defendant Santilli. 14 Plaintiff’s December 13, 2019 report to Defendant Santilli.
Case ID: 200500268
21
Jean Wallace v. Todd Smith, Scheid & TACS
Defamation/Slander
66. Ms. Wallace incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this complaint
as if set forth fully and at length.
67. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff Wallace has been a private figure who has
not thrust herself into any public controversy as defined by law.
68. At all relevant times Defendant Smith was acting within the scope of his
employment and in furtherance of TACS’ interests.
69. Plaintiff was esteemed and accepted among others to whom Plaintiff was known
to be a person of good name and reputation, prior to commission of the acts by Defendants.
70. The Defendants willfully and maliciously published scandalous and defamatory
statements to others, including but not limited to Defendant Smith’s email to Wayne Carley
stating that many of Plaintiff’s statements in her November 2019 article were not accurate, “her
lack of professionalism was astonishing”, and that many people were regarding her article as
defamation.
71. Defendant Smith’s attack upon Plaintiff’s professionalism constitutes a per se
defamatory statement, which statement was ratified and approved by Defendants Scheid and
TACS.
72. Upon information and belief, Defendants Smith and TACS further publicized the
defamatory statements in Smith’s “anonymous” email to Wayne Carley throughout the APS
network.
73. The statements made by the Defendant were false, defamatory, unprivileged and
injurious to Plaintiff Jean Wallace’s good name, and continue to expose her to injury.
Case ID: 200500268
22
74. The Defendants did not have a privilege to make the defamatory statements about
Plaintiff; alternatively, the Defendants abused any privilege that did exist.
75. The Defendants published false and defamatory statements as set forth herein and
the suggestions and implications arising there from, with knowledge of their falsity and/or with
reckless disregard as to their truth or falsity and with malicious, intentional, and/or reckless
disregard for the injury to the good name and reputation of Plaintiff Wallace.
76. The Defendants’ aforementioned false and defamatory statements and suggestions
have severely tarnished Plaintiff’s excellent reputation, exposed her to public ridicule and
stigmatized her within her profession as an educator.
77. Plaintiff Wallace has sustained damages as a result of the Defendants’ defamatory
communications and is entitled to recover all such damages and expenses resulting from the
Defendants’ false and defamatory words.
WHEREFORE, Ms. Wallace prays for the following relief:
a. An award of damages to compensate her for her economic loss;
b. An award of compensatory damages to compensate her for her non-economic
losses;
c. An award of punitive damages; and
d. Such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.
Case ID: 200500268
23
COUNT III
Jean Wallace v. Thomas Scheid & TACS
Tortious Interference with Contractual Relations
78. Ms. Wallace incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this complaint
as if set forth fully and at length.
79. At all relevant times Defendant Scheid was acting within the scope of his
employment and in further of TACS’ interests.
80. Plaintiff and APS had a contractual relationship.
81. Defendant Scheid intended to harm Plaintiff by interfering with that contractual
relationship by ratifying and spreading false rumors that Plaintiff is unprofessional and included
false information in her published article. Scheid refused to apologize and refused to order Todd
Smith to apologize and retract the e-mail to STEM Magazine.
82. Defendant Scheid interfered with Plaintiff’s contractual relationship with APS to
punish her for exposing deficiencies in TACS’ science curriculum.
83. Plaintiff has been damaged as a result of Defendant Scheid’s interference with her
contractual relationship with APS.
84. Defendant Scheid was acting within the scope of his employment for TACS at all
times relevant to these allegations.
85. Defendant TACS is vicariously liable for all acts and omissions of its employees
and agents, including, but not limited to Defendants Scheid and Smith.
WHEREFORE, Ms. Wallace prays for the following relief:
e. An award of damages to compensate her for her economic loss;
f. An award of compensatory damages to compensate her for her non-economic
losses;
Case ID: 200500268
24
g. An award of punitive damages; and
h. Such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.
