The Wapakoneta City Board of Education met in special session on Thursday, April 27, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. at Wapakoneta High School.  The meeting was called to order by President Ron Mertz.  Roll call was as follows:  Sammetinger, aye; Copeland, aye; Kantner, aye; Mertz, aye; and Frame, aye.  Also in attendance were Superintendent, Keith Horner; Treasurer, Susan Rinehart; Business Manager, Don Arnett; staff and administrators; students and parents; community members; and media representative.

 

          The Pledge of Allegiance was led by President Ron Mertz.

                  

HEARING OF THE PUBLIC REGARDING ITEMS ON THE AGENDA

 

William Reese had the following comments:  He is upset that the Board has mishandled the teacher situation.  He thinks it is not in their heart and soul to cheat and he doesn’t condone cheating, but what teacher can’t tell a student to finish a test?  He feels the teachers are not cheaters; they violated rules.  He stated it is stupid and is a bad rule.  Teachers’ jobs are to prepare students to take tests, and that’s what they get paid for.  The teachers should not have been taken out of the classroom and made to sit around for two hours not knowing what was happening.  It is not fair.  He would hate to think that a lawsuit from this would not be out of the state’s pocket versus local taxpayers.  He understands the rules to be interpretable by the district and not mandated by the state.  He admitted his information is all hearsay.  The teachers spend a lot of time and money on their education and masters degree, and these rules need to be examined more closely so we take caution with people’s futures and the work they put in to get here. 

 

John McCormick had the following comments:  He is addressing the Board on behalf of Heather, teachers, and the school system.  He is bringing a different perspective, since he is out of the loop and doesn’t know the particulars.  Heather sent him a letter, and he is just going to highlight his response to her as follows:  He feels something is wrong; he doesn’t know the particulars.  He did talk to teachers and administrators, and it appears the punishment suggested does not fit the crime.  There are two legitimate sides, but is this punishment an over-reaction?  I know we live in the state’s system and we have to play by their rules, but these are our teachers, our kids, and our district.  We can set our own bar higher in favor of our teachers.  Please look at the severity of the punishment for the situation, not as a black-and-white issue, but with people there are shades of gray.  When I think of cheating, I think of someone giving the answer, writing things down, showing them exact solutions, and doing things that are lazy.  My gut check tells me something doesn’t feel right to cost someone an eight-year career.  Is this a measured response to the offense?  The damage is done.  Whether Heather remains employed here or not, that doesn’t change.  Lessons could be learned from this.  I believe it was an honest mistake.  Is the school better now if she is asked to leave, or could she stay and help us to keep this from happening again?  Keeping her would be more of a reminder.  Besides firing teachers or asking them to resign, have we done anything else to keep this from happening again?  If we have to change or tighten something up, maybe our instruction or procedures or protocol for procturing exams or preparation might need to be improved.  My understanding is there was a study sheet given prior to the test, and technically, they broke the rules.  Technically, it’s cheating, but we need some discretionary interpretation.  The state is rigid, but not always right.  He does not see Heather as a cheater, but she made an honest mistake.  Asking Heather to leave will not improve things. 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SESSION

 

          Sammetinger moved to go into executive session for the purpose of discussing dismissal or discipline of an employee, with action to be taken.

 

Seconded by Frame.  Roll call:  Copeland, aye; Kantner, aye; Mertz, aye; Frame, aye; and Sammetinger, aye.  Motion passed unanimously.

 

Upon returning from executive session, it was noted that five Board members were present.

 

CONSIDERATION OF THE EMPLOYMENT OF HEATHER BUCHANAN

 

          Mr. Horner read the following agreement:

 

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

 

          This Agreement is made as of April 27, 2006, by and among Heather Buchanan (“Buchanan”), the Wapakoneta Education Association (“Association”) and the Wapakoneta City School District Board of Education (“Board”);

 

          WHEREAS, Buchanan has admitted that she acted improperly according to the rules for the Administration of the Ohio Achievement Tests by reviewing materials with her students prior to the test;

 

          WHEREAS, Buchanan has publicly apologized for this conduct;

 

          WHEREAS, the parties wish to come to an agreement regarding Buchanan’s employment status;

 

          NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties to this agreement agree as follows:

 

          1.  As discipline for the conduct identified above, the parties agree to the following:

 

            a.  Buchanan is hereby placed on an unpaid suspension, effective March 17, 2006, through the end of the 2005-2006 school year.

