Week+5+Reflections

Week 5 part 1: Another example of unethical behavior occurred regarding a school board election. There were a lot of rumors going around that the opposing candidates were ahead and they were out to get the current superintendent voted out. In response the Superintendent and members of his cabinet/upper administrators used school district phones and computers to get access to district resident information, then proceeded to call parents of the community to remind them to vote, while persuading them to vote for one board member over another. They were doing this for a few hours when they were interrupted by a group of principals who had booked the same room for a meeting. This was a violation of Standard 1.4. The educator shall not use institutional or professional privileges for personal or partisan advantage, as they would not have had access to this information if they had not worked for the district, nor access to phones, computers and office space. What happened to them? Nothing. They were exposed, and everyone heard of all that happened, but nothing was publicly, formally done to these people. In the short term they were able to use district equipment, electricity, phone lines and computers to carry out their voting requests. What could have been the consequences? The superintendent could have been reprimanded, removed for interfering with the elections and this could have been turned in to TEA for voting violations. The cabinet members could have also been reprimanded, but nothing happened. The incumbent team won and things went on like normal. No additional money was spent. A past administrator was accused of paying teachers stipends and extra duty for work they never completed. This pay was to offset the extra work they did after the normal school day, yet there were no records of students sign in sheets, nor was there true documentation of the actual days and hours they worked. These individuals received well over $7,000 in some cases up to $10,000 and after much investigation they could never find any proof that they had actually worked either with students or were even at the building the days they had claimed to work. This is a violation of Standard 1.3:The educator shall not submit fraudulent requests for reimbursement, expenses, or pay. The principal was fired and the district claimed they would file charges against this him, which to date have not occurred. In the short term, he lost his position and was exposed to the community for these financial issues. The district had to conduct a financial audit, file charges against the administrator in question and complete a very thorough investigation. Completing each of these items was a great expense that needed to be carried out to show the fraud and misuse of money. As a result of this investigation administrators are no longer allowed to earn extra duty pay, teachers must turn in student rosters with student signatures for any extra duty they receive and we must explain the purpose of these tutorials as well as document this expense in our CIP. A new system to track and justify any extra duty has been put in place district wide to avoid these issues in the future. All administrators and budget clerks had to be trained on the new procedure and a complete audit of each campus had to be done to ensure money is being accounted for and spent appropriately. Will this eliminate fraud? I don’t believe it will do away with it completely, but it will be harder and more time consuming if someone really is out to beat the system. As the administrator over the budget it has given me a lot more work to do. In the long term, I can see more changes coming to document more accurately and many more procedures put in place to avoid misuse of funding. Ethical standards based on discrimination of an employee or student based on their race, color, gender, etc is also something TEA outlined as not tolerable in the state of Texas. Standard 2.5 states that the educator shall not discriminate against or coerce a colleague on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, age, gender, disability, family status, or sexual orientation. AN example of a violation of this standard was with an assistant principal who was being considered for a promotion. He was not openly gay, but there was some discussion as to his sexual preference. He was great with the students, teachers/staff of his building and had been a great assistant for six years. He made appearances and did all of the extras to be noticed. As interviews approached, he as asked by his immediate supervisor whether or not he was gay. When he admitted he was, she directed him no to “come out” to avoid endangering his job. He was reminded that we are in a good ole boy part of Texas and the community wasn’t ready for this yet. He kept quiet and when interviews came around he interviewed, scored well and was being considered when his boss shared that he was gay. Over the summer he was reassigned another campus as an instructional coordinator with the same pay as an assistant principal. He later learned it was his boss who informed cabinet and the real reason for all the changes were due to his preference. What could this administrator have done? He could have filed a grievance against the superintendent or his boss, but would that have saved his job in the end or caused more problems. Who would he get to “testify” his side of the story or the details that had been communicated to him? At the time, we were all shocked at how quickly he was “put away” so as not to shame the district. It was very sad as he was a great leader and the district missed out on a great man due to their prejudice of not wanting to be