When citizens of Grande became aware of Miss Forest’s dismissal more than 1,800 signed a petition protesting that action. The petition is worded:
Miss Mary Forest was denied a teaching contract, and denied an opportunity to speak with the board. She was evaluated unfairly and we would like for her to be reinstated immediately! As citizens of Grande we want to put a stop to this type of injustice.
Education SOS!
Students enrolled at Dromedary High School perform academically below their ability. Mr. Murphy and administrative evaluators seem to approve of substandard performance. Mr. Murphy had an opportunity to use his Dromedary High School Reading and Writing Initiative with these students but didn’t; like so many, many times he failed to do so. In other words, he blew it! It is evident that reading and writing improvement of these students never entered Mr. Murphy’s mind. If he had thought otherwise, he would have reminded them (11th and 12th graders) to write the assignment (criticism of their teacher, Miss Forest) using skills taught by their English teacher(s). But instead of improving their work, Mr. Murphy continued contributing to this severe problem by accepting messy work – scribbled writing, scratched-out words, and incorrect grammar.
Most Dromedary High School students come from homes without a father. Without the father image, these youths, some are parents already, will continue a family cycle which is harmful to society. Mr. Murphy’s treatment of Miss Forest is typical of most men’s attitude toward women and senior citizens; they disrespect (rude, mean, and heartless.) Aside from academics, Mr. Murphy failed to teach the students a lesson in ethics – obey those in authority; himself and Miss Forest.
Legal Work:
Discipline
Books are basic to education. Much of the education budget is used for books. Each child is issued a book for every registered course. Miss Forest expected students to bring their book to class each period. Without that expectation some students would come to class every day expecting Miss Forest to supply them a book! Their reasoning is: the government has plenty money. Just ask for it! Some students would not attend school if a law didn’t require attendance. Since Miss Forest could not legislate this action (requiring books to be brought to class) she motivated students to do this by using reasoning and common sense. But two students would not adhere. She sought Mr. Murphy’s help.
The Background
Date: May 10, 2002; course: History; Grades: 11th and 12th; number of students: 34: Level: multi. Mr. Murphy, over intercom, cautioned teachers not to permit students to idle although the end of the school year is near. Two students had been written a discipline referral for not bringing their book to class. Mr. Murphy returned the referrals. On one he wrote “administrative conference held.” In Mr. Murphy’s letter to Miss Forest on 5-13-02 he mentions six students were removed from her class. Other referrals were also returned; their offense was talking. That was puzzling. Each referral was quadrupled – a copy for parent, for student, for teacher, and for administrator (office). Mr. Murphy did not convey his opinion on students bringing books to class to her in the 5-13-02 letter. Instead, on 6-13-02 an attorney of Mr. Murphy’s questioned her about that incident. *From transcript of the Deposition of Mary Forest, June 13, 2002 question and answer session is recalled between an attorney and Miss Forest, P. 158:18.
In some of these discipline referrals you had written children did not bring materials to do work or come to class without his book. Do you think those kinds of students should be referred to an administrator?
Note: Two students came without a book.
Documented.
If they’re going to be in class, I feel they should have material because the material was given to them. Otherwise they can’t do what is required.
There are about 1,400 students at this school, is there not?
Sure
Q. And if 200 of them do not bring their textbook to class or bring materials to class,
Do you think those students should be referred to an administrator?
I can’t say.
Why?
Because I have not thought about that. It seems to me they should have the material. Otherwise they can’t do their work if they don’t have the material.
Miss Forest looked from the attorney to Mr. Murphy. That was her first time hearing that. So, Mr. Murphy didn’t mind students coming to class without their books. Then why didn’t he notify Miss Forest? Evidently he told the students. When he and Ms. Green complained to Miss Forest concerning requiring students to memorize patriotic poetry (songs, etc.) the assignment was immediately withdrawn. She would have permitted students to come to class without books, if she was aware Mr. Murphy approved of it. She was always cooperative.
Miss Forest has given much thought to questions that the attorney asked. And her answers have not changed. These Dromedary High School students, at writing, score at or near the bottom on standardized tests, but their intelligence is not abnormal. So, the person who was “concerned” with teaching Miss Forest how to teach ignored her by failing to communicate with her it was alright for students to come to class without books. It wasn’t until after the 2001-2002 term ended that the information was indirectly conveyed to her through his attorney.
It is evident Mr. Murphy and his attorney considered the act of students not bringing books to class trivial. More time was needed to answer that question because if Miss Forest had been in Mr. Murphy’s position that problem would not have occurred. On this issue of bring books to class, their viewpoint is opposite. It never entered her mind that he thought different from her. Miss Forest expected her students to bring their book to class. It was required. That policy was successful, only those two students Miss Forest refer to on 5-13-02 had a habit of disobeying that rule. Evidently they were aware of his view. Then Miss Forest should have been informed also. Instead, Mr. Murphy, along with the students, ganged up against Miss Forest, making a difficult task more difficult. Starting over the intercom his expectation of teachers toward students and conniving with students against their teacher is confusing. In a class of thirty-four (34) only two (2) students failed. To bring their book to class while knowing the Head School Master did not mind them not bringing their book. This is proof Miss Foster got across to those students the importance of the textbook. Two out of thirty-four is outstanding under this dire circumstance. And that fact is documented! August 28, 2000 Mr. Murphy states …”you should communicate high expectations for achievement to all students that you teach…” And he calls this act “high expectation”!
