Teacher Statements for Level 4 Grievance Hearing re: Involuntary Transfers
Statement to the School Board
By Kailey Carey
My name is Kailey Carey, and I’m currently in my third year working for Bandon School district. For the past two years, I taught sixth grade at the middle school. This year, I teach freshman and sophomore English, as well as yearbook, at Bandon High School. I also coach high school softball and middle school volleyball.
I want to begin by expressing my gratitude for my current position. I truly love working at the high school, and despite everything that led to this point, this has started as the best school year I've had so far. That being said, I teach students about accountability, and doing the right thing, and I would be a hypocrite to not stand up for what is right, and remind others of the importance of being held accountable for their actions.
Unfortunately, it took us reaching grievance level four before we were given the opportunity to speak to the school board. Contracts are legally binding, and according to Article 23(C) of our contract: it states QUOTE
“Before a teacher is involuntarily transferred, there should be a meeting with the principal, we should get a chance to give our input about assignments, and we should be told about available vacancies.” END QUOTE.
In my case, none of that happened. I was not made aware of anything like this prior to that email I received on a Thursday, at 3:30pm. So while I acknowledge that this new assignment has been a personal growth opportunity, it does not negate the fact that the process that led me here violated our contract and has caused real and lasting harm—not just to me, but to many others. Including the students - who should be our district's most important focus, and should be the reason we all work together to do what is best for them.
Over the past few months, I’ve had to work hard to recover from the emotional and professional damage this transfer caused. I’ve received messages—one even from another district employee—telling me I don’t deserve my new position, that I’m a terrible person, and that I would fail at the high school just as I apparently failed at the middle school. These messages, coupled with a lack of honest communication from administration, have deeply shaken my confidence. And yet, I continue to show up. I build strong relationships with students by teaching them about respect and how it goes two ways, by holding them accountable for their actions, and encouraging them to be good to other people, because being good to others is simple. I pour myself into my teaching and give a lot of extra time to our community by coaching. I work, at minimum, 20 extra hours each week to give my students the education they deserve. I look stopped working my second job on Sundays because I now have to spend my Sundays at school, due to my new work load which includes, prepping my lessons, creating material, and grading. But because of the state of all of this, that still doesn’t feel like it’s enough for our administration or our school board. And instead of a simple thank you, we’ve been villainized just for asking for things to be done the right, moral, legal, and professional way.
The most troubling part for me is how my name has been repeatedly mentioned in various emails, meetings, and conversations as part of the reason for these involuntary transfers—without a single conversation ever being had with me. I’ve since heard many “reasons” for the transfers, and some of those reasons have been damaging to me personally, as well as other educators who put SO MUCH into this community, and our students. None of those reasons were ever discussed with me by an administrator. If there were concerns, why were they never addressed directly? And more importantly, how are we supposed to improve if the leadership fails to communicate clearly, or offer support? One of the main reasons that has been thrown around is test scores. Standardized tests do not reflect the full picture of student growth or educator effectiveness. I challenge the board to actually be present in our classrooms—see firsthand the learning, the growth, the connection—rather than relying on data that often fails to represent reality.
The silence, rumors, and lack of transparency have made this district feel like a hostile place to work. That is a sign of a deeply toxic culture, and it must be addressed. The district has a habit of only addressing mistakes being made when they’re teachers. I know I am not alone in feeling this way. Several educators have expressed fear of speaking up due to potential retaliation—including myself. Whatever retaliation comes for me, so be it. I am doing what is right for our students, as they all deserve better from us. We, as educators, are committed to giving them our best every day. But that becomes increasingly difficult when we are dismissed, disrespected, and undermined by those in leadership. The lack of accountability and honesty from administration is deeply damaging—not just to staff morale, but ultimately to our students’ learning environment. Most comments and opinions have continued to stem from those not in the classroom every day, from those not spending their free time working (for free) in order to do their job well for our students.
I remain hopeful that today marks a turning point. I hope our administrators begin to truly listen, to acknowledge the harm that’s been done, and to take meaningful steps toward repair. I hope the school board holds leadership accountable, instead of only teachers, and ensures our contract is honored moving forward. My final hope is that the people that are licensed, educated, and do the real work with students daily start to be listened to about what is best for the students, instead of continuing with this idea of teachers being the villain. At the end of the day, I love this job. I love my students, and I am proud of the work I do. In order for this culture to move forward in a positive direction, educators should have the support of the board and administrators, as well as actually collaborating with the experts - those in the classroom- when big decisions are being made. All I ask is to be treated with the same respect, care, and integrity that I extend to my students every day.
