Bullyingwarrior: NMUSD Community found this Lawsuit with Kathleen C...

Bullyingwarrior: NMUSD Community found this Lawsuit with Kathleen C...: BULLYINGWARRIOR AND KIMBERLY MIMMS THANK KATHLEEN CARROLL FOR BEING OPEN, TRANSPARENT, HELPING EDUCATE OTHERS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCED CO...

Bullyingwarrior: PROMOTIONS GIVEN ON JUNE 15, 2011 DURING A TIME OF...

Bullyingwarrior: PROMOTIONS GIVEN ON JUNE 15, 2011 DURING A TIME OF...: Office of Public Information Laura Boss, Director of Communications 714-424-5070 lboss@nmusd.us ...

PROMOTIONS GIVEN ON JUNE 15, 2011 DURING A TIME OF RETALIATION TO OTHERS IN DISTRICT, STUDENTS AND FAMILIES. WAS THE DISTRICT HIDING SOMETHING AND ACTIONS OF OTHERS?

Office of Public Information Laura Boss, Director of Communications 714-424-5070 lboss@nmusd.us

For Immediate Release: Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Newport-Mesa Unified School District Announces Appointments of New Principals for California, Killybrooke, Newport Heights, and Pomona Elementary Schools; and, the Director of Elementary Education
In March/April, 2011, three N-MUSD principals and one director formally announced their plans to leave/retire from N-MUSD at the end of the current school year: Kelli Smith, California Elementary School, Kathy Sanchez, Killybrooke Elementary School, Stacy Holmes, Pomona Elementary School, and Bonnie Swann, Executive Director of Elementary Education.
In April 2011, the District began the process to recruit principal candidates. The process included community forums held at each school to gather input from parents and staff on the attributes they would like to see in their next principal. Following the forums, the District held interviews conducted by panels comprised of district, employee and parent representatives from each of the open schools. The District concluded the final interviews the week of June 1.
The District is pleased to announce the following appointments officially approved by the Board of Education on Tuesday, June 14, 2011.
Matthew Broesamle - Principal, California Elementary
Mr. Matthew Broesamle has been a teacher in N-MUSD for 8 years. He currently serves as a 6th grade lead teacher at Adams Elementary. Matt previously taught 5th grade at Adams and has taken on many leadership roles at Adams including upper grade lead teacher, grade level chair for 6th grade, site tech coordinator and staff development coordinator. One of his favorite jobs has been creator and advisor of the student club A.R.K. – Acts of Random Kindness. Matt is currently a member of the District’s Leadership Institute. He received his teaching credential and Master in Education from ConcordiaUniversity. MatthasbeenaresidentofCostaMesafor27yearsandisa graduate of Costa Mesa High School.
Megan Elsten Brown - Principal, Pomona Elementary
Ms. Megan Elsten Brown has been with N-MUSD since 2005, most recently as the Even Start TOSA/Coordinator. At N-MUSD, she has also served as an intervention teacher, adult education ESL teacher, and elementary Spanish teacher. Megan is a proud alum of N-MUSD, having attended Newport-Mesa schools from kindergarten through twelfth grade. Megan is a member of the N-MUSD Leadership Institute. She received her Bachelor of Arts from University of California, Los Angeles and both her Professional Clear Multiple Subject Teaching Credential with CLAD and Master in Multicultural Education from National University. It is a great benefit that Megan already knows many Pomona parents and community members.

