Nysmith allegedly allowed antisemetic bullying and expelled the kids who's parents complained

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

Is there any allegation anywhere in the complaint that the parents were concerned about anyone criticizing the IDF or Israel? Or did you just make that up in your head to silence victims and cast doubt on serious allegations of antisemitism?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

It's kind of hard to believe that people can't see that lessons that involving drawing Hitler (in any context), canceling Holocaust survivors and expelling three students in March is anything other than anti-Semitic. No one is challenging criticism of the IDF or Israel's heavy-handed response to October 7th, but rather, you know, anti-Semitism. Like "you're the reason people hate Jews" or celebrating (incorrectly) an October 7th death.

How is this anti-Semitic?

And for that matter, why would drawing Hitler be anti-Semitic either? Unless youre lionizing the guy... I mean drawing someone is a neutral act. We hire courtroom artists to draw the most vile criminals and murderers, that's hardly an endorsement of them.

Okay, you have to realize how insane this sounds. Like, you are so deep in this hole that you can't even see the top.

I actually dont, so please explain it to me. Because the emotional, overwrought reaction isnt exactly winning over any minds.

People who suffered through a catastrophic historical genocide at the hands of a single person don’t like to see that person depicted in a neutral way. I imagine a black wouldn’t be happy about some depiction of a “happy slave” or a slave action. sorry you have a mental disability.

So unless people are beaten over the heads with it they are unable to perceive hitler as evil?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

It's kind of hard to believe that people can't see that lessons that involving drawing Hitler (in any context), canceling Holocaust survivors and expelling three students in March is anything other than anti-Semitic. No one is challenging criticism of the IDF or Israel's heavy-handed response to October 7th, but rather, you know, anti-Semitism. Like "you're the reason people hate Jews" or celebrating (incorrectly) an October 7th death.

How is this anti-Semitic?

And for that matter, why would drawing Hitler be anti-Semitic either? Unless youre lionizing the guy... I mean drawing someone is a neutral act. We hire courtroom artists to draw the most vile criminals and murderers, that's hardly an endorsement of them.

Okay, you have to realize how insane this sounds. Like, you are so deep in this hole that you can't even see the top.

I actually dont, so please explain it to me. Because the emotional, overwrought reaction isnt exactly winning over any minds.

DP. I have to agree that you sound pretty insane. Actually you sound like the one who is hysterical and overwrought.

[Anonymous]

Whenever something like this happens (see also the thread about SAAS), the character of a school community is revealed.

Is this a community that can engage in introspection, or is this a community that closes ranks and starts slandering the victims?

It tells you a lot, actually.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AG was careful to emphasize that THE ALLEGATIONS are "deeply disturbing."

We’re all lawyers here - we know these are allegations. Except we do have photographic evidence of the giant Hitler drawing.

Except, from what I’ve gathered, the kids were effectively tasked with drawing a representation of a bad, cruel, manipulative, fearsome leader. Kids who learn about WWII and the Holocaust. Or maybe you are suggesting that Hitler is NOT a good representation of a historical leader embodying those characteristics?

In thinking more about this, why aren’t there more emails in the complaint? There’s only the one expulsion one. Anytime I’ve had an issue with a school, I’ve first reached out by email, documenting the issue. When I had an issue with bullying of my own child, I had a string of emails back and forth with the school (not this one), and I also met with the school several times in person. And I documented the meeting (“As we discussed when we met today, I said X, Y, and Z and you agreed to (or refused to) take A, B, C steps to correct the issue.”). Given the type of families at this school, it seems strange to me that the complaint suggests this is a long-standing issue, but contains nothing written to show failure by the school to address it or any other interaction between the school and parents. I guess it’s possible, but seems odd, especially given the gravity of the bullying alleged.

It was a poor choice for an assignment and was not appropriate for their thinking level unless you had a kid truly gifted in the right areas. If the teacher felt it was important, the assignment should have been done as a class so the teacher could help them understand better. I could see a college student writing a paper about this and choosing a beloved leader who had also done some really questionable things. Machiavelli felt the ends justify the means, but Hitler would be a case where there is no way the ends justify anything. Hitler is s a choice you might make it you had very concrete thinking and did not understand the assignment. For typical kids this age, they hear Machiavelli and probably think of the vocab word "Machiavellian" and assume it means just evil. Plus, in group assignments, sometimes the most adamant kid wins so you don't even know if the other students agreed with this choice. I don't blame the kids. Critical thinking and analysis may not be their area of giftedness.