Thank you
Statement by Ashley Pearson
Hello, my name is Ashley Pearson and I taught in the Bandon School District for 8 years. I started at Harbor Lights Middle School, where I had a truly awful experience for three years before I was able to make the move to teach at Bandon High School. While at the high school I taught 9th and 11th grade ELA. I taught dual credit college writing for two years, before I began to teach the dual credit Speech and Debate class. For both dual credit options I paid for and took college courses after my move to the high school to qualify to teach the classes. I was also the coach of the Speech and Debate team, who took second place at state my first and second years coaching, and then last year in my third year as coach we took first place at state. I also ran the yearbook at the high school and briefly coached the Cheerleading team.
According to our contract “Article 23(C) says that before a teacher is involuntarily transferred, there should be a meeting with the principal, we should get a chance to give our input about assignments, and we should be told about available vacancies.” Specifically point 3 reads “an involuntary transfer will be made only after a meeting between the teacher and the principal at which time he will be notified of the reasons for transfer.” This point is particularly important.
None of the items listed in our contract occurred in relation to my involuntary transfer. I was not spoken to about the possibility of moving before the email came telling me I was being moved, I was not given a chance to speak about assignments, nor was I told that there was any possible consideration of changing teachers around at all before I received an email on May 22nd telling me I would be transferred. In fact, in the weeks and days leading up to this email, every indication was given that everything was normal and on track for me to continue at the high school in the fall. I was asked on May 9th to complete dual credit certification steps with OIT. They approved me after the involuntary transfer email had been sent out and after asking Dr. Dockery what I should tell them because not responding looked poorly on me, I was told they would speak to OIT and then I received an email that my dual credit approval had been rescinded.
If you recall, I mentioned point three of section 23c in our contract. The morning of May 22nd I had my end of year evaluation with Dr. Dockery where I received all threes and fours, a great evaluation for what I had felt was a great school year. During that end of year evaluation meeting, Dr. Dockery and I spoke about my plans for the next school year and the high hopes and expectations I had about increasing the rigor with the Freshman and Juniors that I taught. Then, not even four hours later, I received the transfer email while Dr. Dockery wasn’t even in the building. I had never felt more disrespected than I did in that moment knowing he had engaged in conversation about the following year when he knew that was not the district's plan. The contract language is clear about conversations occurring before the transfers happen, and this demonstrates how blatantly they violated the contract.
I was not asked my preference, and to this day I have not been given any justification on why I was being moved. When I met with Dr. Dockery after the email was sent out, I was told I would be allowed to continue coaching the Speech and Debate team but I would not be teaching the class come fall. I was also told that they thought I would be excited to move to the middle school as they had only heard great things about my time there. I told them I thought that was odd and I don’t know who would have told them that - only a few teachers from my time there still remained. Anytime I have talked about my time at the middle school it is clear I was unhappy and why I actively sought the move to high school. I explained my preference to remain at the high school, and that under no circumstance was I interested in returning to teach at the middle school - that I knew I would not be as effective as a teacher there as I knew myself to be at the high school. This preference was dismissed and there was no option for collaboration given.
Even later when they changed their mind about the Speech and Debate class following community outcry and I was apparently going to be teaching it while being a teacher at the middle school - and I tried to bring solutions to problems they felt existed - my ideas were disregarded. My expertise meant nothing and they knew what was best. Now dual credit Speech is not offered to the students of Bandon High School.
After this meeting, where no clear justification or productive conversation was had, I only spoke to Dr. Dockery one additional time, where I tried to offer continued solutions for the speech and debate class, and made it clear that due to what had happened I had begun to apply for other jobs as I was not interested in returning to teach at the middle school. Then I did not seek out further meetings - I felt that there would be no point and we had begun the ULP Process. I had made myself clear that I had no desire or intention to teach at the middle school. In every conversation that I have been part of since the involuntary transfers were announced, it is very clear that the district does not care about my thoughts, opinions, or expertise. I want to be clear this is not a reassignment as some people have implied, that would be within the walls of the high school and something entirely different. This move to the middle school was an involuntary transfer, and the proper procedures were not followed.