Lorie Hoggard, Ed.D. – Principal, Killybrooke Elementary
Dr. Lorie Hoggard began her career at N-MUSD in 1999 as Principal of Sonora Elementary. In 2002, she was named Director of Early Childhood Education. Dr. Hoggard received both her Bachelor of Arts and Master of Arts from California State University,LongBeach. ShereceivedherDoctorofEducationfromtheUniversityof Southern California. Lorie volunteered to get our preschool program started in 2002; Nine years later the program is now one of the best in the state. We owe many of our K-12 successes to the preparation our students have received through our preschool program. Unfortunately, our preschool program funding has been reduced by the state this coming year. Lorie’s true love is being an elementary principal and we are thrilled for her to become the Principal of Killybrooke Elementary School. Lorie’s knowledge of the District and her tremendous skills will be an asset to the school community.
Kurt Suhr, Ed.D. - Director, Elementary Education
Dr. Kurt Suhr has served in N-MUSD for the past 14 years. He has held the position of teacher, TOSA, assistant principal and principal. He is currently completing his 7th year as Principal of Newport Heights Elementary. Dr. Suhr has also been a trainer for the district-wide Assessment Program, a resource principal to new principals and a member of the N-MUSD Negotiations Team. Dr. Suhr received his Bachelor of Arts from the University of California, Irvine. He received his teaching credential from California State University, Long Beach and his Administrative Credential from University of California, Irvine. He earned his Master of Arts from Pepperdine University and his Doctor of Education from University of California, Irvine. Amazingly, Kurt is another K-12 Newport-Mesa student success story. We will welcome Kurt’s vast knowledge, experience and bilingual skills to the District office team.
Kathleen Jaquin - Principal, Newport Heights Elementary
Ms. Kathleen Jaquin has 15 years of experience as an educator and has served as an elementary principal for the past five years in the Ocean View School District. Prior to her role as elementary principal, Ms. Jaquin served as a middle school principal and assistant principal, resource teacher, and elementary teacher. Ms. Jaquin received her Bachelor of Science from Niagara University in New York and her Master of Science from State University of New York at Plattsburgh. She completed her Professional Administrative Services Credential at the University of La Verne. We welcome her wealth of experience to the District and to Newport Heights Elementary School.
The new administrators will assume their leadership roles effective July 1, 2011.
### 

Bullyingwarrior: 5TH GRADE STUDENT EXPERIENCED “BULLYING FROM TOP S...

Bullyingwarrior: 5TH GRADE STUDENT EXPERIENCED “BULLYING FROM TOP S...: 5TH GRADE STUDENT EXPERIENCED:  “BULLYING FROM TOP SCHOOL OFFICIALS”,  FOR MONTHS FROM RETALIATION. FAMILY REPORTED TEACHER BREAKING A S...

5TH GRADE STUDENT EXPERIENCED “BULLYING FROM TOP SCHOOL OFFICIALS”, FOR MONTHS FROM RETALIATION.

5TH GRADE STUDENT EXPERIENCED: 
“BULLYING FROM TOP SCHOOL OFFICIALS”, FOR MONTHS FROM RETALIATION.

FAMILY REPORTED TEACHER BREAKING A SCHOOL VIOLATION PROTECTED FROM PRINCIPAL IN 2011, AT NEWPORT HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. WHY WAS IT PROTECTED ALL THE WAY UP TO THE CHAIN OF COMMAND TO SUPERINTENDENT, JEFFREY HUBBARD AND DISTRICT EMPLOYEES OFFICES? 

HOW COULD A 5TH GRADE TEACHER BE ALLOWED TO BRING HER BABY ONTO CAMPUS AND INTO CLASSROOM WHILE TEACHING HER STUDENTS IN THE FIRST PLACE? 

WHY DID THE TEACHER TAKE HER ANGER OUT ON THIS CHILD WHEN SHE COULD NOT BRING HER BABY ONTO CAMPUS ANYMORE AND OTHERS?  

WHY DID POLICE DEPARTMENTS FAIL TO PROTECT THE CHILD, REFUSED TO TAKE A WRITTEN COMPLAINT OR EVEN LOOK INTO THIS MATTER FURTHER? DID IT NOT MATTER THAT THE OFFICIALS CREATED AN UNSAFE, UNFAIR, UNEQUAL, SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT? 