Mr. Murphy had “limited concern” with academics. Why? That confounds the highest intellect! There is an adage-one rotten apple will spoil the whole barrel. The same principle applies with students and books regardless of the number, whether two or two hundred. Test scores of the students are proof.
Different Perceptions
The purpose of public school is to make education available to all students. It is a gift of the nation. All students should have been given this privilege and encouraged to perform on their highest level. Miss Forest agrees with this theory. But Mr. Murphy‘s thinking was opposite. When his career performance is scrutinized much evidence is uncovered. A review of the incident which happened on May 10, 2002 show much double-dealing.
Each class period lasted one and one half (11/2 hr.) hour. The discipline problem happened within the first thirty minutes of class. Mr. Murphy responded promptly, accompanied by a campus cop. Why come so heavily armed? What was all the smiling about? It appeared he expected a show-down or a classroom that was out of control. When they entered the classroom both men’s countenance fell. How odd! This was the time for smiling. Students were orderly and doing their work, indicating the discipline problem was minor. But those students, with exception of one, were honoring Mr. Murphy.
If Miss Forest had been Head School Master, her approach to the problem would have been different from Mr. Murphy’s. She would have listened intently to details of the problem provided by the teach
er. She would have reassured the teacher the action taken was in keeping with his requirement. He had reminded teachers not to allow students to idle, which those students had been doing when discipline referrals were written. Realizing it was springtime, some were suffering from a touch of Spring Fever, especially the one who kept the young lady from doing her work. Others were just “trying themselves.” To the teacher she would have said
“Let’s give them another chance.”
Teachers understood the mood of teenagers. Noticing the students, all of them, were doing their work, she would have taken her notepad and written a note such as “Keep it up” or “Stick with now” or the like. She would have gone from seat to seat of the cutting-up students letting them read one of the notes, showing each of them her approval of their attitude at present.
Another Approach:
After hearing detail of the problem, students would have been ushered from the classroom. A few paces down the hallway Miss Forest would have expressed her disappointment of the conduct of such intelligent young minds. Continuing with, “Didn’t you hear my announcement over the intercom “no idling”? “You know better,” she would have said. Sending them back to class saying – “Go back and complete your work and stop acting like what you are not.” At the end of class, disciplined students would have been required to submit the assignment to the headmaster, except the young lady who was interrupted.
All involved would have been pleased:
Students: Head School Master praised and had confidence in their ability.
Teacher: showed tolerance; thought highly of them.
Head School Master: Found students working quietly – a great show of respect.
But those students were kept from class the remainder of the period and did not have to do their assignment. Another example of Mr. Murphy’s brand of “high expectation.” They did not return to class.
This episode is only one of several which exposed problems occurring at Ciber-Blue High School during Mr. Murphy’s tenure as head master. Results of problems:
Books not required in classroom; Students were aware; teacher unaware
Students encouraged to criticize teacher.
Administrators encouraged and tolerated misconduct.
These factors caused discipline problems, making teaching difficult.
The Headmaster
On July17, 2002, under the questioning of Atty. Bell, Mr. Murphy unflinchingly testified he never saw Miss Forest make use of the media center (library), nor did he ever see her students do research. But the other Social Studies teachers had been observed doing these activities. (From Transcript of the Deposition of Stone Murphy. July 17, 2002. Case: Clark Regent vs. Mary Forest.)
With “…I never saw…” Mr. Murphy alludes to his respect for research. He was not sure whether Miss Forest’s students used research or not, and he never asked her. Why didn’t Mr. Murphy ask her, he had concluded her unfitness as a teacher? It seems Mr. Murphy had inquired into that matter, and discovered Miss Forest’s students did research, also. But acknowledging she did something he admired would not have met the approval of the others. “…I never saw…” was intended to show his cleverness. Instead, he exposed a lack of knowledge of an important fact and his refusal to ask Miss Forest for clarification shows his disrespect of her. His decision making is tainted.
The Social Studies teachers used numerous strategies in instructing their classes, but Miss Mary Forest, testified Mr. Murphy, depended on lecture and student discussions. From transcript of the deposition of Stone Murphy: July 17, 2002. Case Dr. Clark Regent vs. Mary Forest. Mr. Murphy was examined by atty. Bell. Twice Mr. Murphy was questioned about the effectiveness of the strategies used by Miss Forest; both times he dodged, not being responsive to the question. The last reply shows what Mr. Murphy is noted for – falsehood! Two questions and Mr. Murphy’s answers follow:
Q: Give me an example of what you observed that you did not consider effective.