I was devastated to make the decision to leave Bandon School District. It wasn’t until these meetings where it was made clear my expertise not be considered that I began looking for work. I had planned to spend my entire teaching career in Bandon - my mom on more than one occasion has asked me if I would ever look for a teaching position somewhere else, perhaps in a bigger city, and I always said no. I had built a life in Bandon, and consider this town my home.
I want nothing more than to be done with this, to be able to move forward in my new job and not have this situation looming over me and my former colleagues. The right thing for the district to have done was to reverse course back in May when this began, but they made the decision not to do that. There is no easy way to correct the problem now. Even if the district were to offer me my job back, I would decline. As I stated in my resignation letter, the circumstances surrounding my involuntary transfer to the middle school eroded any remaining trust I had in district leadership and placed me in a position where I could no longer envision a sustainable or fulfilling future teaching within the district. I continue to be part of this grievance and our ULP because I feel an obligation to hold the district accountable to make sure this does not happen in the future. The contract language is clear and it is clear that the district violated my rights as a contracted employee with the way my involuntary transfer was handled. I am asking the board to hold the district administration accountable for violating our contract, and for the harm they have caused the district.
Nicole Guzman
Grievance Hearing Statement 10/6
My name is Nicole Guzman, and I currently teach 6th, 7th, and 8th grade English and a
technology class at Harbor Lights Middle School. Last year, I taught 7th and 8th Grade
English with one period of intervention. I have been in Bandon School District for the
past 5 years.
Article 23(c) 3 states “an involuntary transfer will be made only after a meeting between
the teacher and the principal at which time he will be notified of the reasons for the
transfer.”
In addition Article 23(c) 4 states “Teachers being involuntarily transferred or
reassigned will be informed of appropriate vacancies known at the time the transfer
decision is being made. Teachers will be able to indicate their preference of
assignment.”
Throughout my career, I have often taught new courses and grade levels. The
procedure has always been the same (including the precedent that has been set and
followed every single year that I’ve taught in Bandon)... administration calls me in for a
discussion about the upcoming needs of the school, and I am given an opportunity to
share my perspective and preferences. Ultimately, it is the administrator’s choice, but I
have never resisted an involuntary transfer or reassignment because of the
collaboration that has occurred prior to the final decision. In fact, in two separate cases,
in places where seniority determined the final decision and I could have avoided
transfer, I waived my seniority because I understood the benefit to students. I have
always willingly embraced new challenges and eagerly looked for ways to make a
positive impact wherever I am.
This was different though. There was no opportunity for conversation until AFTER the
transfers were in place, and there was certainly no opportunity to voice preferences as
the decision was being made. We were notified of the transfers via a form email after
school on Thursday, May 22 and told they would be announced publicly the following
day. I found out after 4PM because a coworker who had been notified reached out to
me and told me to look and see if I had an email. That email said I would be moved to
being an interventionist (a position we did not previously have at the middle school), and
I learned that Ms. Pearson was being given my current position. I was shocked because
this was all very out of character and not in line with how Ms. Armistead has always
done things. Ms. Armistead was still on campus and approached me at the copy
machine, offering to talk for the 8 minutes before she had to leave. Dr. Dockery was
unavailable at his site.
The procedures of Article 23 exist in the contract, not only to protect teachers, but to
protect the quality of education we provide. Teachers have insights that administrators
do not. We are often able to see potential problems or incomplete elements in their plan
because they don’t have the full level of understanding that we do from our vantage
points. Collaboration is absolutely essential and beneficial to our students because of
the knowledge we each bring from our different perspectives.
Had I been spoken to about the movements before they happened I would have
expressed concern over the impact to tier one grade level instruction and the disruption
to the work we’ve been doing at the middle school level to improve student outcomes. I
would have also questioned creating a new position in a time of budget troubles
because though I was definitely willing to eventually teach intervention, spreading
teachers too thin would also impact the quality of instruction.
But I was not asked. I was not given the contract-specified opportunity BEFORE the
transfers were in place and finalized. Further, when staff and community have asked for
reasons to justify the transfer, different reasons have been given, depending on the
audience.
Yet, even after the transfers, I was trying to figure out how to make the best of the
situation that I could. I spent part of my summer working on intervention materials
because that was the one constant in my assignment... I would either be teaching
multiple sections of intervention, or I would be returned to my previous position of 7/8
ELA and intervention.