IT APPEARS TO NMUSD COMMUNITY THAT THIS BEHAVIOR HAS GONE ON FOR YEARS IF ANYONE REPORTS, OR QUESTIONS THIS SCHOOL DISTRICT. SHOULD ALL PEOPLE BE FEARFUL TO COME FORWARD WITH THEIR CONCERNS IN NEWPORT MESA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, ABOUT NOT KEEPING CHILDREN, FAMILIES, GOOD TEACHER/STAFF AND OTHERS SAFE AT ALL TIMES? 

Bullyingwarrior: Bullyingwarrior: Bullying in Schools against Schoo...

Bullyingwarrior: Bullyingwarrior: Bullying in Schools against Schoo...: Bullyingwarrior: Bullying in Schools against School Officials: Offi... : Home About OCR Programs/Initiatives Know Your Rights Offi...

Bullyingwarrior: Bullyingwarrior: Bullying in Schools against Schoo...

Bullyingwarrior: Bullyingwarrior: Bullying in Schools against Schoo...: Bullyingwarrior: Bullying in Schools against School Officials: Offi... : Home About OCR Programs/Initiatives Know Your Rights Offi...

Teachers Who Bully Students

TEACHERS WHO BULLY STUDENTS: PATTERNS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS [9520]

Alan McEvoy, Wittenberg University, Ohio

This study examines non-sexual abuses of power over students by teachers – bullying – that have serious academic and social consequences. Focus group discussions with school staff, and interviews with 236 respondents about their experiences with high school teachers whom they perceive as bullies reveal the pervasiveness of the problem. The data also suggest that school policies and responses to reports of abusive behavior by teachers generally are ineffective or do not exist. Few schools have any avenue to redress legitimate grievances. Suggestions for effective school response, including policy implications and possible legal ramifications, are offered.

Recently, the phenomenon of peer-on-peer bullying by students has garnered considerable attention in both the popular media and in scholarly publications. Journalists, researchers, and educational practitioners have sought to document the nature and extent of bullying in schools, its consequences, and the characteristics of bullies, victims, and bystanders. Efforts also have been directed toward developing school policies on bullying, staff training, and prevention and intervention programming (Davis, 2004; Garbarino and DeLara, 2002; Olweus, Limber, and Mihalic, 1997).

Although progress has been made in gathering baseline data, gaps exist in our knowledge about key aspects of bullying. The focus of this research is on an area of abusive behavior that has received virtually no attention – when teachers bully students. For the purpose of this study, bullying by teachers (or other staff, including coaches, who have supervisory control over students) is defined as a pattern of conduct, rooted in a power differential, that threatens, harms, humiliates, induces fear, or causes students substantial emotional distress, and serves no legitimate academic or ethical purpose. Included are behaviors that any reasonable person would recognize as having a significant risk of harming students. 

Bullyingwarrior: Bullying in Schools against School Officials: Offi...

Bullyingwarrior: Bullying in Schools against School Officials: Offi...: Home About OCR Programs/Initiatives Know Your Rights Office Contacts Prevention Reports & Resources Reading Room Ne...

Bullying in Schools against School Officials: Office for Civil Rights

	Home About OCR Programs/Initiatives Know Your Rights Office Contacts Prevention Reports & Resources Reading Room News Questions and Answers

OCR COMPLAINT PROCESSING PROCEDURES

LAWS ENFORCED BY OCR

OCR enforces the following laws:

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin;
• Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex;
• Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability;
• Age Discrimination Act of 1975, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of age;
• Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability;
• Boy Scouts of America Equal Access Act, part of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, which prohibits denial of access to or other discrimination against the Boy Scouts or other Title 36 U.S.C. youth groups in public elementary schools, public secondary schools, local education agencies, and state education agencies that have a designated open forum or limited public forum.

