To further discuss reasons why Kansas public schools should consolidate, instead of operating in "unified" districts, a misnomer because school districts in Kansas are not unified at all, a third reason is unequal and selective hiring practices and selective application of the law in relation to teachers and other employees of the "unified" school districts. The Renwick school board, near Wichita, has terminated the contract of Troy McChristian, principal of Garden Plain High School, pictured to the left; because he was arrested in the recent past for DWI. Officials cited that McChristian was "not setting a good example" for students, and was not reporting criminal activity, both prosecuted and unprosecuted, to the board in order to ensure proper decision making! Okay; driving while intoxicated does not set a good example....no argument there, but what about Noble Rick Pendland? He taught in a different public school in Southern Kansas, and was a foster parent, to boot, yet it took years to get rid of him, and his school isn't even responsible for the decision: Pendland was arrested and jailed for sex crimes against children, and was not granted work release pending bond or trial so that he could continue to go to work at the school where he met some of his victims. Terminating Pendland's contract was simply necessitated by circumstances, and would not have happened if law enforcement had not removed his presence from his forced audience, the students. This is a glaring example of unequal, and possibly selective, application of Kansas law, used to make or break a school employee's contract with a "unified" school district's school board.
If public schools in Kansas were consolidated, it would be much easier to insist that the same laws be followed by all Kansas teachers in public schools. Parents would have a basic notion of what to expect from their childrens' teacher; Rick Pendland and his ilk, favored by conservative Christians, would have to curry favor with a school board governing the public schools in all of Kansas, rather than just brown nosing the republicans on the school board in one locale. There would not be teachers who get away with drunk driving or showing up to teach classes while drunk (yes, Frankfort, you covered for a teacher with addiction problems) in one part of Kansas, while the same is not tolerated in other parts of Kansas. Children would have more stability, as well, through knowing what to expect. As things are run at this point, each unified district is allowed to play picksies/choosies with which laws it will respect and which laws it will ignore, at the ultimate expense of the children.
Another problem with laws, and the applications thereof, that could be cleared up with consolidation of public schools in Kansas is not only the favoritism employed by unified school districts, but the favoritism employed by local judicial systems and county prosecutors. When a teacher commits a serious crime, especially a person felony against a student, and a parent steps forward with a complaint, terminating his contract should be the next logical and acceptable step. According to the Kansas Department of Education, prosecution for a crime is not what determines breach of contract. Breach of contract is setting the bad example in the first place. It should not matter if the policeman responding had the teacher for eighth grade social studies, or if the teacher's parents also taught at the same school and donate money to the school, or if the county attorney has personal problems with the child's parents and denies justice out of personal prejudice. Once the state school board hears about a teacher who criminally endangers a child, such as Tom Schroeder, pictured on the right, who abandoned a fourteen year old girl along a highway in Marshall County Kansas, that teacher's walking papers should be forthcoming. There should be no exceptions made because of political or personal favoritism, and if all of the public schools in the state of Kansas answered to one school board, instead of un-unified unified districts, equality, justice, and common sense would have a stronger chance of prevalence in such decisions.
Has anyone noticed a difference in skin complexion between the two teachers cited in this post who did not get sanctioned by their "unified districts", and the teacher who did? In other places, this might be chalked up merely to coincidence; but in Kansas, it deserves consideration.
I feel as though if you did not bad mouth people, talk badly and down about other people's religion, and just try to start drama with false stories that you just dream up, you would have absolutely nothing to write about. Gee, wouldn't that be a shame!
ReplyDeleteSeriously? I did not have a single bad thing to say about anyone's religion until certain people told me MY religion was not good. A certain Methodist minister actually had the cheek to ask me if my FATHER taught me my "Satanic" religion! My Dad actually did teach me pretty all of my family traditions, and I "feel as though" Frankfort, as a whole, wanted to be as insulting as their ignorance could be, both to me and to my children. As for making things up and starting drama, WHAT ABOUT THE SHIT MY HUSBAND WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY OF BY A JURY OF HIS PEERS? If ANY of it had been true, he would certainly have been found guilty! If Dean Dalinghaus had not put my child up to lying her ass off in exchange for a few privileges not granted to other students, (btw-that counts as making up false stories and starting drama) I probably would not have noticed a few things that I have noticed around here, and might not write about them; so you have a point, but I certainly did not start the drama. That was the indigenous Frankfurters. But what does any of that have to do with consolidating the schools? Are you suggesting that there should be no laws protecting children?
Delete