The Command Post - Op-Ed - [Update 6] Teacher Walks Out Over Display Of Presidents Picture

October 03, 2004

[Update 6] Teacher Walks Out Over Display Of Presidents Picture

Shiba Pillai-Diaz, a middle school teacher in New Brunswick, New Jersey walked out of her class after being instructed by her supervisors to remove a picture of the President of the United States
from her classroom or be fired.

In a country where there's a lot of people who couldn't tell you who the President or the Vice President are this is ridiculous.

From the Home New Tribune

Though she says he has not resigned, the teacher's situation at Crossroads Middle School South is not yet resolved.
Shiba Pillai-Diaz's walkout involved the local police, left school officials mum and appalled the local Republican Party.

Pillai-Diaz, 33, a volunteer with the Bush campaign and an English teacher, has had a publicity picture of the First Couple hanging in her classroom since the start of the school year, she said.

The photo became an issue last week.

...

"Students said, 'You like George Bush? He's killed people,' " Pillai-Diaz said. "As a rule I don't talk about my politics in the classroom."

...

Thursday, at back-to-school night, the controversy exploded after a parent asked why the picture was up, Pillai-Diaz said.

"The way she asked was a political assault," the teacher said.

Then the parents started their own debate about the picture, and one mother stormed out of the classroom, Pillai-Diaz said.

Friday morning, the teacher, who is in her sixth year of teaching and her first in South Brunswick, was called into the assistant principal's office. Daniels told her to remove the picture, Pillai-Diaz said.

"He said, 'If you care about your job, you'll take the picture down,' " she said.

Pillai-Diaz told the assistant principal to take the picture down himself. Then she sought Principal Jim Warfel, who gave her an upbraiding.

"He said, 'You've caused more disruption, hatred and anger than anyone I've ever known,' " she said.

The teacher said the principal told her to "get out," so she left and headed to the South Brunswick Police Department.

An officer accompanied Pillai-Diaz back to the school because she said she feared for her safety when she went to collect her belongings, police said.

Once Pillai-Diaz felt safe at the school the officer left, police said.
In the school, Pillai-Diaz had a two-hour meeting with Superintendent Gary McCartney and a representative from the teachers' union. Both parties told the teacher she would lose any fight she would try to start about the picture, Pillai-Diaz said.

I don't see where the problem is with a picture of the current President being displayed. One day soon I'm afraid we will see certain groups asking that Presidents be removed from textbooks because they may offend some students. Should Harry S. Truman be removed from textbooks because his decision to use the bomb in World War 2 may offend some students of Japanese decent? Should Ronald Reagan be removed from all references because he was a Republican and may offend a high school student that may have Democratic beliefs?

I personally would be offended if in the 1990's a Republican asked that an image of Bill Clinton be removed from classrooms because it is "furthering an agenda" rather than informing students of who the current leader is.

There is nothing in the story above that shows the teacher was pushing the presidents, or her own, agenda on the students. It was displayed next to the Declaration of Independence and the constitution.

When are people going to become annoyed enough at all the blatant political correctness and partisan bickering to realize that education of students is more important than whining about something?

* * *

Update:
Pete over at Encyclopeteia has pointed me to press release by Gary P. McCartney, Superintendent of Schools for the South Brunswick School District. It can be found here (PDF file). I have reproduced it below in its entirety.

* * *

October 3, 2004

District Statement Regarding Bulletin Board at Crossroads Middle School

In an incident that has recently been reported to several media sources, a claim has been made by South Brunswick Middle School teacher Shiba Pillai-Diaz, that she was fired for not removing a picture of President George W. Bush from a classroom bulletin board. The claim is false. While I am normally reluctant to discuss personnel matters in public, Ms. Pillai-Diaz� distortions of the facts, along with her aggressive efforts to get herself national media attention, leave us no choice but to set the record straight.

The facts are as follows:

Ms. Pillai-Diaz is a new Language Arts teacher in the South Brunswick Schools. Recently, the school administration began receiving complaints from students and parents that Ms. Pillai-Diaz was using her position, classroom and teaching time to engage in partisan politics. Students reported that she had made statements which denigrated one party over the other. The conversations included Ms. Pillai-Diaz telling some students who offered opinions contrary to her statements, that she was "glad they were not old enough to vote." Other comments to students, including such statements as, "you should be ashamed to be a Democrat" have been verified through student interviews.