GREENBLATT PIERCE FUNT &
FLORES, LLC
Dated: May 5, 2020 s/ Patricia V. Pierce_______
Patricia V. Pierce
Ronald L. Greenblatt
Noah Cohen
Greenblatt, Pierce, Funt, & Flores, LLC
Attorneys for Jean Wallace
Case ID: 200500268
EXHIBIT 1 Case ID: 200500268
Science Curriculum Consultant – Part Time Position
PHASE I Inventory of Strengths and Needs
➢ Review current curriculum alignment/scope and sequence and all science instruction materials
and resources currently being used in TACS K-9 Science curriculum and instruction; begin to define strengths and identify specific needs of the K-9 Science/STEM Program at TACS.
➢ Review PSSA scores and data for TACS 4th and 8th grade Science to determine strengths and gaps
in content.
➢ Hold round table discussions with TACS K-9 teachers and TACS/APS administrators to gain input into what they see as the strengths of the current program, as well as the gaps in curriculum content, materials, and resources.
➢ Based on a review of the K-9 Science curriculum and instruction, materials resources, data, and roundtable session/s, together with APS and TACS teachers and administrators, develop a plan, as well as a timeline, to prioritize and address the identified gaps in TACS/APS K-9 Science curriculum and instruction, materials, and professional development.
PHASE II Curriculum Development/Standards Alignment
➢ Organize a series of curriculum development/standards alignment professional development
workshop sessions with TACS/APS teachers including an overview of PA Academic Standards relating to Science; defining how students learn best, and resulting in a fully-developed, teacher-created, standards-aligned, K-9 scope and sequence.
➢ Based on the standards-aligned scope and sequence, begin to identify resources necessary to assist TACS/APS and teachers’ in delivering effective instruction to TACS students, grades K-9.
➢ Collaborate with Technology, Engineering, and Math teachers to identify areas of Science integration and support from STEM content teachers and administrators.
PHASE III Review and Identify Resources
➢ In collaboration with TACS/APS, review and recommend for purchase those materials and resources that directly align with and support the teacher-created, standards-aligned scope and sequence.
➢ Identify and develop community partnerships (field studies, professional development, etc.) that directly align with the scope and sequence with the goal to enhance student learning as it relates to the standards-aligned scope and sequence.
Case ID: 200500268
➢ The Science Curriculum Consultant will act as an ongoing resource to assist TACS/APS with the implementation of the standards-aligned scope and sequence.
➢ Repeat Phases I, II and III and revise and edit as needed. Curriculum and Instruction is never stagnant, but always in a stage of review and revision.
Case ID: 200500268
EXHIBIT 2 Case ID: 200500268
2018-2019 School Progress Report
Tacony Academy Charter School
Turnaround Model
Admissions Category
Enrollment
Grades in Report
Report Type
Website
Phone/Fax
Address
Sector
School Code X04
Charter
1330 Rhawn St., 19111
215-742-5100 / 215-742-5200
www.ap-schools.org/Tacony-Academy-Charter
K8
K-8
714
Citywide With Criteria
N/A
Performance Tiers Legend
40.0%
MODEL (75-100%) REINFORCE (50-74%) WATCH (25-49%) INTERVENE (0-24%)
OVERALL:
3-YEAR AVG
57.3%A school's overall score represents its combinedperformance on the Achievement, Progress, Climate,and College & Career (for high schools only) domains.
The Achievement domain measures performance onstandardized assessments, including PSSA, KeystoneExams, ACCESS for ELLs, and reading assessments.
Achievement:
Progress:
The Progress domain measures growth onstandardized assessments and progress towardsgraduation (for high schools only).
58.7%
Climate:
72.7%The Climate domain measures school climate as wellas student and parent/guardian engagement.
2018-20192016-2017 2017-2018
(76%)MODEL
(24%)INTERVENE
(37%)WATCH
(44%)WATCH
Case ID: 200500268
2018-2019 School Progress Report Tacony Academy Charter School
out of
out of
AchievementMETRIC METRIC SCORE
PSSA: English Language Arts
% Advanced
% Proficient or Advanced
ACCESS for ELLs:% 4.5 or Above
Grade 5 -% Proficient or Advanced
POINTS EARNED TIER
INSUFFICIENT SAMPLE
57% 4.22 9.00 WATCH
(47%)(461 students)
45%(78 students)
Grade 6 -% Proficient or Advanced
Grade 7 -% Proficient or Advanced
Grade 8 -% Proficient or Advanced
66%(80 students)
59%(78 students)
63%(67 students)
13% 1.04 2.00 REINFORCE(52%)(461 students)
Achievement section continues on next page.
