Such great hires, wow, those are your tuition dollars hard at work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is Sidwell offering any more information about what exactly it knew when it hired this teacher? Or how much due diligence it did or did not do when this hire was made?

Is it going to conduct an internal investigation about whether this teacher has had any inappropriate conduct with Sidwell students?

you sound like a reporter or prosecutor

And you sound like a defensive Sidwell parent. What's wrong with wanting more information?

Feel free to reach out to the Head of School.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:is Sidwell offering any more information about what exactly it knew when it hired this teacher? Or how much due diligence it did or did not do when this hire was made?

Is it going to conduct an internal investigation about whether this teacher has had any inappropriate conduct with Sidwell students?

you sound like a reporter or prosecutor

And you sound like a defensive Sidwell parent. What's wrong with wanting more information?

Anonymous wrote:is Sidwell offering any more information about what exactly it knew when it hired this teacher? Or how much due diligence it did or did not do when this hire was made?

Is it going to conduct an internal investigation about whether this teacher has had any inappropriate conduct with Sidwell students?

you sound like a reporter or prosecutor

is Sidwell offering any more information about what exactly it knew when it hired this teacher? Or how much due diligence it did or did not do when this hire was made?

Is it going to conduct an internal investigation about whether this teacher has had any inappropriate conduct with Sidwell students?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate to say it... but hiring an unmarried male over the age of about 45 should be a red flag to any school.

Although there's nothing defensible about the particular teacher at issue here, this kind of broad-brushed intolerance is offensive.

You call it broad-brushed intolerance. I call it making a smart decision based on circumstances and contributing factors.

By all means, please share to the class what "circumstances and contributing factors" surrounding age and marital status warrants red-flagging any male applicant.

Anonymous wrote:You people really need a life.
But, this would never happen at a catholic school.

Good one.

You people really need a life.
But, this would never happen at a catholic school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Article from today's Post about the situation. Seems what Sidwell did here is reflective of a new trend toward transparency when situations like this arise. Also interesting to read the comments in this article from the woman who contacted Sidwell about the teacher.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/in-its-response-to-a-sexual-abuse-allegation-sidwell-friends-joins-other-private-schools-in-pursuit-of-more-transparency/2017/05/09/aa2d6d76-31ac-11e7-8674-437ddb6e813e_story.html?utm_term=.8fbfc661aeb5

LOL so typical to try to make this look like a positive for the school.

Typical of the Post, you mean? Or typical of the people quoted? Not sure where you're going.

Anonymous wrote:Article from today's Post about the situation. Seems what Sidwell did here is reflective of a new trend toward transparency when situations like this arise. Also interesting to read the comments in this article from the woman who contacted Sidwell about the teacher.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/in-its-response-to-a-sexual-abuse-allegation-sidwell-friends-joins-other-private-schools-in-pursuit-of-more-transparency/2017/05/09/aa2d6d76-31ac-11e7-8674-437ddb6e813e_story.html?utm_term=.8fbfc661aeb5

LOL so typical to try to make this look like a positive for the school.

Article from today's Post about the situation. Seems what Sidwell did here is reflective of a new trend toward transparency when situations like this arise. Also interesting to read the comments in this article from the woman who contacted Sidwell about the teacher.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/in-its-response-to-a-sexual-abuse-allegation-sidwell-friends-joins-other-private-schools-in-pursuit-of-more-transparency/2017/05/09/aa2d6d76-31ac-11e7-8674-437ddb6e813e_story.html?utm_term=.8fbfc661aeb5

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: ... What would concern me if I was a parent there is this direction to call Bryan with any report of abuse and then he goes to the board who then go to the police. It might be well intentioned, but it also could be a way to buy some time before police are called. It also sets up a process with so many people involved that a victim could worry about loss of privacy and reprisals. It's nice to let parents know that they can call the head of school and the complaint will be taken seriously, but parents should also be told to call the police if their child says she or he has been abused by an adult, including a teacher.

+1 from a Sidwell parent. To me, that was the one weird line of an otherwise very effective letter.

I don't even know Bryan. You can be sure that if my child came home with reports of this kind of thing, he is not the first person I would call.

