Mom Of Bullied Springfield 4th Grader Responds To Superintendent

To the Editor:

Please note, the below document is a copy of the statement made by Springfield Schools Superintendent Michael Davino during the Nov. 6 Board of Education meeting.

The information provided here has not been changed in any way with the exception of removing the school letterhead and Mr. Davino's signature.

The text in "bold" font indicates statements made by the superintendent while the italic-font text indicates my response to points made during the meeting.

I want us all to take a breath and recognize who we are and what we do every day. What the parents in our community do every day is trust us with the most precious things in their lives: Their children. And what we do every day is take all of our training and many years of experience and care for these children — as if they were our own —while educating them and making sure they are safe.

We have come to a sobering awareness as a society as to how dangerous bullying can be and, because of that, we never take it lightly. With that history of caring for your children, it is particularly disappointing to me that the members of this community would take half-truths spun by people with an agenda and people in the media and believe them as if they were the complete truth.

And so I want to take an opportunity to share some truths of which you deserve to be made aware.

The first truth has to be my acknowledgement as to the professionalism of our staff in the face of what I know to be some adult bullying. Right now and for the last several weeks, the most vicious bullying of which I am aware has been directed at our principal and our teachers and our secretaries, by the people in this community and some from outside this community. These folks, who have been using their training and experience to care for your children, have received unkind emails and vulgar voicemails, which have no place in this community or our society. These vicious and vulgar messages have been directed at our employees based on what was spun by the media with incomplete and inaccurate accounts of what has gone on in our schools. I find them regrettable and I hope we can put a stop to them right now.

Ordinarily, we do not make public statements about student-related issues such as bullying investigations or requests for accommodations. However, in this case, the parent of one student has used the media to attempt to extort from District staff that which the parent was denied for educational reasons. The parent has engaged the media and has publicized her child’s otherwise private information. Therefore, we will address the inaccurate information, spun by the media in an effort to enflame this situation and put pressure on the District, in order to focus on the truth

Here are the facts

1.

No claim of harassment or bullying was made by this parent or any parent in that classroom at any point during the 2016-2017 school year.

I can only speak to our personal family situation and therefore will not comment on any other claims filed during the 2016-2017 academic year. But I did not file any claims during the aforementioned time period as I was not aware of the issues my daughter was experiencing. As I found out later, once the school year was over, she was afraid to share this with me while it was happening, because she was scared of retaliatory actions

2.

At the end of the 2016-2017 school year, the professionals in our District reviewed the achievement of the students in various classes and determined that it was in the best educational interests of the students in that classroom to remain with the same teacher for the 2017-2018 school year. The students had made good to excellent progress.

I have no comments pertaining to either the evaluations Mr. Davino claims to have conducted or to the academic progress made by the students.

3.

The practice of having students remain with the same classroom teacher for two years, or more, in a row, is called “looping.” While the District does not have a policy with regard to looping, it is the opinion of the professionals in the District that, when possible and appropriate, it is a well-supported educational approach that may be used. There are many benefits to this practice and these benefits are all documented in respected educational literature. Because of our belief in the educational benefits of this practice, the District has over eight classes this year where the teacher followed the students from one year to the next.

I am not an educator, nor do I have any training pertaining to anything related to education. I think looping CAN be beneficial to many students from both academic and emotional/social/psychological standpoint.

However, I do understand that it is NOT something that will work for all students and therefore I feel very strongly that any parent must have the ability to opt out of their child being looped. Furthermore, if a certain percentage of parents of a proposed looped class do exercise the option to opt out, this should raise a red flag and initiate an evaluation of the teacher to gain a better understanding why so many parents are opposed working with this particular teacher for an additional year.

Nevertheless, I want to make it clear that Emma's issues and our request for class re-assignment has nothing to do with looping and everything to do with bullying.

4.

The parent at issue in the recent media reports initially objected to her child being placed with the same teacher because she stated she did not like that particular teacher. She made no mention to administration whatsoever of bullying or that the students in the class were of any concern. Instead, her stated focus was on her dislike of the teacher and the practice of looping.

I would like to make it clear that at no point, did I ever state that my daughter did not like that particular teacher. I never made a single complaint during the 2016-2017 academic year, nor did I ask that my daughter get assigned to a different educator due to my "dislike" for her current one. I have always, from day one, requested a class transfer strictly based on my child's issues with her classmates and the teacher's refusal to assist her.

