Did Delaware Department of Education violate state law by not reporting violence against student by teacher?

Read it for yourself! The Delaware Department of Education had knowledge of abuse or possible abuse against a student a didn’t report it to the AG’s office. If they did, they wouldn’t be asking Academy of Dover for more details. The AG’s report should be sufficient in the review of this charter school. Teachers and all school staff have a legal obligation to report abuse or possible abuse against a child even if they heard it by rumor. So shouldn’t DE DOE staff have the same legal obligation? The comments in this official DE DOE letter strongly suggest DE DOE doesn’t know the facts about this incident. Such strong wording surely raises concern for DE DOE’s charter school oversight responsibilities. 

Advertisements

19 responses to “Did Delaware Department of Education violate state law by not reporting violence against student by teacher?

  1. hopeforourstudents

    The “oh! And, by the way, please tell me about this abuse problem” attitude in this letter is appalling. It should be front and center of the request. What is wrong with these people? (I seem to ask this question, over and over and over again lately).

    Liked by 1 person

    • lastDEconservative

      Excellent point. But then again, who said anyone involved in the issuance of diktats with respect to govt schooling (not education) had to know how to write a letter, or make a point, or communicate with clarity in the native tongue. It’s not like they have anything to do with our kids …

      Liked by 1 person

  2. How do you know they didn’t report it to the Department of Justice AND ask for additional info? That’s a big leap, and there is no reason to make it.

    The DOE already had a meeting scheduled with those clowns before this even happened. This is a CYA letter – the DOE giving formal notice that it knows what happened and will be asking about it at the meeting. And there is no way in hell that a DAG from the DOJ wasn’t involved in writing or reviewing that letter.

    Like

  3. kilroysdelaware

    “How do you know they didn’t report it to the Department of Justice AND ask for additional info?”

    Because if it was reported to the police it would be a criminal investigation whereas DE DOE wouldn’t be in the position to engage to the point of conducting their own investigation. The word “violence” suggest felony type crimes.

    Liked by 1 person

    • The DOE has a different responsibility. The AG’s office – who, by the way school was responsible for notifying – deals with criminal issues.

      The DOE is the regulator – they have a responsibility for the charter, and accountability for the board that holds it. When something like this happens, that means that they have a responsibility to do their own related, but separate investigation on a different question – how did this happen and what is the school/board going to do to prevent it from happening again? And with this letter, they are showing that they are doing just that.

      Doing that doesn’t mean that they didn’t notify other people and agencies – have you asked if they notified anyone before shouting to the world that they didn’t?

      Also, it’s worth pointing out that while the DOE has taken action on FFA and Moyer, and is taking action on AOD, the AG and the AOA have done ZERO in response. NO reports have been released, and NO ONE HAS BEEN CHARGED. It’s not clear why you have blinding faith in the AOA and AG to get things done.

      If the DOE didn’t take the step of doin its own investigations and holding the boards accountable for their share of wrongdoing, Sean Moore and Tennell Brewington would still be working at FFA.

      Like

    • Post HIJACK alert warning:
      Mr. Kilroy, where pray-tell is your post regarding First Liberty’s response to and financial recommendations for : CSD’s upcoming referendum?
      It would seem it would be a worthy topic of discussion for the enlightened group along with the “selfish stupid” group.
      http://firststateliberty.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Christina-Flyer.pdf
      At the very least it would allow fur to fly and additional misinformation to be disseminated by your discerning followers.

      Like

    • lastDEconservative

      That’s a pretty cool document, there, M. Was it presented last night? This selfish, stupid unenlightened soul would like to know. And is eager to hear The Wise argue against such privateering proposals.

      Like

    • LDC, it was supposed to be discussed at the meeting. I was unfortunately unable to attend, being as after school, one child had to be transported in one direction and the other child had to be transported in the other, and by the time I actually arrived home 3 hours later, to find said document on my porch, it was way too late for this stupid, unenlightened, irresponsible, elitist parent to inquire personally as to the validity of a request for cost reductions prior to tax increases.

      Perhaps Kavips, Mr. Kilroy, Mr. Young, or Eve could expound upon how unreasonable the proposal was or present what occurred at the meeting. As a misinformed, stupid resident of CSD, I sincerely would like to better understand why my home district repeatedly asks me to put more financial and human “capital” in the game but receive little to no return. I would even be willing to offer my itemized list of charitable contributions if it meant my local district teachers and students wouldn’t have to put up with being told to “F” off or be assaulted on school grounds for their I-phones.

      I digress. Mr. Kilroy PLEASE open for debate in it’s own post the First State Liberty response to CSD’s referendum.

      Like

    • lastDEconservative

      As your list of self descriptors grows, M, it sounds to me like you should add lazy and/or slow. I mean really, only two kids’ activities left you unable to attend a district meeting to which the rules prevent you adding a comment? C’mon, man!

      Five’ll get you ten that since the delivery of the flyer was that late, the creators did not secure a position on the agenda, and IF they got there in time to sign up, got the requisite 2 minutes every other yahoo gets … to no avail. Rain on a duck. Fart in a windstorm. Toothpick poke to the leviathan.

      Like

  4. It is a good point that a DDOE DAG would normally involved at this level but if so would have either authored the letter or at least been officially cc’d.
    .

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Why don’t you report the DOE’s not-reporting to the AG’s office? In a year or two or three, something might be done about it …

    Like

    • lastDEconservative

      Another cynical skeptic (or is it skeptical cynic?) comes out of the shadows? Possibly even selfish and stupid like some of us? Welcome.

      Like

  6. Pencadermom

    I have something nice to say about CSD. Ok, it’s just about their bus person, but did want to mention to anyone interested. I see so many dangerous bus stops and dangerous situations with children crossing busy streets. Today bus #300 (and I’m 99% sure it was a CSD bus) stopped on a semi-busy street and an adult (driver or aide, not sure) got off the bus with a student and stood in the street walking most of the way across the street with the him and stayed in the street until he was up into his yard. Just wanted to mention it in case anyone reading here knows who that would have been, and can thank her. I’ve personally never witnessed that before.

    Like

    • lastDEconservative

      I know the headline over this block says last wrote the following, but really it’s his evil twin …

      Are you sure it’s not -L-SD that was the source of what you saw? 😉

      Like

  7. Pencadermom

    “I digress. Mr. Kilroy PLEASE open for debate in it’s own post the First State Liberty response to CSD’s referendum.” – or, at the very least, a reply to Ryder as to why you won’t. geezz

    Like

  8. Pencadermom

    “Are you sure it’s not -L-SD that was the source of what you saw” Eh?

    Like

  9. What does it mean when individualized letters promoting the CSD referendum, addressed to each child, asking parents to attend informational meetings, arrive AFTER the CSD meetings took place?

    I believe there may be some L SD involved at the district level Pmom. Either that or I am experiencing some second smoke residual hallucinations. I keep hearing crickets. Perhaps a major district referendum isn’t all that important or Mr Kilroys interests lie with those who prefer the status quo.

    Like