EVALUATION OF THE COMPLAINT

OCR evaluates each complaint that it receives in order to determine whether it can investigate the complaint.  OCR makes this determination with respect to each allegation in the complaint. For example, OCR must determine whether OCR has legal authority to investigate the complaint; that is, whether the complaint alleges a violation of one or more of the laws OCR enforces.  OCR must also determine whether the complaint is filed on time.  Generally, a complaint must be filed with OCR within 180 calendar days of the last act that the complainant believes was discriminatory.¹  If the complaint is not filed on time, the complainant should provide the reason for the delay and request a waiver of this filing requirement.  OCR will decide whether to grant the waiver.  In addition, OCR will determine whether the complaint contains enough information about the alleged discrimination to proceed to investigation.  If OCR needs more information in order to clarify the complaint, it will contact the complainant; the complainant has 20 calendar days within which to respond to OCR’s request for information.
OCR will dismiss the complaint if OCR determines that:

• OCR does not have legal authority to investigate the complaint;
• The complaint fails to state a violation of one of the laws OCR enforces;
• The complaint was not filed timely and that a waiver will not be granted;
• The complaint is unclear or incomplete and the complainant does not provide the information that OCR requests within 20 calendar days of OCR’s request;
• The allegations raised by the complaint have been resolved;
• The complaint has been investigated by another Federal, state, or local civil rights agency or through a recipient's internal grievance procedures, including due process proceedings, and the resolution meets OCR regulatory standards or, if still pending, OCR anticipates that there will be a comparable resolution process under comparable legal standards;
• The same allegations have been filed by the complainant against the same recipient in state or Federal court;
• The allegations are foreclosed by previous decisions of the Federal courts, the U.S. Secretary of Education, the U.S. Department of Education’s Civil Rights Reviewing Authority, or OCR policy determinations.

OPENING THE COMPLAINT FOR INVESTIGATION

If OCR determines that it will investigate the complaint, it will issue letters of notification to the complainant and the recipient. Opening a complaint for investigation in no way implies that OCR has made a determination with regard to the merits of the complaint. During the investigation, OCR is a neutral fact-finder. OCR will collect and analyze relevant evidence from the complainant, the recipient, and other sources as appropriate. OCR will ensure that investigations are legally sufficient and are dispositive of the allegations raised in the complaint.

INVESTIGATION OF THE COMPLAINT

OCR may use a variety of fact-finding techniques in its investigation of a complaint.  These techniques may include reviewing documentary evidence submitted by both parties, conducting interviews with the complainant, recipient’s personnel, and other witnesses, and/or site visits.  At the conclusion of its investigation, OCR will determine with regard to each allegation that:

• there is insufficient evidence to support a conclusion that the recipient failed to comply with the law, or
• a preponderance of the evidence supports a conclusion that the recipient failed to comply with the law

OCR's determination will be explained in a letter of findings sent to the complainant and recipient. Letters of findings issued by OCR address individual OCR cases. Letters of findings contain fact-specific investigative findings and dispositions of individual cases. Letters of findings are not formal statements of OCR policy and they should not be relied upon, cited, or construed as such. OCR's formal policy statements are approved by a duly authorized OCR official and made available to the public.

RESOLUTION OF THE COMPLAINT AFTER A DETERMINATION OF NONCOMPLIANCE

If OCR determines that a recipient failed to comply with one of the civil rights laws that OCR enforces, OCR will contact the recipient and will attempt to secure the recipient’s willingness to negotiate a voluntary resolution agreement.  If the recipient agrees to resolve the complaint, the recipient will negotiate and sign a written resolution agreement that describes the specific remedial actions that the recipient will undertake to address the area(s) of noncompliance identified by OCR. The terms of the resolution agreement, if fully performed, will remedy the identified violation(s) in compliance with applicable civil rights laws. OCR will monitor the recipient’s implementation of the terms of the resolution agreement to verify that the remedial actions agreed to by the recipient have been implemented consistent with the terms of the agreement and that the area(s) of noncompliance identified were resolved consistent with applicable civil rights laws.
If the recipient refuses to negotiate a voluntary resolution agreement or does not immediately indicate its willingness to negotiate, OCR will inform the recipient that it has 30 days to indicate its willingness to engage in negotiations to voluntarily resolve identified areas of noncompliance, or OCR will issue a Letter of Finding to the parties providing a factual and legal basis for a finding non-compliance.
If, after the issuance of the Letter of Finding of non-compliance, the recipient continues to refuse to negotiate a resolution agreement with OCR, OCR will issue a Letter of Impending Enforcement Action and will again attempt to obtain voluntary compliance.   If the recipient remains unwilling to negotiate an agreement, OCR will either initiate administrative enforcement proceedings to suspend, terminate, or refuse to grant or continue Federal financial assistance to the recipient, or will refer the case to the Department of Justice.  OCR may also move immediately to defer any new or additional Federal financial assistance to the institution.