A classroom bulletin board, normally intended for curriculum-related matters, was set up as what she herself described as a "personal bulletin board." On the bulletin board she placed a picture of the President, the President's dog, the Oval Office and several other Presidential artifacts. In addition, she placed a stuffed elephant on a classroom cabinet, which generated student reaction and discussion about partisan politics. Following receipt of complaints from parents, the Assistant Principal met with Ms. Pillai-Diaz and cautioned her not to engage in partisan political discussions in her Language Arts classes. He did not initially ask her to remove the picture of the President. As the issue grew in intensity, the teacher herself chose to remove the stuffed elephant because of student
comments.

In the ensuing days, parents expressed increasing concern about the teacher's classroom behavior, the misuse of classroom instructional time and the personal bulletin board. The level of concern resulted in a classroom confrontation between some parents and Ms. Pillia-Diaz at the Back-to-School night program. It was at this point that the school administration decided to intervene again.

On Friday morning, October 1, Ms. Pillai-Diaz was directed by the Assistant Principal to remove bulletin board materials because they were being viewed as contributing to an ongoing disruption of the teaching-learning environment. She refused. She then met with the Principal who repeated the directive. At this point, Ms. Pillai-Diaz abruptly left the building, abandoning her post of duty and her classroom responsibilities.

At no time was she told to leave, asked to leave or given authorization to leave. School was still in session. At no time was she told she was suspended or fired. With professional responsibilities of a classroom teacher waiting, Ms. Pillai-Diaz chose, of her own volition, to walk out of the school, contact various media sources and claim she had been fired. I had occasion to meet with Ms. Pillai-Diaz, along with a union representative and a police escort that she had requested, for approximately two hours when she returned to the building later that same afternoon. After listening to her story, I asked if any member of the administration had used the phrase "you're fired" or anything that remotely sounded like it. She admitted that no one had used any such language. When I further pursued why she reported to media sources that she had been fired, she said that she "thought" that she had been. I explained that principals cannot fire employees, that only Boards of Education can do so. With her union representative present, she said that she now understood. I asked that when she next spoke with the media, that she clarify her new understanding.

I fully support the actions of the Principal and Assistant Principal. It is never acceptable for a teacher to utilize the classroom to advocate for political purposes or advance personal beliefs. The courts have always admonished teachers for proselytizing in public school classrooms. This issue is not about a picture of the President, but rather a zealous misuse of seventh and eighth grade student instructional time. The South Brunswick School community is enormously respectful of the Office of the President of the United States, President Bush and the democratic process for choosing our
President. Anyone trying to suggest the contrary has the worst of intentions. Under other circumstances, the display of a picture of the President would have been viewed as completely appropriate and uncontroversial.

It is important to note that pictures of President Bush are openly displayed in all of the South Brunswick Schools. The teacher�s own actions here, however, took it out of the realm of education and made the presentation appear partisan to many of our students and parents. Under these circumstances, our actions in directing the removal of the display were singularly appropriate.

Gary P. McCartney Ed D.
Superintendent of Schools
South Brunswick School District

P.O. Box 181 · 4 Executive Drive · Monmouth Junction, New Jersey 08852 · (732) 297-7800 · FAX (732) 422-8054 www.sbschools.org
"Expect the Best · And Get It!"

* * *

With this latest salvo from the school district it's confusing as to who to believe. It is also brought to the readers attention that in the original article the whole district is controlled by a Democratic majority and the Democrats in the district outweigh the Republicans by a 3-2 margin. Also educational institutions are, in general, usually liberal slanted. I'm not saying that plays into the Superintendents position or not, just mentioning it as a valid concern with regards to the subject at hand.

* * *

Update 2

WABC in New York has picked up on the story and done an article and news report on it. The article has a link to the video news story. From the article:

Rita Bianco, Parent: "Children should know their president and their first lady!" Parents expressing outrage after a teacher is kicked out of her public school for hanging a picture of President Bush next to pictures of other presidents in her classroom.
...
Paula Sjolund, Parent: "She didn't do anything wrong, and I think that it should have stayed up there."
...
Shiba Pillai-Diaz, Teacher: "There was no political intent, nor was there any political content in that photograph nor on the bulletin board."
School officials would not talk on camera but insist nobody here has been fired. To that, Ms. Pillai-Diaz asks what does it mean then when your boss asks you to hand over the keys and kicks you out of the building? She also says she is not sure if she'll be returning to school tomorrow.