% Reading at Grade Level-Grades K-2
57% 1.92 3.00 REINFORCE(64%)(233 students)
out of
Grade 3 -% Proficient or Advanced
47%(79 students)
Grade 4 -% Proficient or Advanced
66%(79 students)
Case ID: 200500268
2018-2019 School Progress Report Tacony Academy Charter School
PSSA: Science
% Proficient or Advanced
% Advancedout of
out of
out of
Achievement Total:% of Points Earned
WATCH37%
POINTS EARNED TIER
Grade 5 -% Proficient or Advanced
METRIC SCOREMETRIC
out of
Achievement
% Proficient or Advanced
% Advanced
PSSA: Mathematics
out of
Grade 6 -% Proficient or Advanced
Grade 8 -% Proficient or Advanced
Grade 7 -% Proficient or Advanced
(Continued)
31% 1.23 9.00 INTERVENE
(459 students) (14%)
19%(77 students)
15%(80 students)
34%(77 students)
25%(67 students)
9% 0.71 2.00 WATCH(36%)(459 students)
54% 1.29 3.00 WATCH
(43%)(145 students)
Grade 8 -% Proficient or Advanced
37%(67 students)
13% 0.26 0.50 REINFORCE(52%)(145 students)
28.5010.68
Grade 3 -% Proficient or Advanced
47%(79 students)
Grade 4 -% Proficient or Advanced
44%(79 students)
Grade 4 -% Proficient or Advanced
69%(78 students)
Case ID: 200500268
2018-2019 School Progress Report Tacony Academy Charter School
METRIC
Progress
PSSA Science (Grade 8):Average Growth Index (AGI)
PSSA Mathematics:AGI for Lowest-Performing 33% ofStudents
ACCESS for ELLs:% of Students Meeting Growth Target
PSSA Mathematics:Average Growth Index (AGI)
PSSA English Language Arts:Average Growth Index (AGI)
Progress, On Equity
METRIC SCORE POINTS EARNED TIER
out of
out of
out of
out of
out of
PSSA English Language Arts:AGI for Lowest-Performing 33% ofStudents
Progress Total:% of Points Earned
DATA NOT AVAILABLE
24% 8.80 37.00 INTERVENEout of
-3.65 0.00 12.00 INTERVENE(0%)
0.30 5.20 12.00 WATCH(43%)
-0.79 0.18 2.50 INTERVENE(7%)
-1.90 0.00 4.00 INTERVENE(0%)
1.57 3.43 4.00 MODEL(86%)
PSSA Science (Grade 4):Average Growth Index (AGI)
-4.03 0.00 2.50 INTERVENE(0%)
out of
Case ID: 200500268
2018-2019 School Progress Report Tacony Academy Charter School
out of
Climate
% Attending 85-90% of Days
% Attending 90-95% of Days
TIERMETRIC
out of
Annual Retention Rate
% Attending Less Than 80% of Days
% Attending 80-85% of Days
% of Students with Zero Out-Of-SchoolSuspensions
METRIC SCORE POINTS EARNED
out of
% of Students with Zero In-SchoolSuspensions
Student Survey: School Climate Rating(% of most positive responses)
Climate Total:
Parent Survey: School Climate Rating(% of most positive responses)
% of Points Earned
out of
out of
27%
9%(726 students)
(726 students)
4%(726 students)
3%(726 students)
99% 10.00 10.00 MODEL(100%)(670 students)
100% 0.93 out of 1.00 MODEL(93%)(726 students)
94% 2.82 4.00 REINFORCE(70%)(726 students)
63% 0.63 1.00 REINFORCE(63%)
87% 0.87 1.00 MODEL(87%)
out ofParent/Guardian Survey:Participation Rate
33% 0.57 1.00 REINFORCE(57%)
76% 22.90 MODEL30.00
% of Students Attending 95% or Moreof Instructional Days
(726 students)
REINFORCE12.00(59%)
7.1057% out of
Case ID: 200500268
2018-2019 School Progress Report Tacony Academy Charter School
Educator EffectivenessTeacher effectiveness measures are displayed in the School Progress Report, but not included in the SPR rating, to share data we havegathered to monitor and support teacher practice. This information is also used to develop responsive and customized professionallearning for teachers to ensure that all students have access to great instruction.