RESOLUTION OF THE COMPLAINT PRIOR TO THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION

Early Complaint Resolution (ECR):
Early Complaint Resolution allows the parties (the complainant and the institution which is the subject of the complaint) an opportunity to resolve the complaint allegations quickly; generally, soon after the complaint has been opened for investigation. If both parties are willing to try this approach, and if OCR determines that Early Complaint Resolution is appropriate, OCR will facilitate settlement discussions between the parties and work with the parties to help them understand the legal standards and possible remedies. To the extent possible, staff assigned by OCR to facilitate the Early Complaint Resolution process will not be the staff assigned to the investigation of the complaint. OCR does not approve, sign or endorse any agreement reached between the parties as a result of Early Complaint Resolution, and OCR does not monitor the agreement. However, if the recipient institution does not comply with the terms of the agreement, the complainant may file another complaint with OCR within 180 days of the date of the original discrimination or within 60 days of the date the complainant learns of the failure to comply with the agreement, whichever date is later.
Resolution of the Complaint Prior To the Conclusion of an Investigation
A complaint may also be resolved before the conclusion of an investigation, if the recipient expresses an interest in resolving the complaint. If OCR determines that the resolution of the complaint before the conclusion of an investigation is appropriate, OCR will attempt to negotiate an agreement with the recipient. OCR will notify the complainant of the recipient's request and will keep the complainant informed throughout all stages of the resolution process. The provisions of the resolution agreement that is reached must be aligned with the complaint allegations and the information obtained during the investigation, and must be consistent with applicable regulations. A resolution agreement reached before the conclusion of an investigation will be monitored by OCR.

APPEAL OF OCR’S DETERMINATIONS

OCR is committed to a high quality resolution of every case. OCR affords an opportunity to the complainant to submit an appeal of OCR's dismissal or administrative closure of a complaint or letter finding insufficient evidence of a violation. The appeal process provides an opportunity for complainants to bring information to OCR’s attention that would change OCR’s decision. The appeal process will not be a de novo review of OCR’s decision.
If the complainant disagrees with OCR’s decision, he or she may send a written appeal to the Director of the Enforcement Office (Office Director) that issued the determination. If the complainant has documentation to support the appeal, the documentation must be submitted with the complainant’s appeal. In an appeal, the complainant must explain why he or she believes the factual information was incomplete, the analysis of the facts was incorrect, and/or the appropriate legal standard was not applied, and how this would change OCR’s determination in the case. Failure to do so may result in the denial of the appeal.
In order to be timely, an appeal (including any supporting documentation) must be submitted within 60 days of the date of the determination letter. The Office Director may exercise discretion in granting a waiver of the 60-day timeframe where:

1. the complainant was unable to submit the appeal within the 60-day timeframe because of illness or other incapacitating circumstances and the appeal was filed within 30 days after the period of illness or incapacitation ended; or
2. unique circumstances generated by agency action have adversely affected the complainant.

A written response to an appeal will be issued as promptly as possible. The decision of the Office Director constitutes the agency’s final decision. The decision will inform the complainant that he or she "may have the right to file a private suit in federal court whether or not OCR finds a violation."

