School Pranks (10 page)

     If Miss Forest had been headmaster, the reaction to those students’ participation in the reading and writing program would have been totally different.  At the completion of the last “presentation,” which lasted a moment or two, she would have gone into action.  Her first act would have been a walk to that student, given him a manly slap on the shoulder and heartily thanked him for his effort and recognized the other participating students; then praised the entire class for their role in making that program successful.  Adding, “You all did well, but a few rough spots need a little smoothing out.  Can I depend on you all to do that?”  Miss Forest believes the loyal class of loving students would have answered, “Yes sir, Mr. Murphy” She would have continued with, “Well, tell your friends what you have promised me, ok?”  Again, their answer would have been positive.  Then, she would have stated the purpose of the Writing and Reading Program, confirming her confidence in their ability to improve in those skills.  Ending with, “Remember now, I want you all to help me keep things straight around here, ok?” Again, it (the answers) would have been positive.  Turning to the teacher, she would have said “I believe we have something here.”  Again she would have thanked the students and smilingly exited the classroom, shaking a few hands of students near the door.

     By exiting the classroom in silence Mr. Murphy demonstrated rejection of love offered him by students and their teacher.  He failed to see that because education improvement was not his motive.  He had come to criticize, and that was done with every measure of his intellect, from topic selection to students’ attitude (happy, laughing).  His failure to see students were glad to have him visit their classroom that morning, shown by the happy expressions on their faces while doing their work, is but one of the benefits he deprived himself of.  He distorted time spent letting students read their assignments aloud; stating most of the block (90 minutes) was used for that purpose.  With few exceptions most could barely write one half pages.  The student with the discipline problem had written four short lines.  The students who performed (read) that morning scarcely used seven minutes.

     Most students at Dromedary High School are highly deficient in reading and writing skills; hence Mr. Murphy’s Reading and Writing Initiative Program got started.  But without Mr. Murphy promoting it at every opportunity available, more time than necessary would be needed to eradicate that problem.  Mr. Murphy failed to promote his program, which obviously was not on his mind and was of his least concern that morning.  The time was perfect for him to give his program a boost; the students were ideal, willing, enthused and they were honoring the headmaster!  But the feeling was not mutual.  The headmaster failed to appreciate them and their efforts.  When the last student asked permission to read his work, reluctantly permission was granted.  Mr. Murphy was aware of Miss Forest’s dilemma, or should have been.  She had a delicate choice: continue collecting work or deviate from the schedule.  This situation, she reasoned, called for flexibility.  Such situation had not happened before.  That student was offering his headmaster a gift of love and Mr. Murphy rejected it.

     Mr. Murphy’s tongue lashing letter of February 12, 2002 ends with a jab at Miss Forest’s topic selection for writing exercises, stating “It did not appear that the assignment was in any way connected to the class being taught which Civics was.”  After several discussions on putting this plan into use, the faculty thought Mr. Murphy’s plan addressed the problem, not only the subject being taught.  The problem, they understood, was paramount; naturally the subject being taught would be used.  A few days later Miss Forest met Mr. Murphy on the hall of Dromedary High and he relented his position concerning topic selection for students’ writing exercises.  He gave her permission to choose the topics as she wished, but he did not put it in writing.  Why didn’t he document his decision?  That was his procedure.  Was this final? Did he contact the other faculty members personally?  Here Mr. Murphy grandly demonstrates his expertise in clearly making himself eloquently misunderstood.  Acknowledgment of his lack of vision in connecting the suggested topic and Civics is commendable (for honesty) but his incompetence is unacceptable as an excuse to dismiss Miss Forest from a teaching position whose performance in the classroom of Dromedary High with a Grade A Certificate, and was evaluated superior until Mr. Murphy’s arrival.  “It did not appear…” means doubt.  So, a decision as important as this deserved research to assure the most accurate judgment.  This, Mr. Murphy did not give.

     Mr. Murphy’s failure to see the connection of sunshine and civics is an admission of ignoring the student’s work.  Was he listening to them while they read their work?  This is another example of his lack of vision and not doing anything to improve it.  People depend on both sunshine and civics.   For example, in Grande` the economy depends on farming.  Whatever is farmed require sunshine and government (civics) which protects the people by requiring a list of ingredients on the outside of the container (product).  With these students sunshine means leisure.  The big item on their list is fashion of various kinds, especially beach wear.  Several beaches are located in Grande`.  Recreation, sightseeing, shopping are enjoyable and sunshine plays a prominent role in all these activities, with citizens depending on the government (civics) for protection.

