Presentation B-1How the policies on bullying and open records were actually implemented

#1 The Bullying Timeline As A Public Record

You will recognize that this document provided a sense of the events that had transpired at Whitman Middle School particularly since 2010.

Perhaps the two most unsettling aspects of the timeline:

1. The troubling content: bullying by a teacher consisting of demeaning and discriminatory comments toward African American students and students with learning disabilities

2. The manner in which the original timeline document was handled by district administrators: The manner it was received, ignored and then ultimately lost or destroyed by district administrators

In addition, the accuracy of the content of the timeline was never questioned or contested by the district. The bullying policy provided consequences that the district could have imposed if the accuracy of the events described was called into question. The district policy clearly indicates that making intentionally inaccurate reports would not be tolerated.

Orchestra Teacher Lyda Osinga testified to the circumstances related to her reporting the bullying and the fact that she had created a timeline of events.

This is testimony on the practical utility of the timeline if it becomes necessary to remember pertinent dates, events and statements. Lyda Osinga testified that she had previously been the administrator of several community music schools and recognized the importance of this kind of documentation.

“Writing down the specific information also re-enforced the troubling nature of the conduct:

“Writing it down in that timeline made it quite evident that there were kids that were not safe.”

First page of the bullying timeline

Note: the names for the students were changed by Lyda Osinga to maintain student privacy.

“8th grader …. was ridiculed ….. due to his learning disability”

“…. he wants to get rid of (student names) ….. because of their incessant chatter and because black kids don’t really belong in orchestra.”

Second page of the bullying timeline

(the offending teacher’s) response was to turn and viciously say:

“ You are such riff-raff. I want you to quit orchestra and if you don’t, I will fail you until you do.”

Third page of the bullying timelineLyda Osinga writes a letter to Principal Jeff Keranen….

….(offending teacher) singles out students that are African American or have lower ability.

September 2010 – present: As an adult I chose to no longer be in a classroom with (the offending teacher) since I cannot condone his behavior or take responsibility for his actions.

Contents of a June, 2010 letter to Whitman Middle School Principal Keranen

“… he targets students so they quit orchestra.”

“There are students with ADHD or with learning disabilities that he even discourages by embarrassing them in front of the class.”

Fourth page of the bullying timeline

Make a Note to Recall the date of this entry, i.e., December 14, 2012

“I met with HR Director Dan Chanenfor almost 2 hours to discuss the continuing bullying of the students….”

December 20, 2012 E-mail to HR Director Chanen

This email confirms that HR Director Chanen and Lyda Osinga had the December 14, 2012 meeting noted in the timeline at which time the student bullying problems were discussed.

The e-mail requests that HR Director Chanenspeak with the offending teacher.

How do we know an administrator actually got this bullying timeline at some point?

E-mail confirming receipt of the bullying timeline

A June 24, 2013 e-mail to HR Director Chanenexplaining that the timeline used fictitious names to protect the identify of the students. However, she makes clear that she can “name the names” when necessary.

On June 25, 2013 Chanenresponds and states that he appreciated the clarification how names were used in the timeline.

Lyda Osinga testimony on the general attitude toward the bullying timeline at the district’s central office

“He (a fellow teacher) was yelling at students. Calling them names. Targeting them. And making them feel very unsafe in their classroom.”

“I had met with him (HR Director Chanen) two other times verbally requesting assistance with the bullying that the kids were experiencing…”

“When I gave him the timeline … he told me that he was not interested in pursuing it because the teacher had left the district.”

How did the district physically handle this troubling document?

What might you expect?

H.R. Director Chanen’stestimony

Question: “…. That is a multi-page timeline… regarding a number of events that occurred during her employment with the school district. Have you seen this timeline before?

Answer: I believe I have.

An apparent mystery: What happened to the timeline at the district central office?

Question: Did you ever pass this timeline along to anybody else?

Answer: “Not that I recall”.

Question: “….do you think it’s your responsibility to communicate those allegations to the relevant principal?”

Answer: “Yes. I may very well have had a discussion with the principal about that, or principals.”

Question: “Once you became aware of this timeline and what the allegations were, do you think that it would have been appropriate to tell Mr Ertl about them?

Answer: “Yes.”