In August, I was informed that they would be absorbing Ms Pearson’s resignation,
rather than hiring a replacement. I was to be assigned an additional grade level of
English on top of my current load, which would not have happened without the
transfers. I met with Ms Armistead and Ms Schmerer, along with my union rep to
discuss the changes. With my previous workload, I was already working later than
admin most days, and I was often the last teacher on campus, since it is an intensive,
multi-faceted position with no adopted curriculum (requiring me to create and gather
every resource required within a lesson), and it’s more time-consuming grading than
many areas.
As a result of the additional grade level, it was agreed in that August meeting that there
would be no intervention this year because of the heavy workload. This was a big loss
for kids as well because at the middle school level we have no other time to provide the
reading remediation that some of our students need. However, in this meeting, Ms.
Schmerer also acknowledged the impact of the heavy load and said she could take
away my elective period to accommodate a second prep. The word she used was that
she could “guarantee” that for me during the first semester. I left the meeting feeling
heard and that maybe we could get through this.
One week later, two days after I had made my first and only public comment ever at a
board meeting in my career, I was informed that the schedule would not allow for me to
have a second prep and I would need to teach an elective on top of the 3 grade levels
of English.
The week after that, further reassignments were made regarding the size of the 8th
grade class. Admin claimed that collaboration had occurred on these new assignments,
but again, I was not asked a single time what I thought would be the best approach to
this before the assignments were made.
The impact of the involuntary transfers has had a domino effect of negative
consequences.
Adding an additional grade level was not a judicious decision, and the only way I’ve
been able to juggle it thus far is by constantly making decisions about what students
WON’T get each day. This does not align with who I am as a teacher, and I cannot be
on board with doing the bare minimum for students.
The inciting event of the transfers also sent a clear message to teachers in regard to
Admin's position of power. It created a culture of fear among teachers, which is not at all
conducive to supporting them in a way that they can show up as their best selves for
students.
In addition, by doubling down on the transfers and eliminating the 6th grade teacher
altogether, the negative impacts to students have been tremendous. Teachers have
been assigned outside of their expertise and scheduling issues have created
consequences in class sizes and availability of core teachers. As a teacher who works
with these students daily and feels a deep level of care and responsibility for them, I
have felt continually powerless in my ability to counteract the impacts of these actions,
which has been extremely troubling.
Four highly-skilled, highly-qualified teachers have now also resigned due to the way
these transfers transpired and the resulting district culture of not valuing teacher
expertise that has been created.
I have heard that people are being told that I’m just moving onto a better opportunity.
The reality though is that I was not looking to leave. I love my students and teaching. I
have been heartbroken to have to make this choice. One of the major contributing
decisions in relocating my family to Bandon was the importance of community to me. As
a teacher, I have always lived in the communities where I teach, and I value being a part
of a village that supports and mentors our upcoming generations. To feel essentially
forced to walk away from this has been an impossible decision that feels like it has no
winners.
My resignation was a direct result of these transfers and the myriad of negative impacts
they created. It would not have happened otherwise. I did not apply to a job until
August, when it became evident that the troubling path our district was on would not be
shifting course anytime soon.
When teachers are disrespected and their years of valuable expertise ignored, it is
students who are harmed.
The district is arguing semantics in contract language saying they only need to follow
these procedures before we start our new assignments, but the intent of Article 23 and
the precedent that has been followed up until this point makes the violation clear. The
original request to resolve this grievance was to reinstate all teachers into their previous
positions and follow proper procedures for any transfers. I do believe the board should
still offer that, though it would be a symbolic gesture at this point, as the harm has been
done, teachers have resigned who will not be returning, and the teachers who have
been transferred to the high school are pleased with their change in assignment.
However, the more impactful action would be that the district acknowledges its breach
of contractual procedures, truly commits to working WITH teachers and teacher leaders
(a commitment they can demonstrate through future actions), and perhaps even
considers a genuine apology for the harm that has occurred as a result of these
violations.
Though my time in Bandon District as a teacher is drawing to an end, I remain
committed to Bandon’s kids. To any of them who might hear my words, I hope they
know how much I care for them and that I will still be here to support them in different
ways, however I can. I will still be a parent and community member, and I will continue
to advocate for the best for our children in my new role.
Statement By Kate Hawthorne
Superintendent, Administrators, Board Members, Colleagues, and Community Members,
Thank you for your time and attention tonight, and for your continued service to this school community. We know how much time you donate in support of our students, and we sincerely appreciate your presence here.
By allowing us this space, you’ve given us the opportunity to share our perspective on a situation that has affected not just individual educators, but the climate and trust within our district and it is vitally important at times like this that we have open dialogue.