I requested a meeting with the principal as soon as I found out my daughter's class was looped (end of August). Furthermore, I asked another teacher for simple advice on this matter and was very honest and forthcoming with my problem. As can be seen from my screen shot, the email to that teacher (name of teacher is removed for privacy issues) went out on Aug. 30 and states very clearly what is the main and only problem with my daughter's placement.

My first meeting with Principal Plias regarding this issue took place on Sept. 6, where I clearly stated my reasons for this request and followed it up with an email and copied Mr. Davino (children's names have been removed for privacy purposes.)

5.

It was not until after her request to move her daughter to another teacher was denied that she raised to administration, for the very first time, a claim of bullying.

Please refer to the statements and screen shots of written communications pertaining to the specifics of my request. I never asked for a new teacher because of my "dislike" for Emma's current one. My issue was to move my child ASAP (and I was hoping this would be done BEFORE the school year began, thus allowing her to simply start a new school year with a different class in a safe and nurturing environment.

6.

At that time, the parent requested that this claim of bullying NOT be investigated by the school. The school was not legally permitted to honor this request and told the parent so. Even though the parent’s report was not made until the following school year; it was still investigated. Therefore, the first of two investigations was conducted.

Please see the below screen shot and the date stamp. The HIB investigation was launched right away, as per my statements and on my request, and this can be seen in the confirmation from the principal.

While I was glad to see that an investigation was launched, my fears for my child were confirmed just after the first day of school.

Despite being assured again and again by the principal that my daughter's safety was of utmost importance to him and everyone will work tirelessly to ensure she feels safe and comfortable in her classroom environment, she was placed at the same table as one of the students whom I named in my report as one of her bullies. See below email for detail and note both the date and the fact that both the superintendent and the anti-bullying specialist were included in the email to the principal.

7.

The first investigation was completed in accordance with State regulations. As part of this investigation, the student herself was interviewed and her statement documented. On a side note, let me say here, that this investigation was conducted by staff members, including an anti-bullying specialist, with years of experience working with young students, counseling them, and ferreting out answers to questions relating to tough situations. These folks are highly trained in assessing the credibility of students of this age. And are highly trained under the State’s harassment, intimidation and bullying laws.

The first investigation was completed based on interviews of my daughter's classmates, who were ushered to the guidance counselor's office (during class and against their parents' wishes and without prior approval from parents) and asked about what they recalled seeing last year. Needless to say, those who bullied my daughter were not going to "confess" and those who were not impacted directly did not recall anything.

Specialty teachers and lunch aides, who may have been interviewed (and I do say may because I requested detail of this investigation through my lawyer and have not received any copies of this despite signing a release waiver), did not specify seeing anything either. While this is disappointing, it is not at all surprising as majority of the issues took place directly in the classroom and therefore would not be witnessed by other staff. Instances outside of classroom would probably be in a larger, more loud setting, making it more difficult to realize what is going on.

8.

In speaking with the anti-bullying specialist, the student confirmed that she liked her teacher and did not confirm much of what the parent claimed.

My claims, including the names of the four children listed in the report came directly from my daughter. Everything I ever communicated was derived from Emma and the fact that she did not feel comfortable stating to someone in position of authority that she did not like her teacher should not, under any circumstances, be used as a piece of evidence to rule out the fact that she was bullied by her classmates. Mind you, I never stated that her teacher bullied her and therefore to expect a response of dislike from a student towards the teacher is puzzling.

9.

The staff involved in this classroom and in this school are well aware that every claim is to be reported and every claim is to be looked into and addressed, no matter how minor. On camera in the news reports, the child stated that she told her teacher and her teacher said “you’re a smart girl, you can handle it yourself.” This statement was taken completely out of context; this student did not complain to her teacher and the teacher did not observe any bullying. In fact, for 6-7 periods each week, there was a second teacher in this class both last year and this year. This teacher also did not observe any bullying

"You are a smart girl, you can figure it out" is not something that can easily be taken out of context. My child was hurting. She came to the teacher for help. The teacher turned her away. No misrepresentation of facts here at all. After this response from her teacher, my daughter never approached the teacher for help again.

On a side note, I am not at all surprised that neither teacher saw any bullying, as according to multiple studies, it was determined that more than 90 percent of bullying in schools goes unnoticed by teachers, specifically in the classroom.

10.