My kids are in public school. In one class my son had to do an assignment on a powerful and persuasive leader with flaws and a kind-hearted boy in the class chose Hitler. This kid meant no harm, he just didn't completely understand the assignment. The teacher gently explained to him that sadly Hitler did become powerful and was persuasive, but it wasn't just that he had flaws, he had millions murdered. He was an extreme tyrant and not what the assignment was about. Perhaps because this was a regular class and not AAP, the teacher understood the need to screen things and make sure the students understood the assignment. It was handled well because the teacher was properly involved.

This is a compassionate take. I also don't blame the kids, but would say that this points at a significant problem at Nysmith. A lot of gifted kids lack impulse control, judgement, and understanding of social norms. If any school should be hands-on working with kids to understand the feelings of others, and the impact of these sorts of decisions on peers, it's a school that centers 2E kids the way Nysmith does.

It's as if a school for kids with dyslexia wasn't teaching kids to read. That's the whole reason a person would choose that school and not addressing the social-emotional piece is a massive dereliction of duty on the part of the teacher and administration.

Yes. I wonder if this teacher has a teaching license. Private schools don't always require it.

I... don't think you need a teaching license to know that having the kids draw a big giant picture of Hitler is a bad idea.

Right?? This thread makes me despair over the state of US education. Are people really this dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

It's kind of hard to believe that people can't see that lessons that involving drawing Hitler (in any context), canceling Holocaust survivors and expelling three students in March is anything other than anti-Semitic. No one is challenging criticism of the IDF or Israel's heavy-handed response to October 7th, but rather, you know, anti-Semitism. Like "you're the reason people hate Jews" or celebrating (incorrectly) an October 7th death.

How is this anti-Semitic?

And for that matter, why would drawing Hitler be anti-Semitic either? Unless youre lionizing the guy... I mean drawing someone is a neutral act. We hire courtroom artists to draw the most vile criminals and murderers, that's hardly an endorsement of them.

Okay, you have to realize how insane this sounds. Like, you are so deep in this hole that you can't even see the top.

I actually dont, so please explain it to me. Because the emotional, overwrought reaction isnt exactly winning over any minds.

DP. I have to agree that you sound pretty insane. Actually you sound like the one who is hysterical and overwrought.

you can think whatever you like, I dont know you and dont care so no sweat on my back. i am waiting for that explanation at any moment though

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

It's kind of hard to believe that people can't see that lessons that involving drawing Hitler (in any context), canceling Holocaust survivors and expelling three students in March is anything other than anti-Semitic. No one is challenging criticism of the IDF or Israel's heavy-handed response to October 7th, but rather, you know, anti-Semitism. Like "you're the reason people hate Jews" or celebrating (incorrectly) an October 7th death.

How is this anti-Semitic?

And for that matter, why would drawing Hitler be anti-Semitic either? Unless youre lionizing the guy... I mean drawing someone is a neutral act. We hire courtroom artists to draw the most vile criminals and murderers, that's hardly an endorsement of them.

Sure. they could also draw swastikas as a neutral act just to show the symbols of the strong Machiavellian leader.

Sure. I'd also advise you never to travel to east asia, where swastikas are still widely used and literally can be observed on google maps marking temples every 200 feet or so. This oversensitivity to historical facts and symbols is what makes people roll their eyes. Again, unless the school is ENDORSING these things, what exactly would be anti-semitic about portraying historical accuracy?

So just to be clear - your position is that people who are offended by Nazi swastikas are “oversensitive” because Hindus use a similar symbol for totally benign, non-Nazi reasons? I don’t think anyone in America in 2025 is going to see a swastika (particularly if the assignment had to do with nazis) and think “oh, must be the Hindu symbol. It would be oversensitive of me to react.” Like what even ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

It's kind of hard to believe that people can't see that lessons that involving drawing Hitler (in any context), canceling Holocaust survivors and expelling three students in March is anything other than anti-Semitic. No one is challenging criticism of the IDF or Israel's heavy-handed response to October 7th, but rather, you know, anti-Semitism. Like "you're the reason people hate Jews" or celebrating (incorrectly) an October 7th death.

How is this anti-Semitic?

And for that matter, why would drawing Hitler be anti-Semitic either? Unless youre lionizing the guy... I mean drawing someone is a neutral act. We hire courtroom artists to draw the most vile criminals and murderers, that's hardly an endorsement of them.

Sure. they could also draw swastikas as a neutral act just to show the symbols of the strong Machiavellian leader.

Sure. I'd also advise you never to travel to east asia, where swastikas are still widely used and literally can be observed on google maps marking temples every 200 feet or so. This oversensitivity to historical facts and symbols is what makes people roll their eyes. Again, unless the school is ENDORSING these things, what exactly would be anti-semitic about portraying historical accuracy?

