horrible teacher- what did you do?

[Anonymous]

Op Again. Your facts are wrong. I am not responding to any more of these back and forths. You can have the last word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op Again. Your facts are wrong. I am not responding to any more of these back and forths. You can have the last word.

My facts can be verified by asking any current Murch student who was in Kindergarten prior to this incident you and/or your friend trumped up.

I don't need the last word as your own statements on this thread make it readily obvious that you have a personal grudge against the Principal and that you've used this trumped up incident and the unhfortunate specials teacher as a stalking horse to slander and malign both her and the Principal.

And despite your protestations to the contrary, your OP goes straight at the Principal. You may want to re-read it.

And perhaps with your free time, you can now volunteer at the school to run the errands from the auxilliary classrooms so my and other's children are not deprived of the Class room Aide or teacher's time who must now run the errands.

[Anonymous]

new poster here. i don't want to get involved in the argument and i am not familiar with murch but....

does anyone else find it even slightly alarming that K children are allowed to walk between school buildings unescorted, esp now that the main building is locked and they need to be buzzed in? i don't think i would be comfortable with this situation. all it takes is one criminal/potential criminal catching wind of this practice....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:". No Principal is going to satisfy every parent all the time. We've got our share of dilletante parents - apparently some who post here - who think that the Principal at Murch can fire or discipline teaching staff at will. "

I have no thoughts that the Principal can fire teachers at her will. My complaint is that Principal Lewis did not take the appropriate steps to file the proper documentation for our children's safety. She did not file reports with the Office of School Security, as she should have, after 2 major incidents- in spite of being asked directly by parents if she did, and her assuring them that she had.
When the Office of School Security found out what transpired, they had to pursue her to get her to file the reports so that the incidents could be investigated. The investigations are ongoing and I believe are in (or close to) the hands of the legal part of DCPS who decides what happens now.
It is not in Ms. Lewis' purview to determine if a teacher is fired. It IS in her job description to have the safety of the children as her utmost concern, and as such, promptly refer incidents to the Office of School Security. She failed to do so.
And of this " Ms. Lewis has the overwhelming respect and endorsement of the teaching staff at Murch"-- I would not be so sure anymore.

Well, OP, I am glad we agree the Principal's and Chancellor's hands are tied in terms of disciplinary action they can exercise. I am sure you would also agree that when they do initiate disciplinary action they must have legitimate and reasonable grounds for doing so.

You seem to be surprised that kindergarden kids were "locked out of the building, having been sent on an errand for her". This tells me that your are unaware of the normal routines at the school.

Since my kids have been there and long before, it has been a standing practice for teachers in the Kaufman Wing (the trailiers where the kindergaten and pre-K's are located) to send kids on necessary errands to the main building. Each week, for example, a child in my kids classes was assigned the responsibility to be the runner from the auxilliary classrooms to the main office for necessary errands.

So, it is not surprising to me that children were sent on an errand by the specials teacher as this is/was a common practice at the time by all teaching staff located in the auxilliary buildings (where the teacher in question is assigned) pre-dating Ms. Lewis' arrival. Neither is it surprising that the children may have encountered difficulties with the buzzer system or a delay in the response by the main office assistant who must now buzz them (and other visitors) in, since DCPS has recently installed a buzzer controlled security lock/camera on the door to the main building with which they may not have been familiar.

Given the foregoing, it is perfectly understandable why the Principal may have chosen to not elevate this non-incident to a formal security report. I don't know what was said between her and the complaining parent, and unless you were there you do not either. Even so, based on what you've related, it would appear the Principal had no reasonable grounds for pursuing any action against the teacher on this matter. In fact, had she done so, and subsequently there was actual grounds for a reasonable action to be made, her having initiated a previous action based on a trivial non-incident would prejudice the subsequent case!

Before elevating this 'incident' to the status of a formal security complaint with downtown, you might have first familiarized yourself with the long-standing practice of all teachers in the auxilliary classrooms using children as runners for the last couple decades. Indeed, had the teacher in question left the other 20 - 25 or so students alone in the classroom to deliver the attendance sheet (or whatever errand was being accomplished), that would have been the basis for a legitimate complaint.

Based on what you have related in this thread, I think you owe the people who have read it an apology for misleading them. Not to mention the Principal and the school's reputation which you seem to have have baselessly damaged in a public forum.

New poster here. Your post made my head spin. Are you KIDDING that KINDERGARTEN CHILDREN ARE SENT AS RUNNERS FOR TEACHERS AND THAT THEY "MAY HAVE ENCOUNTERED DIFFICULTIES" when locked out of the school because of DELAYS in the buzzer system?

My head is about to explode. Now I will NEVER send my children to DCPS.

Unbelievable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:new poster here. i don't want to get involved in the argument and i am not familiar with murch but....

does anyone else find it even slightly alarming that K children are allowed to walk between school buildings unescorted, esp now that the main building is locked and they need to be buzzed in? i don't think i would be comfortable with this situation. all it takes is one criminal/potential criminal catching wind of this practice....

PP here. Of course! Plus they've been doing this for 25 years.

Now I know why people pay $25k a year for private school tuition.

[Anonymous]

New poster here. Your post made my head spin. Are you KIDDING that KINDERGARTEN CHILDREN ARE SENT AS RUNNERS FOR TEACHERS AND THAT THEY "MAY HAVE ENCOUNTERED DIFFICULTIES" when locked out of the school because of DELAYS in the buzzer system?

My head is about to explode. Now I will NEVER send my children to DCPS.

Unbelievable.