Those experienced personnel who conducted the investigation determined that the claim — ±raised only by this parent and only after she requested a different teacher because the parent did not like the teacher was unsubstantiated. This investigation included interviewing students and staff and no part of the claim could be substantiated. Nevertheless, the administration did not ignore this issue. Instead, it took action to ensure the classroom teacher was carefully monitoring the classroom environment and the young lady’s comfort within the classroom; set up follow up meetings with the parents; separate this young lady to the extent possible in the classroom from those identified by her parent as being of concern; speak with every member of the staff with direct teaching or supervisory responsibility over this young lady; have the school counselor observe the classroom; and provide individual counseling sessions to all students identified.

This issue was already addressed in that at no point did I ever request a new teacher for the sake of having a new teacher. My issue is, and always has been, my daughter's safety resulting from events of last year.

Please see earlier included screen shots where I specifically mention bullying from the first communication and follow up on the fact that Emma was placed at the same table as one of the individuals whom I listed in my report. I do NOT believe this constitutes assuring my daughter's comfort in the classroom, as is alleged in Mr. Davino's point.

Furthermore, my daughter's teacher was made aware of these issues, where she began to act in retaliatory manner towards the child, shaming her publicly for trying to help a student with a question and placing her in the back of the classroom, an area designated for the "bad kids". This issue was discussed with Mrs. Loew, the school counselor by both myself and Emma.

11.

As with every instance of harassment, intimidation, and bullying, when the investigation was complete, it was reported to the Board of Education. The parent was advised of the outcome of this investigation —in writing and verbally. The parent was advised of the right to appeal to the Board, and to request a hearing before the Board. No such appeal was taken. Despite this fact, the Board still reviewed the investigation and the outcome before making a determination to accept the findings of the investigation and the recommendation of the Superintendent of Schools. The Board undertakes this review with every instance of harassment, intimidation, and bullying. The parent was advised of the right to appeal the Board’s decision to the Commissioner of Education. No such appeal was taken.

LET ME REPEAT THAT, AS IT IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT. The law provides a mechanism to object to both the Superintendent’s decision and the Board’s decision on a claim of harassment, intimidation, and bullying.

The parent in this case went to the media instead of availing her self of that right, that opportunity.

I made the decision to not appeal the findings as I did not have any new evidence and did not see a point of appeal based on guidance of my legal counsel as well as experiences of those around me. I was always very clear on the fact that my main and only purpose was NOT to get the earlier mentioned set of students into trouble, but rather to get my daughter OUT of trouble. As such, I was focused on changing her class assignment due to her classroom setting anxiety and negative experience from last year. I chose to not exercise the option of appeal because it seemed pointless as her physical and emotional symptoms were clear and obvious and no set of witnesses should have been needed to prove that.

12.

As noted in my statement to parents last week, but which I believe bears repeating here: Given the care with which Springfield's school administrators make their HIB assessments, and the scrutiny with which the Board thereafter reviews those assessments, Springfield's HIB determinations are rarely appealed, and they have never been overturned by the Commissioner. This is important to us as a District, as it signals that our procedures are comprehensive and our staff is trained and fully knowledgeable in this area. Nevertheless, because of the importance of the security and comfort of your children, we continue to require ongoing training for our staff.

I have no comments on training offered to the school staff, however based on my daughter's experience I will say that some additional training might be needed. I feel that based on earlier stated statistics of high percentage of bullying going undetected, the inability to substantiate something does not mean it did not happen.

13.

Despite the thoroughness of the internal investigation, when the District was first presented with a doctor’s note regarding this student — a fact publicized recently by the parent in the media, which is the only reason I am acknowledging this fact now it immediately requested that the parent authorize District medical professionals to confer with their private physician. As many of you are aware, federal and State laws, such as HIPAA, require that physicians obtain written authorization prior to consulting with or sharing protected health information.

This parent initially refused our request. There have been many inaccurate reports in the media of the District’s delay in addressing these claims. There was no delay.

And so, LET ME REPEAT THAT SO IT IS CLEAR: This parent initially refused our request. After this denial, a second written request was made by the school administration. It was not until after that second written request was made that the request was honored by the parent.

This is entirely false. The first letter from Emma's physician was offered during an in-person meeting with Mr. Plias on Sept. 28. He was given a hard copy of the letter and no additional questions were asked.

The principal followed up with me, stating that a letter was sent on Oct. 11 (that is 2 weeks after our initial meeting.) I never received this letter. Furthermore, if this letter was truly sent via certified mail, it should be easily tracked and it's delivery should have been easy to prove. No proof of delivery was offered at any time.However, when the same letter was sent via email, I provided my approval right away.