     The most sensitive connections of sunshine and civics bring to remembrance a period of shame, sorrow, and pain – slavery; the Civil War and segregation.  Mr. Murphy couldn’t make the connection!  Miss Forest is a post Great Depression child.  She grew up during the pre-Civil Rights Era (segregation).  The word sunshine brings recollections of work on the farm, mainly in the cotton fields (hoeing, chopping, and picking cotton.)  Miss Forest remembers sunshine (extreme heat.) Long hours in the field and little money.  But Miss Forest appreciated the challenges.  The most precious challenge was the gift of an ambitious spirit motivated by unequal treatment of people – because of race.  In Grande` farmers still have cotton farms.  Has Mr. Murphy noticed?  Yes, Mr. Murphy, there is connection between sunshine and civics.  Cotton – sunshine – civics, acreage [government] and segregation are all interrelated!

     The case of firing Miss Forest was championed by Mr. Murphy.  Grande` suffers from his lack of vision!  Yes, Mr. Murphy’s lack of vision added to the education problem!

Firing

     Motive(s) for the action taken against Miss Forest was painstakingly studied by the education organ of Grande`.  Although the action was irrational, the citizens accepted it, some reluctantly and others with misgiving.  This professional abnormality carried out by high ranking administrators is detrimental to society.  In some instances, irreparable damage has been done.  Ethics was cast aside.  The consequences of their decision are regrettably unprincipled.

     Retirement was suggested. That was the passionate desire of Mr. Murphy.  But Miss Forest was not ready to retire. They presented her with benefits of retirement, yet she was not interested in retirement at that time.  It was evident the administrators (evaluators) and Miss Forest were looking at her career differently.  They just wanted her to stop teaching.  But Miss Forest was not ready to retire.  She was working in her home area; therefore her interest in these students was deep.  Discipline was a major problem here.  Miss Forest had a better understanding of that problem, because she knew many of the parents personally.  She had already proven her skill in discipline.  So, why not continue as a disciplinarian; she was able to do it.  She wanted to help save some of the students who just get kicked out of class or get sent home (expelled or suspended).

     “Well, resign then, if you don’t want to be fired.  Or perhaps a compromise, but with that you will have to resign though.”  “These suggestions were presented to Miss Forest by her lead attorney.

     Thinking firing her would be an embarrassment, an opportunity was offered her to resign.  Their generosity was flatly refused! What is wrong here? One thing was a play on words.  Their definition of opportunity is the same as the use of the word “concern” – its meaning is opposite the normal.  For example, they call bad, good and wrong, right.  Miss Forest’s firing demonstrated a lack of appreciation for quality teaching.  Restated, it is a preposterous situation.  The problem deals with the Department of Social Studies at Dromedary High School; two black teachers are employed; the student body consists of approximately 1400, the majority race is Black; the oldest black teacher was fired, the one who was born in that area and the best qualified.

     She was not consulted in their discussion(s) on terms of her “compromise.” Nor was she told a compromise was in the making.  On the evening of its presentation it was offered to her in a take-it-or-leave-it manner.

Education Board

    
Usually, firing happens when the performance is rated, below the level of expectation.  But this case is not usual; it is unusual.  This firing was not related to performing below the expected classroom level; instead, this teacher was fired for performing above the expected level.  This fact is verified by documentations of those who did the firing.  Most of the reasons for her firing had nothing to do with education, but rather with personal matters, such as her mannerisms, and the like.  Miss Forest, the fired teacher, was born and raised on a farm (the country.) But while in motion she looks like she is from anywhere except the country, especially those cotton fields where she spent so much time.  For this she was admired by many.  That is one distinguishing feature for which she was fired!

     After the firing had been finalized, persons responsible for this accomplishment were jubilant.  There was belly-rolling laughing – lots of it.  They gloated over their “success.”  Their celebration was genuine.  Every possible stop had been pulled to achieve this goal, and nothing was held back in taking
great
pleasure in observing their victory.

     Miss Forest considered this firing to be a serious error.  She pondered over the situation which was so needless, so costly, and so anti-public education.  How should she respond to their erroneous decision?  Should such type action be allowed to continue?  This was not the first time such gross error had happened.  In the past, dedicated teachers had been forced out of their careers.  Was Miss Forest supposed to stop teaching as her predecessors had done? Is that type of act commendable?  Is such act desirable?  The correct answer to the last two questions is – no!

