Teacher accuses principal of assaultDispute arose over evaluation; school head placed on paid leave By Diette Courrégé (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Friday, March 21, 2008
The principal of Jane Edwards Elementary School has been accused of grabbing a teacher's arm during an argument about the teacher's evaluation. Christy Thompson has been placed on administrative leave with pay while the incident is investigated, and the teacher, Pamela Zbrzeznj, is teaching her classes at the small, rural school on Edisto Island. Attempts to reach Thompson and Zbrzeznj on Thursday were unsuccessful. The alleged assault happened March 13 in the principal's office, and the dispute was related to Zbrzeznj's evaluation, according to a Charleston County Sheriff's Office report. Zbrzeznj said Thompson had passed her "onto the next level, then had changed her mind and had decided to flunk her and hold her back," according to the report. Zbrzeznj had the original paperwork that showed she had been passed, and Thompson grabbed it from her when the teacher showed it to her, the sheriff's office report said. Zbrzeznj took the paperwork back and began walking toward the door when Thompson grabbed her arm and closed the door to her office in an attempt to keep Zbrzeznj from leaving with the original paperwork, the report said. Zbrzeznj eventually was able to leave the office with the original paperwork, and she later asked sheriff's deputies to document the assault, according to the report. Charleston school officials would not say whether the alleged incident occurred during the school day or release any other details about what happened. Associate Superintendent Doug Gepford, along with school district security officials, took statements from Thompson and Zbrzeznj on March 14. They will review the information and determine whether any further administrative action is necessary. The decision could be appealed to the chief academic officer, the superintendent and the school board. Superintendent Nancy McGinley said she didn't know how long the internal investigation would take but said she didn't expect a decision within the next few weeks. She planned to consult with the school district's attorney and find out what police planned to do. "Everybody has the right to due process," she said. "At this point we are treating it as an allegation. Certainly, there are two sides to every story." Maj. John Clark said the Charleston County Sheriff's Office has assigned an investigator to look into the situation further to see whether enough evidence exists to press charges. The investigator will talk to everyone who is involved, including witnesses, before making any decision, and Zbrzeznj would have to be willing to file charges, Clark said. Information about the incident at Jane Edwards Elementary surfaced a day after two middle school teachers in Columbia were charged with disturbing schools after they got into a fight in front of students during a class change. Thompson has faced criticism from teachers at her school in the past. Her first year at Jane Edwards was the 2006-07 school year, and 11 of the school's 15 teachers did not return to the school this school year. Many of those teachers alleged that Thompson acted inappropriately and with poor judgment. District officials completed two investigations into the allegations but did not release specifics of the results. McGinley said Zbrzeznj's accusation is about a specific incident that has no connection to what happened last school year. The previous allegations have been dealt with, and this incident would be treated separately, she said. An interim principal will be assigned to Jane Edwards. School officials haven't determined who that will be but said their choice would be an experienced principal. Reach Diette Courrégé at 937-5546 or dcourrege@post andcourier.com. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 25 comment(s)
Posted by belovedbliff on March 21, 2008 at 6:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
protecting administrators again, i see. no wonder they can call black children dumb stupid n------. Yes, this happened this year at a local downtown school.
Posted by Tulane75 on March 21, 2008 at 7:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
How is race involved in this story? Belovedbliff, like so many others, fantasizes about opportunities to use slurs. Who calls black children that? I dispute your vile assertion.
The issue in this story concerns the evaluation.
I don't think there was really a criminal assault, but the accusation, like so many these days, provides some leverage and could benefit the accuser in a court proceeding. I am curious to know whether EMS was called, whether there were visible injuries and whether there are medical bills for something real.
Posted by belovedbliff on March 21, 2008 at 7:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
My comment has to do with administrators being protected by the district for their acts.
Tulane (ironic name, given Tulane is such an excellent school), how can you characterize me as fantasizing "like so many others". You know nothing about me. I have not made this about race. I simply reported a story in which nothing was done to an administrator. There are countless other stories, too.
You may dispute my "vile assertion." was there and you were not. Hopefully, it will all come out one day.