A. Okay. Are we still talking about one year now or any example?
Q. Let’s go, if you can, with that year.
A. “99 – 2000
Q. and 2000 – 2001.
A. 2000-2001 school years
Q. As a STEP evaluator is what we’re dealing with right now?
A. Okay. One of my concerns would have been the, considerable dependency presentation as a means of conveying lessons to students. I would have been concerned and shared concern; I recalled doing so, about the interaction with students, the effective monitoring of student progress. I recalled those as being concerns I would have discussed.
Q. When you stated that there was considerable dependency on the lecture method of teaching, what was your concern about its effectiveness?
A. I do not recall an instance where I went into the classroom where I saw specific examples of other, of diverse teaching strategies…
Neither time did Mr. Murphy admit whether he considered her teaching effective or non-effective. But when questioned about methods other department members were using, he proudly listed several, one was research. His answer ended with, “I saw none of that in Miss Forest’s classroom.”
Here, he implies the positive value he places on research. From the beginning of Mr. Murphy’s tenure he claimed his concern was to help Miss Forest improve her instruction skill; the reason for the Remedial Plan, which was designed for Miss Forest by the Area Administrators, with Mr. Murphy’s approval. Then, why wasn’t the skill he valued so highly been suggested to her, or assigned to her, using his policy of documentation for his protection? Claiming other teachers in the Social Studies Department were observed in the noble act of research although not under observation, officially shows he admired them all, yet, under surveillance for three years (his figures are 2 ½ years) Mr. Murphy denies seeing evidence of students doing research in her, (Miss Forest’s) classroom!
Well, I declare! Hogwash! Was Mr. Murphy looking for evidence of that skill? No! And he never asked for that information, either. Mr. Murphy is like this: He would have requested Miss Forest to assign research to students, and given a copy of the document to everybody connected with that Remediation Group. But to his disgust, plenty evidence of research was left in Miss Forest’s classroom over the years he served as her headmaster. Miss Forest’s classes did research before Mr. Murphy’s tenure at the high school and during his tenure. This evidence was included in students’ notebooks. Periodically these notebooks were collected and stacked by class. Each notebook contained a Table of Contents which included Research. All of those notebooks at the front of the classroom on the floor and he, Mr. Murphy, didn’t see them! If Mr. Murphy wanted to know whether Miss Forest’s classes did research, the librarians would have gladly obliged him; they did the scheduling. But why couldn’t Mr. Murphy ask the teacher he was “Concerned” about – Miss Forest. Because research was positive, an instructional heavyweight. Their attention of Miss Forest seemed geared to the negatives; positives did not set so well with them if Miss Forest was involved. She and her students used the library often. Most students enjoyed the library. Below is recalled an incident that happened in route to the media center (library) which teaches an invaluable lesson:
Before leaving the classroom to do research, students were reminded of their expected conduct – while in the hall, and while in the library. Classes were in session, therefore, no talking, because some teachers would have their classroom door open. Miss Forest’s classes always walked single-filed, to the right. Miss Forest was in the rear. Approximately half the distance to the library they met some students who began to laugh and tease the orderly conduct of the students. Miss Forest’s students began to get uncomfortable and some began to “chicken-out”, and broke away from the line. When they reached the library most were in groups, talking. They entered the library a few paces before Miss Forest. Some had begun with the assignment, others were in preparation. Miss Forest entered and had a word with the librarian, and told her of her (Miss Forest’s) decisi
on. Since students disobeyed a rule of conduct in route to the library, each would gather their belongings and return to the classroom. When they returned, some were sulky. “How are we going to do research”, some fumed. (Obey was one of the character – building terms on the classroom walls.) Miss Forest explained what happens when a rule or law is not obeyed. “Research for this grading period has to be done on your own time. Your misconduct has interrupted the teacher’s schedule, also.” Said Miss Forest. She told the students all would have to readjust. She further explained to them that by allowing a few students influence them to break a rule caused them this unnecessary inconvenience. A short discussion followed. The class continued with lesson from the text.
Valuable lessons were highlighted. It was concluded that:
People who break the law hurt themselves and others.
Breaking the law is costly.
It takes character to obey the law.
Although Mr. Murphy was not a resident of Grande`, citizens held a positive impression of him, at first. Miss Forest was no different. She admired the way he communicated. It was distinct. She encouraged her students to practice this skill during class and used Mr. Murphy as a prime example. That age group (grades 11th and 12th) is usually fussy with details, especially attire, sports, and the like. Miss Forest was patient with their fussiness. That gave her opportunity to take their fussiness in stride, carrying it a little further. During discussions, students were taught to communicate their thoughts as if communicating with an English teacher(s) or with Mr. Murphy, a news reporter or anybody they admired in that category. She constantly reminded them that effective speech is a part of one’s attire. It is a means to understanding. It is outstanding! In order to communicate effectively, students were taught to observe the following: word usage, pronunciation (articulation), expression, and the like. Make sure you listen, be courteous, and be open-minded. Whenever the TV was used as a teaching/learning tool in the classroom, before turning it on Miss Forest would call students’ attention to those pertinent communication skills mentioned earlier. That skill is ageless, timeless and invaluable.
School Pranks Page 9