For those who don’t know me, I’m Kate Hawthorne. I’ve been a teacher for over 15 years, including a decade at Bandon High School. Most recently, I taught for two months at Harbor Lights Middle School. I’m also a BSD parent — both of my daughters attend our schools — and they and their friends are also directly affected by the decisions we’re here to talk about.
Let me start by naming the obvious: none of us wants to be here. This grievance, and the tension that’s surrounded it, has taken an emotional toll — and I know I’m not alone in saying it’s kept me up at night.
We previously met at Level 3 of this grievance process, and the discussion was respectful, honest, and productive. We left with a shared sense of greater understanding. And yet, here we are. It’s fair to ask: Why hasn’t this been resolved?
In an email to our OEA representative, Ms. Schmerer acknowledged that our Level 3 meeting was professional and constructive. That’s true — and I want to take a moment to acknowledge that some steps have been taken by the administration since then to improve transparency and include educators in dialogue. That matters, and we’re grateful for it.
But the core concerns at the heart of this grievance remain. Most significantly, the logical, sound reasons for these involuntary transfers still have not been provided by the district and the impact is still being felt.
Ms. Schmerer stated that the grievance should be denied on procedural grounds — that it didn’t comply with the correct level. However, Article 18, Section B-10 of our contract allows the Association to file a grievance at Level Two if it impacts a group or class of teachers — which this clearly did.
More importantly, the District’s claim that no contract violation occurred, particularly around Article 23(C) on involuntary transfers, overlooks both the spirit and the intent of the language.
Yes, the District gave notice. Yes, meetings were eventually held. But the process by which these transfers were made — and communicated — ignored the collaborative intent behind the language.
Let’s look at the contract:
Article 23-C.1 says teachers will have the opportunity to express their wishes regarding a new assignment. That implies more than just being told after a decision has already been made.
Teachers have unique insight into their strengths, their weaknesses, their assignments and their students. I don’t mean to say that teachers should necessarily get their way but what this union membership has tried to express to this district leadership again and again is that, as key and uniquely knowledgeable stakeholders, teacher’s in-put should be meaningfully heard and considered carefully.
By making the decision about these transfers, and apparently irrevocably, before consulting the teachers involved, the district leadership demonstrated a disrespectful regard for their professionalism, expertise, and the impact on their personal as well as professional wellbeing.
Article 23-C.3 says an involuntary transfer will be made only after a meeting with the principal — a meeting in which the reasons for the move are explained.
Our teachers received impersonal emails announcing their transfers — before any conversation occurred. And again, to this day, clear and specific reasons for these transfers have never been fully explained.
When decisions like this are made unilaterally, without input or discussion, it undermines trust and disregards the professional insight that teachers bring to their roles. We aren’t asking to get our way — we’re asking to be respected as partners in the work of educating students.
The email I received on May 22 informed me that I would be moved from BHS to HLMS. It said the decision was based on student needs and my experience. I was surprised — and my initial thoughts about it were that it must be related to our ongoing contract negotiations. I had not asked for this transfer, nor was I consulted beforehand. The decision to make the move seemed arbitrary at best but potentially punitive and retaliatory and for what, for taking a seat at the table, for asking to be paid what other educators in this area are paid or at least asking for clear explanations for why other districts in the area can pay what we for some reason cannot.
When I met with both principals the day after receiving the email notifying me of my transfer, the reasoning offered was vague: that my skills would be valuable at the middle school, and that I had previously expressed interest in HLMS roles. But past interest in specific positions doesn’t equate to a blanket desire to leave the high school — and I made it clear at the time that I did not want this transfer.
I accepted it because it was presented as final. I chose to make the best of it — for students, for the community, and for my own peace of mind. But that doesn’t mean it was handled well. Rumors were spread that I wanted this move — a misleading narrative about me that was not my own and that only could have benefited the district.
And while I have grown to enjoy teaching middle school students — more than I expected, in fact — the important point is that this change was never presented in a way that really helped me understand how it would benefit students. I was not given agency, and I was not offered a voice.
In the May 23rd staff meeting, the day after the emails about transfers were sent out, the tension was thick. Teachers raised concerns about the lack of transparency and the top-down nature of these decisions. I referenced my own graduate coursework in educational leadership — where the very first thing that I was taught was that shared decision-making is the foundation of healthy school systems. What happened here was the opposite.