     Miss Forest had had little experience with legalism, but several friends encouraged and supported her.  They were unsatisfied with these administrators’ misuse of power.  Every step in these legal procedures was a valuable learning experience.

     After the Education Board was notified of the problem, it assigned a date to Miss Forest for a hearing.  At the time of the session with the Board everything was strange.  The session was conducted in the media center (library) at Dromedary High School early in the school year of 2002-03.  In attendance were supporters of Miss Forest.  A petition was signed by more than eighteen hundred citizens who were unsatisfied with administrators’ procedure, especially the firing of Miss Forest.

     The session was conducted in a “don’t care” atmosphere; a “just-going-through-the-motion” attitude.  Most questions were irrelevant.  Everything looked as if it was “set-up” or “arranged!”  Frivolity was the mode.  This scene was unheard of!  Miss Forest was not questioned.  So! The Board was concerned with only one side of this issue, Mr. Murphy’s side.  Without interrogating Miss Forest, a just decision could not be made.  That was impossible to do.  Why?  Because half of the information was not revealed. 
They
didn’t
care
.

     At the completion of the session, Miss Forest’s lead attorney escorted her into a side room a few paces from the Media Center.  They were to discuss a proposed compromised which had been written by him and other involved attorneys.  When the attorney opened the door, aroma from an artfully arrangement of foods gushed forward.  The menu included fried chicken, fresh vegetables, salads, fruits, beverages, etc.  The two entered and were seated.  After a brief discussion, Miss Forest rejected the compromise.  The compromise demanded that her retirement from the system would become effective at the end of the present school year, 2002-03.  Her decision was reached after carefully considering the manner their decision was reached.  Why didn’t they include Miss Forest in the formation of the compromise?  Again, she was deliberately ignored.  Valuable assets she contributed to the education system of Grande were also ignored.  These include forty-nine (49) years of experience in the classroom, disciplinary assistant to one of its headmasters and possessed top credentials demanded by the school system of Grande:

1. Grade A Certificate (Preparation)
   
2. Superior performance (except for the last administration.)
   
3. Willingness to serve (not ready to retire.)
   

     When the Board members re-entered the media center to continue the process of whether Miss Forest would be rehired, some members were noticed leaving the conference room wiping their mouth and hands, in a festive manner.  So, that spread of food was for the Board.  Citizens were kept waiting while they dined.  Obviously, their decision was reached earlier.

     Who were these persons elected to carry out this task which requires much attention to detail?  An examination of this group’s profile revels several professions - business, education, religion and industry.  Their conduct at her hearing was very disappointing.  Why order food at such a critical time, when clear thinking and careful consideration were required?  Was there any concern that the consequence of their decision would be costly and detrimental if done incorrectly?  Why didn’t members of the Board question Miss Forest?

     Voting on her rehiring was done in a festive mood.  There were three categories of voters – for rehiring: one (1) member.  Against rehiring: five (5) members.  Nonvoters: two (2), members.  One member was absent.

     So, the Board was concerned with only one side of this issue, Mr. Murphy’s side.  Due to lack of certain essentials, especially the testimony of Miss Forest, the Board was incapable of making a correct decision.  Blocking the Board from performing this duty was: 1. failure to question Miss Forest. (Lack of information).  2. Prejudice. (A show of preference). 3. Showed a “don’t care” attitude. (Ate a repast while in the process of decision making).  “I don’t care” was not verbalized by the Board, but, body language was used to communicate that message.  Their action and attitude opened the eyes of many citizens.  Many wondered whether the Board had a purpose.  And if it did was the purpose achieved?  It seemed that education was not its concern, because their performance did not reflect the duty for which they were elected.

     A sense of connection exists between Mr. Murphy, Area Evaluators, (of Miss Forest), and the School Board.  A comparison is obviously in job performance.  Each performed their duty below expectation level.  All were careless toward Miss Forest.   As for the performance of most students enrolled at Dromedary High School, the connection is the same; their performance level is below expectation.  Damage deliberately committed against humanity by these educators is incalculable.  A combined force of past, present, and future weaponry would barely register on the most accurate scale of terror.  They are teaching, practicing, and encouraging our children to discard character, honesty and principle from their living.