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Right to File a Separate Court Action
The complainant may have the right to file suit in Federal court, regardless of OCR’s findings.  OCR does not represent the complainant in case processing, so if the complainant wishes to file a court action, he or she must do so through his or her own attorney or on  his or her own through the court’s pro se clerk’s office.
If a complainant alleges discrimination prohibited by the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, a civil action in Federal court can be filed only after the complainant has exhausted administrative remedies.  Administrative remedies are exhausted when either of the following has occurred:

1) 180 days have elapsed since the complainant filed the complaint with OCR and OCR has made no finding; or
2) OCR issues a finding in favor of the recipient.  If this occurs, OCR will promptly notify the complainant and will provide additional information about the right to file for injunctive relief.

Prohibition against Intimidation or Retaliation
An institution under the jurisdiction of the Department of Education may not intimidate, threaten, coerce, or retaliate against anyone who asserts a right protected by the civil rights laws that OCR enforces, or who cooperates in an investigation.  Anyone who believes that he or she has been intimidated or retaliated against should file a complaint with OCR.
Investigatory Use of Personal Information
In order to investigate a complaint, OCR may need to collect and analyze personal information such as student records or employment records. No law requires anyone to give personal information to OCR and no formal sanctions will be imposed on complainants or other persons who do not cooperate in providing information during the complaint investigation and resolution process. However, if OCR is unable to obtain the information necessary to investigate a complaint, we may have to close the complaint.
The Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. § 552, govern the use of personal information that is submitted to all Federal agencies and their individual components, including OCR. The Privacy Act of 1974 protects individuals from the misuse of personal information held by the Federal government. It applies to records that are maintained by the government that are retrieved by the individual's name, social security number, or other personal identifier. It regulates the collection, maintenance, use and dissemination of certain personal information in the files of Federal agencies.
The information that OCR collects is analyzed by authorized personnel within the agency and will be used only for authorized civil rights compliance and enforcement activities. However, in order to investigate or resolve a complaint, OCR may need to reveal certain information to persons outside the agency to verify facts or gather additional information. Such details could include the age or physical condition of a complainant. Also, OCR may be required to reveal information requested under FOIA, which gives the public the right of access to records of Federal agencies. OCR will not release any information to any other agency or individual except in the one of the 11 instances defined in the Department's regulation at 34 C.F.R. § 5b.9(b).
OCR does not reveal the name or other identifying information about an individual unless it is necessary for completion of an investigation or for enforcement activities against an institution that violates the laws, or unless such information is required to be disclosed under the FOIA or the Privacy Act. OCR will keep the identity of complainants confidential except to the extent necessary to carry out the purposes of the civil rights laws, or unless disclosure is required under the FOIA, the Privacy Act or otherwise by law.
FOIA gives the public the right of access to records and files of Federal agencies. Individuals may obtain items from many categories of records of the Federal government, not just materials that apply to them personally. OCR must honor requests for records under FOIA, with some exceptions. Generally, OCR is not required to release documents during the case evaluation and investigation process or enforcement proceedings, if the release could affect the ability of OCR to do its job. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(7)(A). Also, a Federal agency may refuse a request for records if their release would result in an unwarranted invasion of privacy of an individual. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) and (7)(C). Also, a request for other records, such as medical records, may be denied where disclosure would be a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy.
Updated December 2012

¹Complaints that allege discrimination based on age are timely if filed with OCR within 180 calendar days of the date the complainant first knew about the alleged discrimination.

Bullyingwarrior: Education: When the Bully making your child’s life...

Bullyingwarrior: Education: When the Bully making your child’s life...: Wednesday 20 February 2013 i Jobs Dating Property Shop NEWS VOICES SPORT TECH LIFE PROPERTY ARTS   & ...