Here's a store in Mumbai that was subsequently forced to close.



https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/hitler-clothing-store-in-india-causes-uproar/article4507530/

You will note that Hitler is not regarded as negatively in India as he should be. Whether or not this fact has any connection to Nysmith is unknown, but we do know that Nysmith has a considerable number of South Asian students.

Protestations that this was nothing more than an innocent mistake might also seem more convincing were there not earlier instances of Hitler casting an enduring spell on some Indians.

In 2006 a Nazi-themed cafe called Hitler's Cross opened in a Mumbai suburb, complete with swastika and reportedly a large portrait of Hitler. The proprietor told the New York Times that "Hitler is a catchy name. Everyone knows Hitler." In the face of protests he later changed the name simply to the Cross Cafe.

Western reporters were staggered a few years ago to learn that Hitler's manifesto and memoir, Mein Kampf, was racing up the bestseller list in India. The book sold 10,000 copies in just six months in 2009. Some saw the dark influence of extremist Hindu groups but merchants said it was bought by business students for its inspirational value.

"Students are increasingly coming in asking for it and we're happy to sell it to them," said Sohin Lakhani, owner of Mumbai-based Embassy books, according to the Daily Telegraph. "They see it as a kind of success story where one man can have a vision, work out a plan on how to implement it and then successfully complete it".

Bollywood got in on the act with a film whose working title was Dear Friend Hitler, a look at the German leaders supposed love for India and his role in ending British imperialism on the subcontinent. After scathing criticism – the Guardian called it "profoundly misguided – the title was changed to Gandhi to Hitler. But the resulting film was called "an unnecessary play with history."

In a 2010 piece on Hitler's appeal in India, the BBC found plenty of Nazi-related memorabilia for sale. And their research discovered a remarkable ability by some Indians to compartmentalize feelings about the German leader.

"The killing of Jews was not good," said Dimple Kumari, a research associate in Pune. "But everybody has a positive and negative side."

For his part, Mr. Shah, proprietor of the store Hitler, said he'd change the name but, after spending about $750 on branding, they'll need someone else to pay for it.

"We have run out of money now. We are willing to change the name if we are compensated for the board."

[Anonymous]

For God’s sake, PP, your contortions here are getting increasingly desperate and ridiculous. Please stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

It's kind of hard to believe that people can't see that lessons that involving drawing Hitler (in any context), canceling Holocaust survivors and expelling three students in March is anything other than anti-Semitic. No one is challenging criticism of the IDF or Israel's heavy-handed response to October 7th, but rather, you know, anti-Semitism. Like "you're the reason people hate Jews" or celebrating (incorrectly) an October 7th death.

How is this anti-Semitic?

And for that matter, why would drawing Hitler be anti-Semitic either? Unless youre lionizing the guy... I mean drawing someone is a neutral act. We hire courtroom artists to draw the most vile criminals and murderers, that's hardly an endorsement of them.

Sure. they could also draw swastikas as a neutral act just to show the symbols of the strong Machiavellian leader.

Sure. I'd also advise you never to travel to east asia, where swastikas are still widely used and literally can be observed on google maps marking temples every 200 feet or so. This oversensitivity to historical facts and symbols is what makes people roll their eyes. Again, unless the school is ENDORSING these things, what exactly would be anti-semitic about portraying historical accuracy?

So just to be clear - your position is that people who are offended by Nazi swastikas are “oversensitive” because Hindus use a similar symbol for totally benign, non-Nazi reasons? I don’t think anyone in America in 2025 is going to see a swastika (particularly if the assignment had to do with nazis) and think “oh, must be the Hindu symbol. It would be oversensitive of me to react.” Like what even ?

Yeah, my point is it's a widely used, ancient symbol used in various cultures and co-opted by the nazis. Unless youre arguing that the combination of lines is some magical emblem, in which case, half of asia would be implicated, then it makes sense that students might sketch it out as part of a historical lesson. Or are we not supposed to talk or even touch on WWII?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can vouch for the fact that many of the teachers are nysmith do not have degrees. And they have no business having anything to do with children! It’s a very dangerous place to send your kid. I will always have guilt over sending my children there even though it was a short period of time.

This is a ridiculous take. Every teacher at Nysmith has a degree. Some, not all, have teaching certifications, but having a teaching certification is immaterial to the question of whether or not one is a good teacher.

Nysmith has historically exceptional retention rates among both students and staff and a damn near spotless record for its nearly 40 year history. This is a troubling episode, to be sure, but let’s not pretend as though it’s somehow dangerous when you have literally tens of thousands of satisfied customers over their history whose kids have gone on to incredible outcomes.