14.

I will not address the substance of any doctor’s note or other confidential student or medical records. It is my understanding from various interviews with media members that the parent has not released these records; therefore, respectfully, the public does not have all the information. And we are not authorized to speak in any more detail about such matters.

15.

At this time, at my direction, our outside legal counsel conducted a second investigation. Pertinent potential witnesses were re-interviewed and the procedures followed by the District during the first investigation were reviewed for a determination on compliance with State law. This investigation has been completed. The conclusion is that the District followed the proper procedure and that there is no harassment, intimidation or bullying as has been alleged in the media reports. This is an unfortunate case of a parent who simply wants a new teacher for her child.

The above-referenced second investigation by an outside legal counsel was of much news to me, and I have yet to receive any proof at all of this taking place.

Based on the way in which the investigation was conducted and the nature of witnesses (and I say this with utmost respect to all 9-year-olds), this investigation was doomed from the start. Furthermore, it was entirely unnecessary and was a complete waste of taxpayer's money.

The only piece of evidence which was necessary was my child's perception of not being safe. Her increased levels of anxiety and fear related to being in that classroom should have been more than sufficient to make the change and a class re-assignment.

It appears that Mr. Davino is more dedicated to protecting his school's reputation and "low numbers of instances of bullying" than being concerned for the only victim here, who happens to be a 9 year old child. The superintendent disregarded a number of directives from my daughter's medical professionals and chose to focus on the fact that no 9 year old recalled seeing anything worth mentioning.

16.

That fact notwithstanding, the student is not in school. Based upon the media reports and records we have been provided, which we are not privy to discuss publicly, we believe this young lady should not return to the Sandmeier School. Therefore, we offered the parent a transfer. Currently, the District is providing home instruction.

Please note, my daughter's last day in school was Sept. 20. During the in-person meeting with the principal on Sept. 28, I was told that my daughter would receive home instruction. I inquired about it multiple times and this was finally set up and began last week, on Nov. 1.

17.

It should be clear that we are offering this accommodation to the parent in an effort to put this matter to rest. Indeed, despite the parent’s claims, while she has been keeping her daughter out of school, we have been advised that her daughter has been socializing with the same students she says have been bullying her, including going to their homes.

I would like to make it clear that my daughter has NOT been socializing with the students that bullied her, nor has she ever been to any of their homes. To suggest otherwise is not only false, but is completely absurd.

While I am surprised by Mr. Davino's interest in my daughter's social life, I would like to make it very clear that she did not participate in any recent holiday related events specifically for the reason of not wanting to come across any of these children. She did not attend the school Halloween dance, she did not attend any community based events nor has she gone to anyone's homes with the exception of one student, whom she considers to be her close friend.

Should Mr. Davino or the Board have evidence of the contrary, I certainly would love to see it.

18.

We are fortunate in this District that we have two schools that educate our children in grades 3-5. Therefore, based upon what we have seen in the media reports and what has been conveyed to our professionals by this family and through their attorney, we believe this student would be better educated at the Caldwell School. As our District is not geographically that large and all students in Springfield matriculate first at Walton, this young lady would have the benefit of finishing her 4th and 5th grade years at a nearby school with students with whom she attended school just a year and half ago.

While the town is fortunate to have two schools, shipping a "problem child" to another school is hardly a solution. My daughter is sensitive and vulnerable and sending her to a school where she does not know any teachers or students , an environment were enough "cliques" have been formed in the first two months of school.

19.

The alternative would be to return her to a school she has expressed on camera in the media to having a fear of returning. We cannot in good conscience do that based upon these stated fears. All 4th graders have lunch and recess together at Sandmeier. Therefore, the best option for her is Caldwell.

As was stated earlier, my daughter would not be better off in Caldwell, despite the fact that this might make things easier for both the principal and the superintendent. Everyone's primary focus should be the child in question and NOT what her return to the school where she belongs would do anyone's reputation, ego or workload.

I am grateful for the fact that Emma has always been clear on what she is capable of doing. From day one I made sure to be open with her that even when transferred to another class, she would still come in contact with students who were bullying her and to my great relief she always said that she would not worry about seeing them at drop off and pick up, lunch or during recess. She is crystal clear on not being able to stay in the small classroom with kids who tormented her for a year and a teacher who did not help her. She is able to stand up for herself to an extent and would be able to do so, if given the opportunity to be placed in another fourth grade class within Sandmeier.

20.