* * *

Update 3

This story was picked up and posted on The Drudge Report

The Story also was been picked up by Bill O'Reilly on The O'Reilly Factor. Tonight he interviewed the teacher, Shiba Pillai-Diaz. One little factoid that came out in the interview is that she is not a member of the teachers union because she had just moved jobs.

* * *

Update 4 (Oct 5 12:25AM PST)

There are several more developments in the story. According to the Home News Tribune, Shiba Pillai-Diaz has hired an attorney in the case. Not a bad move in my opinion seeing as though she has the full force of the Board of Education against her.

She explained she changed her mind about returning to the classroom because of the prejudicial nature of McCartney's version of events. "I don't how I can go to that school again after he distorted everything and sent (the letter) to all the teachers," Interviewed yesterday, McCartney said if Pillai-Diaz stopped making political statements he would allow her to return to the classroom and even return the picture to the bulletin board, telling her, "I encourage you to do so."

The letter she refers to is the press release from Mr. McCartney that is reproduced above.

She said yesterday the principal told her to "get out," which she interpreted as being fired. "When the principal says get your stuff and get out -- what would you think?" she said.
...
McCartney described her leaving the building as "abandoning her post of duty and her classroom responsibilities. At no time was she told she was suspended or fired."

Read the rest of the article and you will see that Mr. McCartney comes off as real arrogant and a man who made a mistake, but is unwilling to admit to it. From the above statement of "get your stuff and get out" I would figure I was relieved of service as well. The New York Post is also on the story. The post reports that school officials now want to compromise by letting her hang the picture.

"How can I go back to work and have a normal environment when they distributed this false press release about me?" the 33-year-old mother-of-one asked. "They're trying to take attention away from the real issue � that they tried to make me take down the picture."
...
N.J. Sen. John Corzine, who is a Democrat, told WABC Radio he would help her if she contacted his office. "If it's just a straight-up picture of George Bush and Laura, then I don't understand the issue at all," he said.

* * *

Update 5 (Oct 7 8:16AM PST)

There's a few little tidbits more in this ongoing story. First we have an update from the local paper and then I have a press release from the teacher that ws sent to me by one of my readers, Brian F. Curley Esq. Thanks Brian.

Home New Tribune Oct.6

Pillai-Diaz, her attorney and Superintendent Gary McCartney were in a conference until last evening. McCartney said nothing had been resolved and would not comment further.
Pillai-Diaz did not return numerous calls for comment yesterday.

Principal Jim Warfel met with Pillai-Diaz's pupils yesterday to answer their questions about the incident, said parent Michelle Donahue, whose daughter is in Pillai-Diaz's class.

Donahue sent a letter to the board saying she would not permit her daughter in the classroom if Pillai-Diaz continues to teach.

"These kids are old enough to know what's going on," Donahue said. "This is not a good environment for them to be in."
...

Pillai-Diaz joined the district this year as a language arts teacher. She had previously taught in Brooklyn and Tenafly. She is a graduate of Cornell University and has five years teaching experience.

According to Terry Collins, director of personnel with the Tenafly district, Pillai-Diaz worked as a long-term substitute last year.
"She was hired as a substitute for a teacher that was on maternity leave, and her assignment ended in June," Collins said. "She was fine, we never had any problems."

Below is the press release in it's entirety.

PRESS RELEASE
October 7, 2004

Statement of Shiba Pillai-Diaz In Reply to the Press Release Issued By
The South Brunswick School District

The root of this matter is the misguided and unfortunate demand by Middle School Principal, James Warfel last Friday that I leave the school building due to my refusal to remove a portrait of President Bush and First Lady Laura Bush from a bulletin board in my classroom. The portrait of our President and First Lady was a small part of the bulletin board that also displayed a copy of the Declaration of Independence, a copy of the Constitution of the United States, copies of prints from Benjamin Franklin's printing press, and other patriotic symbols including the White House. There was no political content or intent reflected in the bulletin board.

It has been missed that the bulletin board had been up since before the start of the school year in late August. It has also been missed that the school principal, James Warfel, was present in my classroom several times since the beginning of the school term and never expressed any problems or objections to the bulletin board. Moreover, Assistant Principal Mark Daniels specifically reviewed the bulletin board last week, and told me that displaying the Presidential Portrait was not a problem and stated, "It is fine, it is a part of our culture."

After the matter generated some press coverage over the weekend, Superintendent McCartney chose to issue a press release that accused me of "zealous misuse of seventh and eighth grade student instruction time" to "proselytize" my political beliefs. The press release issued by the Superintendent has only inflamed the situation.