 

            b.  Buchanan is responsible for payment of the full monthly premium cost for her medical insurance coverage for the months of April, May, June, July and August of 2006.  Payment for April and May premiums will be made by May 15, 2006.  All other payments shall be made by the 15th of each month.

 

The discipline set forth in this Agreement shall be the only discipline imposed upon Buchanan in connection with the administration of the March 2006 Ohio Achievement Tests.

 

          2.  Buchanan will be placed on a one-year extended limited contract for

the 2006-2007 school year.  Buchanan will either be placed on a continuing contract at the end of that contract or will be nonrenewed.  The parties agree that by entering into this agreement, they are superseding Ohio Revised Code Section 3319.11 with respect to continuing contracts and the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the Board and the Association.  Buchanan understands that she is not eligible for a continuing contract and specifically waives any right to a continuing contract as of the date of the signing of this agreement and for the 2006-2007 school year.  Buchanan further understands that she will be eligible for a continuing contract beginning with the 2007-2008 school year but that she may be nonrenewed pursuant to sections 5.05.1 through 5.12.9 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.  The parties specifically agree that Section 5.12.10 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement shall not apply upon the expiration of Buchanan’s one-year extended limited contract.

 

          3.  This Agreement shall not affect the interpretation of Article 5 of the

Collective Bargaining Agreement and will not be used against either party as past practice or precedent.

 

          4.  Both Buchanan and the Association agree to waive any right to file a

grievance or an unfair labor practice charge with the State Employment Relations Board complaining of the facts and events that gave rise to this Agreement or the action to be taken pursuant to this Agreement.  The Association is a party to this agreement for the sole and limited purpose of waiving, at Buchanan’s request, its right(s) to file a grievance or an unfair labor practice charge with the State Employment Relations Board complaining of the facts or events that gave rise to this Agreement or the action to be taken pursuant to this Agreement.  Neither the Association nor Buchanan make any waiver of any rights, defenses, arguments or causes of action in regard to any proceedings involving the Ohio Department of Education.

 

          WHEREFORE, the undersigned, intending to be legally bound hereby, apply their signatures voluntarily and with full understanding of the contents of this Memorandum of Agreement.

 

          Kantner moved to approve the following resolution:

 

          It is hereby resolved by the Wapakoneta City School District Board of Education that the Board agrees to and approves the Memorandum of Agreement entered into between Heather Buchanan, the Wapakoneta Education Association and the Board.

 

Seconded by Sammetinger.  Roll call: Kantner, aye; Mertz, nay; Frame, nay; Sammetinger, aye; and Copeland, aye.  Motion passed, 3 ayes, 2 nays.

 

          Laura Frame had the following comments:

 

          I have thought long and hard about the situation with Mrs. Buchanan, as have my fellow board members.  I have thought about this to the point that I have had many restless and sleepless nights.  Neither Mr. Payne, Mr. Horner, nor the Board went looking to find this situation.  It was Mrs. Buchanan who made the very bad decision to do what she did.  She has addressed the Board and made a very eloquent plea to explain what she did and to save her job.  It has been very frustrating for me personally to not address the facts of this incident, and the facts of those surrounding Mrs. Burnett’s case for that matter, to all the concerned people who have approached me for details regarding these situations.  This has been made especially difficult since the teachers in question have been giving their side of their stories and we as a board have not been able to do so due to privacy issues.  I feel they have opened the door and the community should be able to look in but it cannot.

 

          I have thought constantly, probably obsessively so, about Mrs. Buchanan and her pleas to the Board last week.  I have read the letters in support of her as a teacher.  I listened to Mrs. Holloway, the union president, plead for the return of Mrs. Buchanan to the Middle School teaching staff.  Mrs. Buchanan has jeopardized the integrity and honor of the Wapakoneta City Schools.  In my mind she has profoundly affected the ethics and morals of her profession.  It was her decision to look ahead at the math test, not anyone else’s.  I have talked to many teachers about achievement testing in general, mostly teachers outside of our district.  All of them—not one—would ever have thought to look ahead at the test and make a practice test.  They all knew it was terribly wrong to do so.  When we talked about it, it was almost as if they were describing an innate knowing, it was knowledge that came just from common sense and from just being a teacher.  It is also clearly and repeatedly stated in the Achievement Testing Administration Manual that looking at the test in advance is a violation of testing procedures, and so is making a practice test.