And yes, middle schoolers are old enough to learn about the Holocaust at a surface level and do projects that force them to learn about terrible people. It’s part of how they hopefully learn not to be terrible people themselves.

Yes, there are people born to be teachers who could probably do it without the certification, but most people need some training in how to think developmentally and adapt assignments. It's not about being old enough to learn it, it's about teaching all of this in a way that is appropriate for the cognitive abilities/critical thinking skills of the class you have and knowing how to adapt assignments. Having a degree in English does not mean you know how to teach it to middle schoolers with a range of abilities. I suspect some kids in the class are gifted in English, and others are there because they are gifted in Math and Science only. You have to adjust assignments and be proactive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

It's kind of hard to believe that people can't see that lessons that involving drawing Hitler (in any context), canceling Holocaust survivors and expelling three students in March is anything other than anti-Semitic. No one is challenging criticism of the IDF or Israel's heavy-handed response to October 7th, but rather, you know, anti-Semitism. Like "you're the reason people hate Jews" or celebrating (incorrectly) an October 7th death.

How is this anti-Semitic?

And for that matter, why would drawing Hitler be anti-Semitic either? Unless youre lionizing the guy... I mean drawing someone is a neutral act. We hire courtroom artists to draw the most vile criminals and murderers, that's hardly an endorsement of them.

Sure. they could also draw swastikas as a neutral act just to show the symbols of the strong Machiavellian leader.

Sure. I'd also advise you never to travel to east asia, where swastikas are still widely used and literally can be observed on google maps marking temples every 200 feet or so. This oversensitivity to historical facts and symbols is what makes people roll their eyes. Again, unless the school is ENDORSING these things, what exactly would be anti-semitic about portraying historical accuracy?

So just to be clear - your position is that people who are offended by Nazi swastikas are “oversensitive” because Hindus use a similar symbol for totally benign, non-Nazi reasons? I don’t think anyone in America in 2025 is going to see a swastika (particularly if the assignment had to do with nazis) and think “oh, must be the Hindu symbol. It would be oversensitive of me to react.” Like what even ?

Yeah, my point is it's a widely used, ancient symbol used in various cultures and co-opted by the nazis. Unless youre arguing that the combination of lines is some magical emblem, in which case, half of asia would be implicated, then it makes sense that students might sketch it out as part of a historical lesson. Or are we not supposed to talk or even touch on WWII?

NP. What would be the reason/necessity to have kids draw such a symbol as part of a lesson?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

It's kind of hard to believe that people can't see that lessons that involving drawing Hitler (in any context), canceling Holocaust survivors and expelling three students in March is anything other than anti-Semitic. No one is challenging criticism of the IDF or Israel's heavy-handed response to October 7th, but rather, you know, anti-Semitism. Like "you're the reason people hate Jews" or celebrating (incorrectly) an October 7th death.

How is this anti-Semitic?

And for that matter, why would drawing Hitler be anti-Semitic either? Unless youre lionizing the guy... I mean drawing someone is a neutral act. We hire courtroom artists to draw the most vile criminals and murderers, that's hardly an endorsement of them.

Sure. they could also draw swastikas as a neutral act just to show the symbols of the strong Machiavellian leader.

Sure. I'd also advise you never to travel to east asia, where swastikas are still widely used and literally can be observed on google maps marking temples every 200 feet or so. This oversensitivity to historical facts and symbols is what makes people roll their eyes. Again, unless the school is ENDORSING these things, what exactly would be anti-semitic about portraying historical accuracy?

So just to be clear - your position is that people who are offended by Nazi swastikas are “oversensitive” because Hindus use a similar symbol for totally benign, non-Nazi reasons? I don’t think anyone in America in 2025 is going to see a swastika (particularly if the assignment had to do with nazis) and think “oh, must be the Hindu symbol. It would be oversensitive of me to react.” Like what even ?

Yeah, my point is it's a widely used, ancient symbol used in various cultures and co-opted by the nazis. Unless youre arguing that the combination of lines is some magical emblem, in which case, half of asia would be implicated, then it makes sense that students might sketch it out as part of a historical lesson. Or are we not supposed to talk or even touch on WWII?

NP. What would be the reason/necessity to have kids draw such a symbol as part of a lesson?

Probably the same reason you do any classroom activity? To get them to connect with the course material and pay attention?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

It's kind of hard to believe that people can't see that lessons that involving drawing Hitler (in any context), canceling Holocaust survivors and expelling three students in March is anything other than anti-Semitic. No one is challenging criticism of the IDF or Israel's heavy-handed response to October 7th, but rather, you know, anti-Semitism. Like "you're the reason people hate Jews" or celebrating (incorrectly) an October 7th death.