Education: When the Bully making your child’s life hell is his teacher. Great information shared by The Independent

• Wednesday 20 February 2013

• i Jobs
• Dating
• Property
• Shop

• NEWS
• VOICES
• SPORT
• TECH
• LIFE
• PROPERTY
• ARTS & ENTS
  • Art
  • Architecture
  • Music
  • Classical
  • Films
  • TV & Radio
  • Theatre & Dance
  • Comedy
  • Books
  • Puzzles and Games
• TRAVEL
• MONEY
• INDYBEST
• BLOGS
• STUDENT

Arts & Ents

Education: When the bully making your child's life hell is his teacher

It is rare, but it can turn lives upside-down. Children who find themselves victims of adults who should be guiding them are often not believed, and parents find complaints met by closed ranks. By Caroline Willcocks

CAROLINE WILLCOCKS

 

 

THURSDAY 05 AUGUST 1999

 

 

inShare

 

PRINT

A A A

EMAIL

Related articles

• More children 'not toilet trained' by school age
• Too many exams are 'ruining children's enjoyment of learning'
• Why phonics tests spell trouble
• Michael Gove: Minister on a mission
• Lisa Markwell: The education reform that is testing for everyone

Ads by Google

• ADHD Small Private School
  Grades 6-12 for ADHD/ADD Students. Individualized one-to-one teaching.
  www.FusionAcademy.com/ADHD
• CA Teaching Credential
  Get your Masters & Credential in just 1 year. Apply Online Now.
  pepperdine.edu/teaching-credential
• ADHD Signs & Symptoms
  Warning: These 3 Symptoms Are Sure Signs Your Child May Have ADHD.
  KidCity.com/ADHD

Suggested Topics

• Diplomacy
• Aberdeen
• Psychology
• Teachers

Pat isn't normally an angry person. But what her young son Luke went through has changed all that. For a year, he was humiliated, verbally abused and at times physically hurt. But this is not an everyday story of children being bullied by other children. Luke was bullied by his teacher.

Children have probably been picked on by teachers for as long as schools have existed. A personality clash can set it off, and it is generally the child who comes off worse because he or she lacks the power that the authority of the teacher confers.

In the past children would have kept quiet, while their parents - even if they did discover what was going on - were unlikely to have done anything about it. But in today's anti-bullying climate not all children are keeping it to themselves - although it is not always doing them much good.

It is comparatively rare for teachers to bully. But when it happens the victims who speak out can find themselves treated with hostility and disbelief. In Luke's case nothing was done, despite Pat's complaints to the headteacher and the school governors.

At first Luke was too terrified to confide in Pat. "It was a girl in his class who told me. She said, `the teacher was so mean today, she was pulling Luke, and dragging him, and he fell down on the floor.' During that evening a few other people phoned me because they'd heard something had gone on."

Luke's school had already contacted Pat and her husband, Ian, several times about the child's behaviour. Teachers complained that he fiddled with his tie, or stood up when the other children were sitting down. Both parents had felt that the school was not being patient with their son.

This incident was much more serious, however. Pat went to the school to find out what had happened. "The whole school went up in arms," she says, "and his own teacher refused to teach him on the grounds that she didn't wish for any more defamatory remarks to be made about her."

At first the school denied that the incident had ever happened; it was only much later, when Pat had access to a summary of Luke's records, that she saw this incident, along with another, had been recorded as an instance of the use of "reasonable force for restraint".

In the following months the school contacted Pat constantly. Luke had hurt his head by banging it on the desk, "on purpose". And another time an accidental collision in the playground was regarded as an assault (although the other child involved confirmed that it had been an accident). Luke was sent to another teacher, who told him he was malicious. "She hates me, Mum," he later wept, "she said she hates me."

An educational psychologist who saw Luke confirmed that he was a bright and friendly child, badly traumatised by his school environment. It is common for children who are bullied by teachers to show a loss of self- esteem, aggressive behaviour and problems with sleeping and appetite. Pat decided to move Luke to another school where his behaviour and work are both excellent.

Helen Rimington, a solicitor with the Children's Legal Centre, says: "Parents do find it very frustrating that the investigative process is an internal one in these cases. It can be quite a problem because, when there are no other witnesses, or the witnesses are other children, it's just the teacher's word against the child's."

