FRISCO — The Frisco school district wants to open an art teacher’s personnel file to the public to defend itself against her claim that she was reprimanded for allowing a fifth-grade student to see nude art.
Superintendent Rick Reedy sent a letter to McGee on Tuesday asking for permission to open her personnel file so the district could respond to criticism over her case.”
I believe some of the information being disseminated to the press is not true and is misleading, especially the allegation that the district has disciplined a teacher for exposing students to nude art,” Reedy said in a prepared statement. “I think we can all agree that the facts should be made available for full review and open discussion.”
Well of course it’s not going to be in the files since the district has already stated that all previous warnings were verbal. That’s part of the problem. It may just be a bluff but apparently McGee is willing to open her file if the district is willing to open “theirs.”
Dunn said he is likely to deny the district’s request unless it also agrees to open the personnel files of Reedy and Nancy Lawson, the principal of Fisher Elementary School.
I think it may be a little late for the district to come “clean” since it has already stated multiple times that the other problems weren’t formally documented since principals often like to operate “informally” to try to solve their problems.
So what are the possibilities?
The file contains previous evaluations that indicate McGee had been warned about problems before. Then why has the district been going on about verbal evaluations?
The file contains documentation regarding the parental complaint. Not likely because the district already said it wasn’t an issue and the district has been going on about verbal evalutions. I can just see some spokesperson pointing to an open file and saying, “see, no complaint!” Duh.
At this point, anything the district decides to show that would document problems with McGee would have to contridict two weeks worth of statements that the performance directives were only put into writing at McGee’s request. Granted, the file may show that McGee’s previous evaluations weren’t as great as she made them out to be. However, if that’s the case then there should be documents that show what the principal did to improve the situation. Otherwise, it’s essentially, “gosh, Syndey, you really need to work on those lesson plans” and then a year later, the principal states, “you know, you really haven’t worked on those lesson plans yet.” As I’ve said before, the question is would the principal have begun to act on the problems if there hadn’t been a complaint?
So my guess is that the district has a file that shows McGee’s evaluations weren’t all that great and certain problems had been identified before. But I bet it also shows that the principal didn’t “formally” address these issues other than in the evaluations. Now why isn’t she being disicplined for failure to maintain adaquate personnel files if McGee is being disciplined for failure to maintain adaquate lesson plans?
And as for Reedy’s file? Maybe he’s behind on evaluating and giving written direction to principals?