They are NOT used as runners from building to building. They are used as "runners" in pairs- (its one of the classroom jobs-- bringing attendance to the office mainly) in classrooms inside the main building. There are Full Time Aides in Kindergarten and they accompany children to their specials and are there to help, as well as to make sure kids do not have to walk from building to building alone, if there is a need for them to go. Not sure where the info to the contrary is coming from. I've been a Murch parent for 7 years and they don't--really. Definitely ask at open houses how its handled at different schools, but they are not at Murch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:new poster here. i don't want to get involved in the argument and i am not familiar with murch but....

does anyone else find it even slightly alarming that K children are allowed to walk between school buildings unescorted, esp now that the main building is locked and they need to be buzzed in? i don't think i would be comfortable with this situation. all it takes is one criminal/potential criminal catching wind of this practice....

PP here. Of course! Plus they've been doing this for 25 years.

Now I know why people pay $25k a year for private school tuition.

Oh now I get it-- you're the troll!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op Again. Your facts are wrong. I am not responding to any more of these back and forths. You can have the last word.

My child brought home a notice from the Murch Principal that the teacher in question will return to her regular teaching duties.

So, it would appear that DCPS' investigation that was initiated by the OP and/or his/her friend, lacked merit.

I certainly hope OP will register a public apology to the teacher and to the Principal in the same venue (here) as the accusations were made.

As to K acting as runners between the 20 yards or so separating the K wing from nearest entrance to the main building, mine frequently did when they were in K, and I observed others doing so on numerous occasions. I have observed them doing so in pairs, and at other times accompanied by an aide.

20 yards. That is about the same distance as the special classroom to which the teacher in question is assigned, and is close to the length of a typical driveway.

To my knowledge, this practice was in effect during the terms of the previous 4-5 permanent and acting principals at Murch.

As to the event of which OP complains and would fault the Principal and/or the teacher, my guess is the location of the buzzer was probably at fault. I certainly hope OP will devote as much time and energy to getting DCPs facilities folks to lower the buzer about 8-12 inches and get the button painted red or yellow.

Now that would help.

Interestingly, OP mentions the promotion of an esteemed teacher to be vice principal. What OP fails to mention is that the Principal she has attacked is the one who made that call, much to the consternation of a few parents whose children are in her class. A good, but tough call by the Principal for which OP gives her no credit.

[Anonymous]

I hope the teacher asks for an apology from whoever slighted her name. Murch has a national board certified teacher, a staff of highly credenitaled teachers, detailed special education coordinator, embedded school psychologist and counseling, a fabulous team of ESL support, and support staff. The teachers often talk about the parents such as the poster of "horrible teacher" as being too involved in frivolous nature. As a colleague posted, in other words, YOU HAVE TOO MUCH TIME ON YOUR HANDS. Why don't you enter the building and help out the knidergarten unit. Kudos to Michelle Rhee for a decision, which is deduced from actuality.

[Anonymous]

I agree! Now, let's start a thread entitled, "nothing to do...let's get people fired!" really was it worth it!
SIGNED A PROUD MURCH MUSTANG PARENT

[Anonymous]

There seems to be more to this issue than these last few posters know about. Please see what the MDT sent home to Murch families below (I removed names) . We should all reserve judgement as I suspect more information will be forthcoming. For the record, we support Murch, I have spent countless hours working on whole school volunteering and in classroom volunteering, I have a child who has thrived in the nationally certified teacher's class, who has benefitted greatly from the highly credentialed teachers, who loves the school counselor and loved the lip synch she organized, but who still was seriously affected by the actions of this teacher being discussed. When one's child (and 99 other kids) are put at risk it is hardly of a "frivolous nature".
FROM THE MURCH MDT:
We are writing to follow up on the letter sent home by Principal X March 16 regarding Ms Y returning to her classroom instructional duties on March 17. We understand that some Murch parents have concerns about this decision and how it has been communicated. It is our understanding that the complaints, investigation and decisions were all handled by DCPS, not Principal X. Although we understand that contract-related and other legal requirements may limit what DCPS officials and Ms. X are able to say about this matter, we are not satisfied with the extraordinarily limited way in which DCPS communicated its decision to the Murch community. We are now seeking additional information from DCPS, including an explanation of the investigatory and decision-making processes, the manner in which Murch parent input was addressed in the course of the investigation, and any steps that DCPS may have taken or be planning to take to address parent concerns going forward, in this or any similar situation. We have also requested that DCPS send an appropriate official to Murch to discuss this issue with parents.

MDT Parent Representatives:

[Anonymous]

Again, this letter should go to the DCPS central investigatory division. What does Principal X have to do with it at this point? It seems that your anger is targeted towards a person that is isolated of the situation. Did you ask for a meeting wtih Teacher Y and Principal X or are you legally advised not to follow the chain of command from the first place? I do understand your committment to the safety of the students. What was the deviation of student safety? And, why was it concluded that the teacher can resume post? From your point of view please.

[Anonymous]

i am not the OP but I am the PP. I do not have an issue with principal X. I do have an issue with teacher Y due to safety and discipline issues she has used on many children, including mine. I did not learn of the thing she was being investigated for until it had exploded. There is a question in my mind about how the investigation was done, as no children or parents (to the best of my knowledge) were contacted by DCPS investigators. The teacher has admitted to doing what she was accused of - why that is not sufficient evidence to recommend termination-- I do not know. I would like to hear DCPS communicate to parents how they came to the conclusion that led her to being returned to the classroom.

[Anonymous]

My child did not bring a letter home? What day?