Posted by 1Recruiter on March 21, 2008 at 7:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
belovedbliff, I certainly have to fully agree with Tulane. There seem to be no need for you to insert the racial statements into your opinion. By doing that and the way it is written gives a read that you were injecting race into the discussion. You statement didn't have enough information for a reader to know that you were referencing another story. In either case, i think your statement with limited information and use of those words only create a thought of "here we go with another race issue".
Posted by belovedbliff on March 21, 2008 at 7:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, 1recruiter, might I challenge you to ask yourself, "why must everything be about race?"
You don't know my race. You don't know the race of the principal. So, I encourage you to reflect on why you (and others) falsely jumped to, "oh, here we go again--another race issue."
Posted by bribetaker on March 21, 2008 at 8 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Two people behind closed doors....he said/she said. I don't see how an investigation will "prove" anything. Just another messy, bad PR story for our school system.
Posted by Early on March 21, 2008 at 8:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I believe the controversy comes from the racial makeup of the teachers, students and the principle. Some folks believe it should be an all black makeup of teachers and principle hence the extreme tensions at this school for years. The problem is deep rooted and this story only emphases the problems there.
Posted by mlm on March 21, 2008 at 8:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Here's one of the "countless other stories" of administrative abuse within CCSD. Charleston County School Board Chairman, Hillery Douglas, has been documented as having subjected his victims to vile epithets and threats, in addition to physically threatening some of them. Is pointing this out an example of my "cultural insensitivity" or is it more an example of just how poor the leadership is at the highest levels within CCSD?
Even if the basic elements of this story are true, it reflects poorly on the professional environment where our teachers work and our children are educated. No wonder a small rural school principal resorts to this type of behavior when Mr. Douglas is known to do the same. CCSD is too vast a system and has too many poorly trained and unqualified people in leadership positions. This makes it twice as hard to provide the proper experience to those who might aspire to advancement when their administrative superiors (otherwise cast as their role models) behave so badly and inappropriately.
Our children, all of them, regardless of race and economic condition (in addition to parents and teachers), deserve to be treated with respect and not intimidation. This is just another example of CCSD's inability to transmit this important detail to its administrators at every level.
CCSD is too big to be held properly accountable for its mistakes and to make appropriate corrections in a timely manner.
Posted by Early on March 21, 2008 at 9:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
mlm, it could be the other way also. Our system is the way it is becasue of the poor support the teachers and principles get from the parents of the students that attend these school. I belivev that to be a more true analysis.
Posted by Corder2007 on March 21, 2008 at 9:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)
WHAT IS THIS ALL ABOUT RACE FOR. NO WHERE IN THAT ARTICLE DOES IT MENTION THE RACE OF THE PRINCIPAL OR THE TEACHER. 90% OF THE TEACHERS DID NOT RETURN TO THE SCHOOL THIS YEAR, THAT SAYS A LOT ABOUT THE PRINCIPALS WORK ETHICS.
Posted by Grace on March 21, 2008 at 9:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you Early for agreeing with mlm. Because I was starting to wonder if you had ever stepped foot in the school this year to feel that tension you say is really there between the teachers and students.
As you all make your comments today and probably through the weekend. Make sure to think about what you say because the students will hear about it. Think about how it affects them emotionally. They are people too and they are proud of their school. They are out for an entire week and have no idea of what is going on, so make sure you leave the students out of your comments.
Posted by Early on March 21, 2008 at 9:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Grace, I have been to the school and I have been by association in the school system for 7 years. I agree there is a large sense of pride at this school as well as others. If you know the school then you know what I'm referring to without me spelling it out on the board and starting more racial BS. It's not the teachers and students I'm referring to, it's teachers, principle and the CCSD administration. It's a complex problem and this recent event is an indication that the problem still exist. If they change the principle then they have given into "we want it our way"
mentality, not a goof thing.
Posted by xannahmac on March 21, 2008 at 9:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What I think they really need to look at is the fact that 11 out of 15 teachers did not return to the school after this principals first year. I mean just read that paragraph again....there is obviously something wrong there. I mean 1 or 2 teachers is no big deal but 11 out of 15!!!! There is obviously a problem with the principal.