Chanentestimony continued

Question: “Do you think it would have been inappropriate not to tell Mr. Ertl about them?”

Answer: “Yes.”

Was the timeline destroyed or not?

Question: “You mentioned that the timeline we’ve been talking about….you did receive that from Miss Osinga.”

Answer: “I believe so.”

Question: “What did you ultimately do with that?”

Answer: “Yeah. I don’t recall doing anything particular with it….”

Question: “Might you have destroyed it?”

Answer: “No, I don’t think I would have destroyed it.”

Question: “Didn’t shred it or anything?”

Answer: “Not that I recall…”

A Revealing Argument from the Legal Brief Filed by School District’s Legal Counsel

Near the end of the open records litigation the argument by the district’s legal counsel was that the district “non-retained” or apparently destroyed the bullying timeline and the district, therefore, should not be faulted for not producing it.

What about the fault for not properly retaining it?

Is this how these kinds of records were supposed to be handled by the district?

Compare this March 25, 2015 letterThis was a letter in response to questions that had been posed as to why various documents could not be furnished when every indication was that they, in fact, existed or had existed.

Superintendent Ertl states: In response to your letter … I would like to clarify the School District of Wauwatosa complies with its records retention obligations. If records have not been located, it is because they do not exist and not because the District destroyed any records it was required to retain or that the District simply did not retain them.

Playing Word Games About the TimelineQuestion: “Are these incidents … the type of thing that should be documented in the district?”

Answer: “No …. until there’s a reason to document, it’s an accusation….What’s here is a list of accusations.”

Question: “So if Miss Osinga had physically walked into your office and given you this timeline … that would not trigger an investigation?”

Answer: “If this document was handed? Yes.”

Question: “What if she simply walked into your office and described these things to you orally?”

Answer: “Yes.”

Question: “That would trigger an investigation?”

Answer: “Yes.”

Note: Here is testimony that does not track with the bullying policy. There is no need to differentiate between bullying “accusations” vs. “reports”. Whether the complaint was part of a written timeline or an oral statement is irrelevant in triggering an investigation. Likewise, whether the complainant walked into the office, wrote a letter or sent an email is likewise irrelevant. The purpose of the investigation is to determine whether it has merit or if it is not grounded in verifiable facts.

Superintendent Ertl’srecollection on whether he had been told about timeline

Question: “Would Mr. Dan Chanenbe aware of this timeline?”

Answer: “ I don’t know.”

Question: “….Has he ever spoken to you about these types of allegations that are in this timeline?”

Answer: “ I don’t remember.”

Note: The cringeworthy nature and content of the timeline makes it hard to believe that anyone would not remember if told about it.

More from Superintendent Ertl on the Timeline

Question: “So it’s still your testimony today that the first time you saw that document was October 16, 2015, at your first deposition.”

Answer: “As far as I can remember, yes.”

Supt. Ertlexplanation of why he might not recall seeing the timeline

Question: …don’t you think that you would have a memory of that if you actually saw the document?”

Answer: “Not necessarily”.

Question: “Any explanation why not?”

Answer: “I see allegations ---a lot of allegations of different things throughout the course of my --- my job.”

*Personal aside: You may see many allegations but certain ones have to stick out more than others.

Big Question: Why not go back and find out if your principals and administrators were properly implementing bullying policies and guidelines?

Superintendent Ertl’s response: “I have no reason to believe that policies and guidelines weren’t followed.”

Note: this is a particularly troubling response from the district’s chief administrator who has been previously made aware of the evidence and is in charge of making sure that school district policies and guidelines are enforced.

Expert Discusses Teacher Bullying’sImpact on Students

Bullying by teachers … is a form of humiliation that generates attention while it degrades the student in front of others …. the teacher who bullies usually receives no retribution or other negative consequences.

Conclusions from the researchImplications: “Failure to address incidents of teachers who bully students has serious ethical implications.”

“….schools that fail to create appropriate policies to ameliorate the problem will pay a steep price in reputation, in student well-being, and in the learning climate they seek to nurture.”

Other findings from the research

Impact on the school and other teachers:

“The many caring educators who must tend to the casualties of abusive colleagues whose egregious conduct goes unchecked can only place a serious damper on school climate and morale.”