This isn’t just about where teachers are placed. It’s about how those decisions are made, how they’re communicated, and whether they’re rooted in shared values and mutual respect.
I entered this school year already employed elsewhere, without a signed BSD contract, and still committed myself to doing right by our middle school students. I was doing two new jobs — one that I chose, and one that I didn’t — and I received little in the way of support or acknowledgment from district leadership.
Still, I stayed focused on students. I tried to give the benefit of the doubt, over and over again.
But in the end, what this left is a broken process, unclear communication, and a decision that left teachers feeling disrespected and expendable.
The finality of these transfers, the vagueness of the rationale, and the lack of meaningful conversation before decisions were made — all of this goes against the values we claim to hold as a district.
It hurts to leave under these circumstances. I’ve poured over a decade of my life into this community. I’ve volunteered countless hours, invested deeply in my students and colleagues, and worked hard to make Bandon schools a place I believed in.
I want my daughters to stay in this district. I want to believe that this community still values the voices and contributions of its educators.
At the heart of this grievance is a simple request: include teachers and other stakeholders. Talk with us, not just to us. Involve us in the decisions that affect our lives and our students. Trust that we care deeply — because we do. And that when given the opportunity, we want to collaborate, not conflict.
Thank you for listening, and for considering what we’ve shared this afternoon — not just as contract language, but as a call to rebuild trust, restore dignity, and move forward together.
Statement by Jen Ells
Hello I am Jen Ells, and I teach art at BHS. I’ve worked for BSD since 2001, this is my 25th year. I have worked with several different superintendents and principals, and I have seen this school board move through many changes. I have always felt supported by our school board, and have always believed that our school board puts kids first, just like we do in our classrooms, every period, every day.
“Article 23(C) says that before a teacher is involuntarily transferred, there should be a meeting with the principal, we should get a chance to give our input about assignments, and we should be told about available vacancies, and told the reasons for the transfer.” This language is clear, and has never come into question. Bandon High School has a history of teachers needing to step up and teach a period or 2 of a new class, or a class outside of a teacher’s subject area. Past practice has been that the principal speaks to anyone involved in a schedule change or a transfer well before decisions at the admin level are made. For example, when our health teacher retired several years ago, Principal Belletti asked teachers, during a staff meeting, if we could cover health classes, and avoid hiring a health teacher. After discussion and deliberation over a few weeks, 3 of us agreed to teach a section of health for a year. Past practice shows a history of administrators collaborating with teachers. Principals have asked me to teach a variety of different classes over the years, and I have also asked to have classes added to my schedule that I thought would benefit our students. These conversations and collaborations are critical to the success of our schools.
May 22 I was on a bus, on the way from Crater Lake, back to Bandon. Trent Hatfield and I had just taken students on a rafting trip down the newly un-damned Klamath River, and hiking and exploring around Crater Lake. This was an overnight trip, which requires an enormous amount of energy and hours beyond contracted, paid time. These trips are incredibly enriching for our students, and I have had the opportunity to chaperone trips to the Oregon Shakespeare Festival in Ashland, hiking trips in the Redwoods, Yosemite National Park, and local places along the coast. Until last year, I never really considered NOT doing these trips, even though they put a large strain on the chaperones and are very stressful. Coming back to Bandon last May, I checked my email to see what I missed over the 2 days away. I read an email from Sam Dockery stating I would be teaching 2 periods of middle school art for the 25-26 school year.
I was shocked with news of reassignment because I had recently (3 days prior) had my evaluation with Mr. Dockery and he didn’t mention any changes to my schedule. When I then learned that my BHS teaching partners Kate and Ashley received a similar email I was gutted. In Bandon, teachers aren’t moved from one school to the next without many conversations. The next day we had an afternoon inservice, including a staff meeting. Before the meeting several teachers asked me about the transfers, and were visibly shaken. They mentioned feelings of disrespect, and worry that this sort of move could happen to them. We hoped that in the meeting, the reasons for transfers would be explained. However, Mr. Dockery would not discuss “personnel issues as a group.” I pressed that these moves affect the entire staff. 3 staff members questioned the transfers.
When this staff meeting ended, and we didn’t have any answers to why the transfers happened, teachers who had been silent in the meeting caught me in the hallway. Tears streaming, words of fear and shock and concern for our future. One teacher said they would no longer participate in union events (in the middle of bargaining, where support of every teacher is so important) for fear of retaliation. Another teacher who has experience in large school districts said they had never seen moves made with so much callousness. As I write this, I am thinking, oh will admin figure out who I am writing about, and will that cause problems for them? That in itself is a red flag.