NP. FWIW, I didn't read that letter as suggesting parents shouldn't contact the police whenever they want. Sounded to me like it was just making clear that anything and everything could be brought to the school. Of course if my child reports clearcut abuse I'm going to the police immediately. But I can imagine lots of gray-area situations where it's not totally clear whether anything improper occurred or where there's a he-said/she-said dynamic. Heck, gray-area situations like that get presented and debated endlessly on DCUM all the time. Just to make up one hypothetical, suppose your child came home and said he thought he overheard another student arranging an after-school meetup with a teacher. Or another ... suppose your child came home to say she thought a teacher might be flirting with her. Are you going to call the police in either of those situations? Not likely. But if I were running a school, I'd surely want to hear about either of those situations so the school could investigate, and also so the school could perhaps spot a pattern of suspicious behavior even if isolated situations have innocent-sounding excuses. I think it's good for any school to try to encourage a "see something, say something" attitude among parents and students.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the impulse to defend your school but the signals here are that this young woman was sexually assaulted. In the article she said it was more than inappropriate touching and that she was too embarrassed to say more at the time. She was also so alarmed at age 35 to find out he was still teaching after he creeped on her linked-in page that she felt compelled to contact the school. This sounds like a brave victim trying to defend people from someone that at one time was a predator. If Sidwell had any indication, and they appear to have, that this guy might have had issues in the past they should not have hired him or done some more due diligence. According to the article, they did not know the extent of the allegations, which to me reads that they took his word for it. The fact that the administrator is gone doesn't mean that Sidwell, and all schools for that matter, shouldn't take a hard look at their hiring practices and background checks, etc.

I think you are reading it a little wrong. Administrator who left in 2003, was aware of something but hired anyhow. That hire, that happened 20 years ago, should not have happened. New administrator in 2017 is made aware the situation and places on leave and then dismisses after investigation. The 2017 action corrected a hire that should not have happened, but that no one apparently knew about.

Same issue today would have resulted in a non-hire.

To be clear, the former administrator leaving the school in 2003 didn't extinguish the school's potential liability. The school was on notice re the allegations of abuse, even if the victim hasn't yet shared all of the details.

What would concern me if I was a parent there is this direction to call Bryan with any report of abuse and then he goes to the board who then go to the police. It might be well intentioned, but it also could be a way to buy some time before police are called. It also sets up a process with so many people involved that a victim could worry about loss of privacy and reprisals. It's nice to let parents know that they can call the head of school and the complaint will be taken seriously, but parents should also be told to call the police if their child says she or he has been abused by an adult, including a teacher.

+1 from a Sidwell parent. To me, that was the one weird line of an otherwise very effective letter.

I don't even know Bryan. You can be sure that if my child came home with reports of this kind of thing, he is not the first person I would call.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I hate to say it... but hiring an unmarried male over the age of about 45 should be a red flag to any school.

Although there's nothing defensible about the particular teacher at issue here, this kind of broad-brushed intolerance is offensive.

You call it broad-brushed intolerance. I call it making a smart decision based on circumstances and contributing factors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get the impulse to defend your school but the signals here are that this young woman was sexually assaulted. In the article she said it was more than inappropriate touching and that she was too embarrassed to say more at the time. She was also so alarmed at age 35 to find out he was still teaching after he creeped on her linked-in page that she felt compelled to contact the school. This sounds like a brave victim trying to defend people from someone that at one time was a predator. If Sidwell had any indication, and they appear to have, that this guy might have had issues in the past they should not have hired him or done some more due diligence. According to the article, they did not know the extent of the allegations, which to me reads that they took his word for it. The fact that the administrator is gone doesn't mean that Sidwell, and all schools for that matter, shouldn't take a hard look at their hiring practices and background checks, etc.

I think you are reading it a little wrong. Administrator who left in 2003, was aware of something but hired anyhow. That hire, that happened 20 years ago, should not have happened. New administrator in 2017 is made aware the situation and places on leave and then dismisses after investigation. The 2017 action corrected a hire that should not have happened, but that no one apparently knew about.

Same issue today would have resulted in a non-hire.

To be clear, the former administrator leaving the school in 2003 didn't extinguish the school's potential liability. The school was on notice re the allegations of abuse, even if the victim hasn't yet shared all of the details.

What would concern me if I was a parent there is this direction to call Bryan with any report of abuse and then he goes to the board who then go to the police. It might be well intentioned, but it also could be a way to buy some time before police are called. It also sets up a process with so many people involved that a victim could worry about loss of privacy and reprisals. It's nice to let parents know that they can call the head of school and the complaint will be taken seriously, but parents should also be told to call the police if their child says she or he has been abused by an adult, including a teacher.