 

(A) No person shall reveal to any student any specific question that the person knows is part of a test to be administered under section 3301.0711 (3301.07.11) of the Revised Code or in any other way assist a pupil to cheat on such a test.

 

(B) On a finding by the state board of education, after investigation, that a school employee who holds a license issued under sections 3319.22 to 3319.31 of the Revised Code has violated division (A) of this section, the license of such teacher shall be suspended for one year.  Prior to commencing an investigation, the board shall give the teacher notice of the allegation and an opportunity to respond and present a defense.

 

          I am not going to read Section (C) (1). It does not pertain to this situation.

 

(2) Violation of division (A) of this section is grounds for termination of a teacher contract under section 3319.16 of the Revised Code.

 

3319.99 Penalty.  Whoever violates division (A) of section 3319.151 [3319.15.1] of the Revised Code is guilty of a minor misdemeanor.

 

          Please consider the following scenario—A student is given a test in the morning to hold on her desk until the afternoon when the test would be taken.  That is all the direction given to the student by the teacher.  The student proceeds through her day, having many opportunities to look at the test if she wanted to, but she does not.  She does not look at the test until she is told to complete the test.  Why?  Because I believe any student would know, without being told, that to look at the test in advance would be cheating.

 

          Mrs. Buchanan claims to have not known that looking ahead at the achievement test and making a practice test was wrong.  Why would a teacher who has a good record do this?  Why, when she has available to her many practice tests from previous tests?  Why, when the school district has paid for Study Island so students can practice at school and at home?  If in fact she is a good math teacher and devoted to teaching math as carefully as she stated last week, then why feel the need to look ahead?  Certainly, by her own stated teaching methods her students would have been very well prepared.  If she only wanted the best for her students as she claims, then why not use these methods?  I have no answer for this, as her decision makes no sense to me.

There are actions, choices, decisions, made by people every day that do affect their lives forever.  There are some actions that do not allow any “do-overs.”  I thought cheating on achievement testing in the teaching profession would be a decision that would not give a teacher a “do-over,” a second chance.  What kind of example has Mrs. Buchanan set for our students—“yes, cheating is bad but don’t worry, nothing of consequence will happen to you!”  Students should also be taught that second chances are not always given.  I personally supported Mr. Horner’s recommendation that Mrs. Buchanan resign or be terminated.  I thought the option of resignation was a gift.

 

          But then I listened to the counsel of the Board attorneys, and realized that there is not a lot of case law on this matter, because most teachers who have been caught cheating do resign.  As the law side of things was of no help, so too was the Ohio Department of Education.  They have no guidelines for this type of thing—their advice was “do your own investigation and we will see if we agree with you.”  I thought the Ohio Dept. of Education would be very aggressive in setting forth a code that shall never be violated—and that is that—the integrity of achievement testing is paramount and it shall never be breached.  Those who do breach the integrity of the test shall lose their license to teach.  Period.  I especially thought they would treat this seriously since the whole teaching year is geared to teaching our children how to take and excel at the test.  I believe the administering of the test should be taken as seriously as the taking of the test.

 

          There is a major component to this situation which neither Mrs. Buchanan nor the union has addressed.  One-third of the 7th grade math scores will be invalidated for our district.  That means 1/3 of the tests administered by Mrs. Buchanan will receive a zero.  Zero.  These are scores that cannot be tolerated.  This invalidation will severely and negatively affect our District report card from the State of Ohio.  I believe that the teachers’ union, teachers, and community should care about this important assessment.  I know I do.  Mrs. Buchanan has taken away 1 of the 28 indicators our District will be judged on.  Her actions could drop our district from an effective school district to a district needing continuous improvement.  I wonder what kind of community support the Board of Education will get if this should happen.