I do not feel supported, respected, or listened to. I feel at any moment I could be handed a job change. I feel my role as union Vice President, and now President, has opened me up to future retaliation. I am a senior teacher who knows their subject matter deeply, who is passionate and enthusiastic about giving kids opportunities to make art.
After May 23, teachers took every opportunity to say why the transfers should be reversed. Several spoke at the June board meeting. We were hopeful that our concerns were heard. Superintendent Schmerer said she would put out a statement explaining the transfers after graduation. That did not happen. In fact, we had a 2 hour level 3 grievance hearing in September with Ms. Armistead, Mr. Dockery, and Superintendent Schmerer and we still do not have an answer to the question of why. The answers have changed many times: at first it had something to do with student outcomes, data. We cannot look at a small sample of data and determine where a teacher would be most effective. I was told in May that moving 2 experienced seasoned teachers would help with some of the behavior problems at the middle school. (This is absurd. The middle school teachers KNOW how to manage behavior).
Then Ashley Pearson resigned in July (did you get a chance to read her resignation letter yet?). I knew the union members felt demoralized, and many of them told me they were looking for jobs in different districts. I still hoped the district would change course. The next to resign was Kate. And then Nicole. And now Jen Shipp. All of these resignations stem from administrative decisions that failed to consider teachers’ perspectives, the experts in the room. Teachers know best how to improve student outcomes. When teachers are supported, respected, and valued by administration they are better able to help students thrive.
In August, 2 days before returning to work, several BHS teachers (myself included) received emails saying they had different teaching assignments. Again, no notice, no collaboration. The emails read the same as the emails in May. This was extremely distressing since I had met twice with the superintendent in the summer and she expressed that they had learned from the May transfers, and would be handling moves differently. I had an entire day (while I was visiting family and still on vacation) where I talked to teachers and principals and tried to get people put back into their subject areas. In my case, I was told I would be teaching 8th grade ELA. After explaining to Mr. Dockery that I could not prepare for one period of ELA (something I hadn’t done for 17 years) and still prep for ceramics, drawing, and painting classes, he agreed to talk to Ms. Armistead. The solution was to use me as an assistant teacher in the ELA class with Ms. Guzman. As much as I love being in Guzman’s class (she is an excellent teacher by the way), my skills are not being utilized.
The repercussions and impacts of involuntary transfers made in May are still happening. Teachers regularly tell me they fear retaliation if they question admin decisions. Was this the actual reason or goal for moving teachers? That they resign, and the ones who stay are working with the fear of potential retaliation? With every resignation our students are negatively impacted. The middle school will have 3 returning teachers when Jen Shipp leaves. At what point will you all look at a different angle to this story? These kids believe that it is their fault that teachers are leaving. It is heartbreaking.
We hear the untruths, and half-truths that you have been told about us. That some of us would have left BSD anyway, that we had been looking for different jobs for years. That some of us needed to be moved because of angry parents, or maybe we weren’t aligned ideologically with the right people. None of these things are valid. We know that our administration has taken time (while we were teaching) to meet with some of you and persuade you to see this issue from her perspective. We know that you have been told that the group of teachers who are unhappy or untrusting of this administration is small. That is far from true. We have a super majority of the union in our support. We know that you have a lawyer here, and you probably spent from 3-3:45 getting advice from him on how to think about us and our claims. Did you receive advice from a school board lawyer, or the district’s lawyer? That answer might raise ethical concerns. We know going into this that we already lost because 4 excellent teachers resigned. We know that our staff cannot be made whole, that your window of opportunity was June, July, and maybe August to reverse course. That’s a big window. So why are we here? I don’t want to spend my precious time in grievance hearings. I want to focus on my craft, on being the best teacher for our kids, finding creative ways to connect our kids with learning, I want to feel respected, supported, and valued. I do not want to be afraid of “getting in trouble”, of having a mysterious complaint made against me that changes my teaching assignment. But I fear that this combination of leaders has created chaos and has destroyed the morale amongst teachers. So why are we here? School board, we ask you to recognize that our contract was indeed broken. We want the acknowledgement that we should have been party to discussions about our teaching assignments, as is stated in our contract article 23C, and as past practice shows. That we should have been able to put forth our expert perspectives before decisions were made. School board, we ask that you hold our leaders accountable for poor decisions that have hurt our students.