Unfortunately, the parent has rejected this as an educational option. We are simply perplexed as to why a parent so adamant that her child be removed would not immediately accept this offer.

To further my points made earlier, I would like to add that the offer of placing Emma in Caldwell came to my attorney on the day of the BOE meeting at 12:36 p.m. I did not have an opportunity to fully discuss it with either Emma or the rest of the family and I find it to be not only unfair, but unethical to discuss this in open forum at this point.

In addition to poor timing, the overall concept of exiling a child who found the strength and courage to speak up and fight for her rights after being mistreated by her classmates is appalling. What kind of message does this send to others who are experiencing similar issues? A child who perceives danger should not be punished or segregated from what she knows. That child needs to be supported and protected in very possible way. A simple classroom change, which is what was requested originally, to move Emma away from four kids who were bullying her while allowing her to remain in a school she knows and STILL feels comfortable attending, would have solved it all easily and quickly. Yet for reasons unknown to me, the principal and the superintendent refused to see the problem for what it truly was — a bullying case, which would mar their reputation and serve as an inconvenient truth.

21.

As reported in the media this young lady is “riddled with anxiety and sadness” and, in her words, wants to be away from her “enemies.” To do so completely, she needs to change schools.

Based on multiple assessments of various medical professionals, no school change was necessary to address Emma's issues. Each of three specialists who met and evaluated my child made it clear that a simple classroom re-assignment would be sufficient, and additional help could be offered on an "as-needed" basis. These evaluations were submitted to the school, but were not accepted. Furthermore, even after I signed a release form to have the school appointed psychiatrist speak with Emma's psychiatrist in order to verify that the requested classroom change within the same school is in accordance with the doctor's medical opinion, the school's doctor failed to do so, thereby coming up with a recommendation based on no medical evidence of his own. I would like to reiterate that the school's doctor established his recommendation without ever reviewing Emma's medical records or speaking with her psychiatrist.

This parent has gone to the media without first looking to speak with the Superintendent or appealing the HIB decision to the Board or the Commissioner, and now they refuse to allow the District to educate her in an environment that will be free from the very situation she has expressed as anxiety-causing. As educators, we find this to be sad and disappointing.

As we remind everyone that this began simply because we denied a parent’s request for a new teacher. We hope that this family will allow us to return her to school, where she belongs.

I am convinced that the school's proposed solution is strictly of retaliatory nature, for me exercising my first amendment rights in speaking to the press. Please note, I reached out to the press as a last resort, only after I felt that all other avenues of approach were exhausted. I tried to get in touch with Mr. Davino multiple times, as can be seen from screen shots provided in points listed above. Furthermore, the only time I was finally able to reach him on the phone (despite endless attempts to reach him for weeks) was after I complained to the Union County School Superintendent's office, where I spoke with a specialist who instructed Mr. Davino to reach out to me immediately. This was on Oct. 4, whereas my original communication to Mr. Davino was on Sept. 6. That is basically a month of failed attempts for an audience with the school superintendent on an urgent matter pertaining to my child's safety and well being.

As I have stated before, I have been involved personally in the situation reported by the media and am aware of and oversee all alleged instances of HIB, the investigations, and the determinations. The safety and security of the students in our districts is of the utmost concern to the administration, the Board of Education, and myself.

Based on the indisputable examples (including visuals) I have provided in this document, it is hard to agree that Mr. Davino is, or has been, personally involved or is concerned about the well being of my child in this, or any other situation related to the school. Since the beginning of the case, parents have been viewed and treated as nuisances, pests which seem to want something they do not deserve. It is hard to imagine that a safe and nurturing environment has now become not a right, but a privilege and demanding this has become a crime, labeled as "extortion"

The school administration and staff at the Sandmeier School followed all applicable State laws and regulations, and all locally developed processes and procedures. I have every confidence that they act, every day, in the best interests of the children of Springfield. I hope we can get back to focusing on our children, including one young lady we would love to have back in school.

Emma has been ready to return to her school and has been asking daily when she will finally be granted a new, safer classroom and an opportunity to come back.

— By Irina Spektor

• See Related: Springfield 4th Grader Won't Go To School Because Of Bullies, Mom's Plea For New Classroom Rejected
• See Related: Disturbing Accounts Of Rampant Bullying Shared At Packed Meeting
• See Related: Springfield Superintendent Responds To Allegations Of Serious Bullying

(Patch Stock Image)

Have a news tip? Email alexis.tarrazi@patch.com.