How is this anti-Semitic?

And for that matter, why would drawing Hitler be anti-Semitic either? Unless youre lionizing the guy... I mean drawing someone is a neutral act. We hire courtroom artists to draw the most vile criminals and murderers, that's hardly an endorsement of them.

Sure. they could also draw swastikas as a neutral act just to show the symbols of the strong Machiavellian leader.

Sure. I'd also advise you never to travel to east asia, where swastikas are still widely used and literally can be observed on google maps marking temples every 200 feet or so. This oversensitivity to historical facts and symbols is what makes people roll their eyes. Again, unless the school is ENDORSING these things, what exactly would be anti-semitic about portraying historical accuracy?

So just to be clear - your position is that people who are offended by Nazi swastikas are “oversensitive” because Hindus use a similar symbol for totally benign, non-Nazi reasons? I don’t think anyone in America in 2025 is going to see a swastika (particularly if the assignment had to do with nazis) and think “oh, must be the Hindu symbol. It would be oversensitive of me to react.” Like what even ?

Yeah, my point is it's a widely used, ancient symbol used in various cultures and co-opted by the nazis. Unless youre arguing that the combination of lines is some magical emblem, in which case, half of asia would be implicated, then it makes sense that students might sketch it out as part of a historical lesson. Or are we not supposed to talk or even touch on WWII?

NP. What would be the reason/necessity to have kids draw such a symbol as part of a lesson?

Probably the same reason you do any classroom activity? To get them to connect with the course material and pay attention?

I'm sure it is pretty easy to just show them a picture of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take this stuff seriously when anyone who criticizes the IDF or Israel attacks on Palestinians gets labelled "anti-Semetic". Seems kinda like a cheap trick and manipulation

It's kind of hard to believe that people can't see that lessons that involving drawing Hitler (in any context), canceling Holocaust survivors and expelling three students in March is anything other than anti-Semitic. No one is challenging criticism of the IDF or Israel's heavy-handed response to October 7th, but rather, you know, anti-Semitism. Like "you're the reason people hate Jews" or celebrating (incorrectly) an October 7th death.

How is this anti-Semitic?

And for that matter, why would drawing Hitler be anti-Semitic either? Unless youre lionizing the guy... I mean drawing someone is a neutral act. We hire courtroom artists to draw the most vile criminals and murderers, that's hardly an endorsement of them.

Sure. they could also draw swastikas as a neutral act just to show the symbols of the strong Machiavellian leader.

Sure. I'd also advise you never to travel to east asia, where swastikas are still widely used and literally can be observed on google maps marking temples every 200 feet or so. This oversensitivity to historical facts and symbols is what makes people roll their eyes. Again, unless the school is ENDORSING these things, what exactly would be anti-semitic about portraying historical accuracy?

So just to be clear - your position is that people who are offended by Nazi swastikas are “oversensitive” because Hindus use a similar symbol for totally benign, non-Nazi reasons? I don’t think anyone in America in 2025 is going to see a swastika (particularly if the assignment had to do with nazis) and think “oh, must be the Hindu symbol. It would be oversensitive of me to react.” Like what even ?

Yeah, my point is it's a widely used, ancient symbol used in various cultures and co-opted by the nazis. Unless youre arguing that the combination of lines is some magical emblem, in which case, half of asia would be implicated, then it makes sense that students might sketch it out as part of a historical lesson. Or are we not supposed to talk or even touch on WWII?

It’s very clear that you’re not arguing in good faith here but, just for the record: symbols have the meanings we imbue them with as a society, and that can differ from region to region. It is beyond any reasonable dispute that if people see a swastika in America in 2025, they’re going to assume it’s a nazi symbol (not an Hindu one) and react in very predictable ways.

Here, students were apparently asked to depict a Machiavellian leader and chose to draw a giant portrait of Hitler. The teacher/school should have foreseen that, regardless of the specifics of the assignment, that portrait might provoke a strong emotional response from Jewish students. The fact that they apparently DIDN’T foresee that, or didn’t care, speaks volumes about their priorities. And whether you think the assignment was actively malicious in some way (I personally don’t), it’s very clear from this and the many, many other incidents detailed in the complaint that the school’s priorities do not include the welfare of their Jewish students.

Re: this part: “it makes sense that students might sketch it out as part of a historical lesson. Or are we not supposed to talk or even touch on WWII?” To be clear, this was not an assignment about WWII/given in the context of any larger lesson about WWII or the Holocaust. In fact, when the parents tried to PROVIDE that context in the form of a Holocaust Memorial Day speaker, they were shut down and the event was cancelled.