David, who has special educational needs, was subject to a more subtle form of bullying. Arrangements for his education were constantly overturned by his headteacher, without consent from his mother, or from the multi- disciplinary team of professionals who manage his case.

The headteacher, who had not wanted David to return to school after a long illness, seemed to enjoy frightening him. His mother, Christine, says: "David would come home so upset. The headteacher wanted to wind him up, so that he would do something and she would have the excuse to get him out of that school."

It worked. David became so anxious that Christine removed him from the school. She complained to the governors, but met with a hostile response. "I had a meeting with the chair of governors," she recalls. "He said, `If you ever repeat what I'm saying, I'll deny it was ever said.' He told me in no uncertain terms that unless the headteacher actually physically hit a child, or was caught stealing, then she was staying."

Margaret McGowan, of the Advisory Centre for Education, says that complaints from parents of teacher bullying should be made diplomatically. "We do unfortunately sometimes get cases where a parent has gone and complained and it backfires, and leads to some kind of victimisation of the child. Where possible, it is best to sort things out informally."

At primary level parents may think about moving their child, but, if it is secondary school, sometimes it is a matter of supporting the child and saying, "Well, this is life, and we've all experienced teachers that we've not got on with".

This is what has happened to Jack, a boy his father, Bill, admits is no angel. An overweight teenager, he has been provoked into fights by name-calling that his school does not seem willing to stop. Some teachers regularly abuse him, calling him "fat boy". Bill says: "When he was in the wrong at school, one teacher said to him, `don't think anyone in this school likes you, because personally I hate you'."

Suzanna Roffey, an educational psychologist, says that the extreme pressure teachers are under nowadays may sometimes lead them to say things they regret, but "there are approaches towards children and young people that are much more likely to escalate confrontation rather than reduce it. If a harsh, inappropriate response comes from teachers, then the child's behaviour may deteriorate even more, but if there's a more understanding response, then you can get an upward spiral."

Recently Bill met Jack's headteacher with a mediator present. It is too early to say what effect this has had but, Bill says, "At least he listened to what I had to say".

Many cases can be settled by meeting the teacher or headteacher, confirms Howard Martin, an anti-bullying adviser with Kidscape. "But if you think your child is in any physical danger or severe emotional danger, or there is a threat of it, remove them from the situation, perhaps with a doctor's certificate that he or she is suffering from anxiety, before pursuing your complaint."

If changing schools is not an option, Martin advises parents to consider education at home. And whatever parents decide, he says: "Trust your guts and your instinct, just keep believing your child, making sure that he or she is supported, because to feel isolated as a child is the very worst thing."

WHAT TO DO IF YOU SUSPECT A TEACHER OF BULLYING

If possible, approach the teacher first, and then the headteacher. Taking it further, you can complain to the school's governors. If your child is in a state school, you can ask them to order an investigation. If all else fails, contact the Secretary of State for Education.

Memories of your own school days may make you uncomfortable, but keep calm. Make an appointment - don't storm in.

Take a witness to meetings, and write down what is said. Some parents tape meetings. Be aware that child witnesses are often regarded as unreliable, and

have sometimes been intimidated.

The Children's Legal Centre (01206 873820) can advise on your rights and legal action.

Confide in Kidscape (0171-730 3300) or Childline (0800 1111). The Stephenson Foundation (0151-475 6246) offers a mediation service for parents in north-west England.

The Advisory Centre for Education publishes two booklets at pounds 1.50 each - "Tackling Bullying" and "Taking Matters Further". Contact ACE, 1B Aberdeen Studios, 22 Highbury Grove, London N5 2DQ (0171-354 8321).

The local education authority is obliged to offer you another school place if you withdraw your child from school.

For details on home education, send a stamped addressed envelope to Education Otherwise, PO Box 2740, London N9 9SG. (0181-556 3437).