seen differently. In the long term his reassignment hurt the district financially, as he still was being paid as an administrator and most definitely the district’s attorney had to be consulted, thus incurring another cost that could have been avoided. A director of communication has been known to have affairs, he had an affair with a married assistant principal and a teacher. He is responsible for teaching others in the district about sexual harassment and always would tell everyone “the article is already written it is just missing a name- don’t let it be yours”. He too is married and was the biggest flirt with all women he came in contact with. His inappropriate behavior and unethical interactions with other employees can be seen as a violation of many ethical standards. The problem was his relationship with the assistant superintendent of human resources, who are very close friends, was the reason he never was reprimanded for any of his actions. When the assistant superintendent came to the district he brought this communications director with him an was part of his team. Therefore, he was directed to stay away from certain people, certain situations, but the temptation was too strong and he faltered yet again. The last straw came just recently when he was caught having an affair with a paraprofessional and her husband came forward requesting his removal. With the past affairs, all the other women had left and he was promoted, but here the district had to respond. I feel this was a violation of Standard 2.6: The educator shall not use coercive means or promise of special treatment in order to influence professional decisions or colleagues. As he was given numerous opportunities and never formally reprimanded for his prior actions due to his relationship with his boss. He was given special treatment and allowed to stay and continue to work as if nothing had happened. This last time, the principals were made aware that he was separating from the district and we should direct all communication requests to another person. Nothing was said about anything leading up to this change. When he was hired at another district there was not one negative thing said or explanation as to his situation. This covering up for their “good ole boy” is not something that is only done in one district, but can be seen occurring in many school district, this was a waste of tax payer money, as he continued to receive his pay while he looked for another job and his reckless behavior will continue, as his boss did not want his reputation tarnished. His relationship and connection to his administrators saved his career though his personal choices have been nothing but impulsive and reckless. As the superintendent what could be done to ensure these situations do not repeat themselves. Hiring people or promoting people who have proven themselves trustworthy are important things to consider when assembling your cabinet. Making sure everyone is on the same page and understands their work is a reflection of you and their actions of your vision. When situations do arise, talking about hem openly instead of trying to avoid the situation will be important. Thos below me must know what to say when confronted with facts and what their response should be when questioned. According to the state competencies for the superintendent he should be able to : “exhibit understanding and implement policies and procedures that promote district personnel compliance with //The Code of Ethics and Standard Practices for Texas Educators”// as well as deal with all of these situations in a fair and ethical manner. Sweeping these issues under the rug and delegating others to take care of these types of situations does not demonstrate strong leadership. To be that leader, I really believe it comes down to being present and dealing with these situations, as uncomfortable as they may be. ||
 * In any business there will always be people who make mistakes, some from which they can learn from, others so large we create laws to ensure these mistakes do not repeat themselves. The Texas Education Agency has created a code of ethics for all educators to follow when working with the youth of our state. These standards have been written with the student in mind, to keep our profession as professional as possible as well as to create an environment of trust and confidence from the viewpoint of the students and parents, as well as that of the employees and those appointed to offices within these public entities. The superintendent should be the primary example of a leader who is ethical and willing to do whatever it takes to ensure children are safe, being taught and make the tough decisions in the face of adversity. An example of unethical behavior in a school district was an elementary principal in San Antonio ISD stole custodial supplies (toilet paper) to sell at his personal store, for his profit. They had noticed at the administration building that his school was always short on custodial supplies and when they actually investigated they found exactly where they were being stored and resold for a profit. This is an example of Standard 1.2 being violated. It states that “the educator shall not knowingly misappropriate, divert, or use monies, personnel, property, or equipment committed to his or her charge for personal gain or advantage”. In response to this violation he was exposed to the local media, he lost his job and ultimately lost his certification. This affects the district financially as they lose resources, have to spend time and money investigating the allegations and contact the district’s attorney to file charges and proceed. This case could have paid for a teacher’s salary.