 

          Personally, I believe cheating is wrong, and a teacher who does this should be terminated.  However, to terminate Mrs. Buchanan would cost our district well over $100,000.  Possibly $200,000.  $100,000 would pay for 4 new teachers, or expand our special ed department, or hire a slew of aides for most of our elementary teachers.  The possible uses of this money are endless.  My struggle has been what I personally believe should happen to protect the morals and integrity of the district balanced against what is the best business decision for the district.  Should there ever be a limit on protecting integrity and honor?  I also worry about any other future incident by a teacher who does this.  What kind of example are we setting now for future infractions?

 

          I still do not know how I am going to vote but I thank you for listening to me and giving me the opportunity to express how I feel about this matter.

 

 

          Dave Copeland had the following comment: 

 

          He agreed wholeheartedly with Laura.  He made the comment that the issue can relate to anyone’s life, his situation at work.  When you falsify something, you have to be accountable for your actions.  You need to stand up and be responsible.  Dave commented that he is continually bragging about Wapakoneta City Schools, what a great staff we have, and what a great school system it is.  Now he is going to wonder if the people that he brags to about our school are going to be thinking, “Yeah, that’s because you’re a cheater and you allow it to happen.”  He said lying has hurt the students and the Board does not encourage the teachers to teach the test, but to teach the kids how to figure out the problems.  He said we have no choice in giving tests; it’s a government requirement.  The Board wants to support Keith and they will do everything they can to support Keith.  They are working to change any procedures for the future to prevent this situation from occurring again, but he has to ask himself, wouldn’t there be more of our teachers who did not comply, if there was something wrong with the instructions?

 

          Mr. Horner has the following comments:

 

          He noted that the support for the teachers resulted in a standing ovation.  He wanted to make it clear that we did not go looking for this situation.  This has been a very difficult issue on everyone.  We did not pick this fight.  No one wanted this situation, and we hope that the community can get past this.  It is still all about the kids.  We are not the bad guys.  He respects the Board, respects the teachers, and he does not want to put the teachers, principals, or kids in this situation again.

 

          Ron Mertz commented that personally, he does not like the tests.  He thinks they are overrated because they are a snapshot in time of that day, and it is unfortunate that we are stuck with this test.  However, that is the rules.  Heather is not a bad person.  He has no animosity against her.  It is unfortunate that the rules were broken.  She is a great teacher and we have lots of good teachers that work their tails off to get the kids ready for tests, and we appreciate everything that they do.  He is hoping that this will not change their working relationship that the Board has with the staff.  He did apologize for not being at the last Board meeting.  He had a double heart stent and was unable to make the meeting.  The Board has heard comments from community members that have discussed taking their kids out of the district if they didn’t terminate the teachers.  He has also heard support for the teachers.  He also wanted to comment that there is nothing secret about the meeting we are having this evening.  It was mentioned at the last Board meeting and it was also published in the newspaper.  He noted that the Board members have had lots of sleepless nights mulling over the correct decision, and we are going to move on from here and let the agreement stand on its own.

 

          Mary Andrews had the following comment:  She is a 5th grade teacher with 34 years of experience.  She is concerned about what will happen in the future.  She noted that there was an inservice in January this year that was confusing to the teachers because the person who did the inservice gave the wrong information about what you were allowed to do with the tests.  She is suggesting that maybe two people should be in the room when the tests are administered and noted that she does not want to give the test next year for the Board because it is a lot of pressure and it saddens her that we are at this point.

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS

 

          The next Board meeting is May 15, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. at Centennial Elementary.  Centennial students will be recognized at the meeting.

 

          The Facilities, Finance, and Policy Committees will be scheduling meetings in May.

 

HEARING OF THE PUBLIC

 

EXECUTIVE SESSION

 

          Frame moved to go into executive session for the purpose of discussing the dismissal or discipline of an employee and preparing for, conducting, or reviewing negotiations or bargaining with employees, with no action to be taken except to adjourn.

 

Seconded by Sammetinger.  Roll call:  Kantner, aye; Mertz, aye; Frame, aye; Sammetinger, aye; and Copeland, aye.  Motion passed unanimously.

 

Upon returning from executive session, it was noted that five Board members were present.

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

Sammetinger moved to adjourn at 9:30 p.m.  Seconded by Copeland.  Roll call:  Mertz, aye; Frame, aye; Sammetinger, aye; Copeland, aye; and Kantner, aye.  Motion passed unanimously.

 

 

 

                                                          _________________________________

                                                          President

 

                                                          _________________________________

                                                          Secretary