Posted by preachlove on March 21, 2008 at 10:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank God all people in South Carolina don't think like you, belovedbliff. You really need to get rid of the "beloved" from your username. For an article about an evaluation dispute between a teacher and a principal to turn into a race issue when no where in the article race is mentioned and to denigrate an entire race of children is simply amazing to me. I mean, come on, was that post even called for? My hat goes of off to all the people who truly try to make South Carolina a nice state to live in.
Posted by Corder2007 on March 21, 2008 at 10:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)
AMEN preachlove that is exactly what i said in my post, basically
Posted by LowcountryMoose on March 21, 2008 at 10:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I bet Ms.Zbrzeznj was rightfully pissed about the handling of her evaluation. According to the school's website, http://janeedwards.ccsdschools.com/site_..., she was Teacher of the Month in January. She must have been doing something right.
The entire teacher evaluation process basically boils down to having two administrators, at separate times, observe a few classes while they follow a standardized checklist of "Performance Dimensions." It is certainly a subjective process. If one of the administrators doesn't like you for any reason, it is very simple for them to grade you as "Needs Improvement" or "Unsatisfactory" in just enough categories to not have to hire you for the next year. It could be a real slap in the face, because it can also make it difficult or impossible for teachers to find another job in the district.
As far as a racial issue, who knows? The Principal is definitely black. I am not sure about the teacher, but with a last name like Zbrzeznj, I doubt her skin pigment even approches the color of your average latte. Black administrators in black schools like Jane Edwards may feel that black teachers are a better fit for their school. If that is the case, they should hire only black teachers. It is unfair and unnecessary to hire white teachers, only to railroad them out of their job and, perhaps, even their career choice.
Posted by Girleygirl on March 21, 2008 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Preachlove- as always you nailed it!!
I just want to know what is going on with the teachers in Columbia. Some of them like having sex with little boys and some like fighting in the school like little girls
Posted by belovedbliff on March 21, 2008 at 1:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Okay, I'll try one more time to help others make sense of my post.
The article is about alleged abuse of power by administrators. I shared an example where an administrator abused his power by name-calling. I gave the facts. He used the "n" word with black students. Is this not inappropriate?
I guess where many are stuck is because it is was a racial example, so let me give other examples--all true
an administrator shared with other teachers that a certain teacher on staff has a history of mental illness (nothing was done about it). Isn't this an abuse of power/authority.
a group of teachers was wanting to set up a female teacher. The administrator told them (I was a part of the group) not to do this because she thought the teacher was only into women.
An administrator told a teacher (it was me), "I am the g--d---of this school and you will do as I say."
So, hopefully, this will give more context to my original post about abuse of administrator.
Now, teachers on board, you know that you have examples, too. The way it works--if you are close to the administrator, they say all kinds of things that they are not supposed to say.
Posted by SomeTruthPlease on March 21, 2008 at 2:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It's hard to throw stones at the children who don't know how to act when there are role models such as Ms. Thompson.
Posted by ticket3477 on March 21, 2008 at 2:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
the what of the school?
how can you be a god damn of anything...that makes no sense. If I were you...I would have laughed at whoever said that to you.
I AM THE GOD DAMN OF THIS SCHOOL...uhh...the god damn what?
Posted by Corder2007 on March 21, 2008 at 3:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
well let's take a wold guess here ticket and say ADMINISTRATOR DUH!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by Corder2007 on March 21, 2008 at 3:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
oops typo meant wild guess
Posted by ticket3477 on March 21, 2008 at 4:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What I was making fun of is the whole jibberjabber argument that beloved is making...
If you're going to try to make a point...make a good point and include everything...its called proofreading
Beloved must be a terrible teacher (or doesn't teach English) because that is a poorly formulated argument...and it makes me laugh.
Posted by belovedbliff on March 21, 2008 at 5:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
well, at least, we have moved away from the whole bringing up race subterfuge.
Posted by RTC on March 21, 2008 at 6:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How come they allow people to type out G.D. on here, but you can't even use words like di*k?
I find the use of God's name in vain way more offensive than many other words. The P&C makes no sense in their policies.