In addition to other metrics, the SPR includes teachers' overall Multiple Measure Summary (MMS) effectiveness ratings. These ratingsare comprised of teachers' Formal Observation, Student Learning Objectives, Teacher-Specific PVAAS, and the building-level score fromthe state of Pennsylvania's School Performance Profile (SPP, also known as Act 82).
Here are some important details that contextualize the teacher effectiveness data reported in the SPR.
Teachers in a formal observation year who fail to receive a required observation receive a default observation score of 2(Proficient) for any missing observation data, which may inflate the overall scores.
Until District-wide inter-rater reliability norming is held for all principals, observation scores may vary significantly acrossschools and observers. As a result, comparisons of scores between schools may not be meaningful.
The District's observation tool evaluates 10 components of the Danielson Framework for Teaching. Therefore, comparing SDP'sobservation scores to scores evaluated against all 22 components of the Danielson Framework may not be meaningful.
EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS INDICATORS
% of Teachers Receiving an MMS Rating of Distinguished
% of Teachers Receiving an MMS Rating of Proficient
FOR MORE INFORMATION
More information about the School Progress Reports, including the User Guide, Public Business Rules, and FAQ, is available atphilasd.org/spr.
NOTES ABOUT ROUNDING
All calculated values in the SPR (metric scores, percent of points earned, and points earned) are calculated using unrounded values;however, displayed values may differ slightly due to rounding for publication purposes.
UNDERSTANDING DUAL REPORTS
Schools that serve multiple grade spans receive separate SPRs for each grade span (for example, a school serving grades 6-12 receives aMiddle School Report and a High School Report). The grades included in a particular report are displayed on the top right of the coverpage.
% of Teachers Attending 95% or More of Days
Student Survey: Student Perception of Quality of Teacher Practice(% of most positive responses)
DATA NOT AVAILABLE
DATA NOT AVAILABLE
DATA NOT AVAILABLE
63%
Case ID: 200500268
EXHIBIT 3 Case ID: 200500268
Case ID: 200500268
Case ID: 200500268
Case ID: 200500268
Case ID: 200500268
Case ID: 200500268
Case ID: 200500268
Case ID: 200500268
VERIFICATION
I, JEAN WALLACE, hereby state that I am the Plaintiff in this action, and that the
statements made in the foregoing Civil Action Complaint are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that the statements therein are made subject to
the penalties in 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
s/ Jean Wallace JEAN WALLACE
Date: May 5, 2020
Case ID: 200500268
Patricia V. Pierce, Esquire (PA ID 23129) Ronald L. Greenblatt, Esquire (PA ID 50673) Noah S. Cohen, Esquire (PA ID 313849) GREENBLATT, PIERCE, FUNT, & FLORES, LLC 123 South Broad Street, 25th Floor Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19109 t. 215-735-1600 f. 215-753-1660 Attorneys for Plaintiff
Jean Wallace
Plaintiff, vs.
Tacony Academy Charter School
Todd Smith c/o Tacony Academy Charter School
Thomas Scheid c/o Tacony Academy Charter School
American Paradigm Schools
Gerald Santilli c/o American Paradigm Schools
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
PHILADELPHIA COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS TRIAL DIVISION
Term, 2020
Civil Action No. ___________
JURY DEMAND
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that on this date a true and correct copy of the foregoing Complaint has been served
to the following counsel via electronic mail:
Andrew La Fiura, Esquire Jackson Lewis P.C. 1601 Cherry Street
Suite 1350 Philadelphia, PA 19102
Frank J. Lavery, Jr., Esquire Lavery Law
225 Market Street, Suite 304 Harrisburg, PA 17101
DATED: May 5, 2020 s/ Patricia V. Pierce Patricia V. Pierce, Esquire GREENBLATT, PIERCE, FUNT & FLORES, LLC 123 South Broad Street - Suite 2500 Philadelphia, PA 19109
:
:
:
:
:
Case ID: 200500268