I categorically deny that I ever engaged in any of the activities alleged in the Superintendent's press release.

In fact, there is evidence that I refused to engage students in political discussions, which may have resulted in complaints from parents to school administrators that I was stifling discussion. On at least one confirmed occasion, I REFUSED TO ENGAGE a student who stated that the President was "killing people" in Iraq.

As a result of my policy of avoiding political discussion, I was specifically asked by Assistant Principal Daniels to allow political discussion in my classroom, to which I responded that I did not view that to be appropriate. The failure of the School District to disclose those facts in its press release speaks for itself.

The question that should be asked is why the School District chose to publicize supposed accusations by parents that should have been handled discreetly and confidentially between the School District administration and me. The School District was under an obligation to me not to disclose such matters publicly. Despite requests by my attorney to document the alleged parent and student complaints cited in the press release, the School District has steadfastly refused to provide any proof whatsoever of the allegations. Superintendent McCartney has responded that the alleged complaints were tendered in confidence and he will not provide proof of the allegations to the public or to me without a court order or legal action on my part.

Superintendent McCartney cannot have it both ways by asserting those purported complaints are confidential while making them the focus of his attack on my character and professional reputation. If he were truly concerned about not involving parents and students in the public forum, he should not have publicized the alleged statements in his press release.

Moreover, the Superintendent and the School District have been adamant in clarifying that I was not terminated on Friday, despite the alleged political "proselytizing" and purported "abandoning of her post." The sheer fact that I was not and have not been terminated belies the strength of those allegations.

In the press release, Superintendent McCartney alleges events he was not witness to on Friday. In particular, the characterization that I voluntarily left my classroom and "abandoned [my] post" is not supported by the facts. On Friday morning, BEFORE my first scheduled class had even entered the classroom, I was asked by Assistant Principal Mark Daniels to come to his office. Despite his earlier review of the bulletin board and expression that there was no problem with the bulletin board and in particular the Presidential Portrait, Assistant Principal Daniels instructed me to remove the Presidential Portrait immediately. When I refused, the discussion moved to the office of Principal Warfel, which culminated in Principal Warfel demanding that I leave the building.

When I complied with the Principal's directive to leave, THERE WERE NO STUDENTS IN MY CLASSROOM FOR WHOM I WAS RESPONSIBLE. It was incumbent upon Principal Warfel to cover my next assigned class before that class convened by arranging for a substitute teacher, or sitting in the classroom himself. At no time did I abandon my duties or leave children unattended as alleged.

Compounding the problem, the "facts" asserted by Superintendent McCartney have apparently been adopted in the press by, among others, Board of Education President Robert F. Long, who is attributed in press reports to have called McCartney's press release a "clarity of the facts." The rush by Mr. Long as the President of the Board of Education to take sides in the dispute without making any effort to independently investigate the truth, or even speak with me, should be a cause for further discussion. One might expect that the President of a School Board would make the effort to objectively evaluate the situation and get both sides of the matter before publicly passing judgment.

In addition to releasing his version of events to the media, Superintendent McCartney appears to have distributed his press release to teachers and staff at Crossroads South Middle School. If the press release was in fact distributed to teachers and staff, it is not clear why this was done.

It has also been reported that in the wake of the School District's press release, at least one teacher has been soliciting parents to send emails to the Board of Education not to allow me to return. If that is occurring, it is not clear if that teacher is acting on her own, or at the direction of school officials.

It is indeed a sad day for our schools that displaying a photograph of the President and the First Lady produced this state of affairs. Whatever one may think of me or my political leanings, I do not deserve to be treated in this manner. No one does.

I have been on administrative leave at the direction of the Superintendent through today, and have been instructed to report to the Office of the Superintendent tomorrow morning at 8:30 for further direction.
Shiba Pillai-Diaz

Thanks once again to Brian for this press release.

* * *

Update 6 (Oct 7 11:00PM PST)

EdWonk over at The Education Wonks has an exclusive interview with the teacher Shiba Pillai-Diaz. As it is their exclusive I offer you nothing more than this tidbit.

... she is looking forward to being out of the limelight.

Head over to their site at the link above for the exclusive news from the interview.

This story originally published at: Diggers Realm.

Posted By Digger at October 3, 2004 09:48 PM | TrackBack

Comments

Both sides? The union and the school administration?

Normally, the union and management are opposed, since they represent interests which (the union thinks) are in conflict. If neither one is willing to stand up for THE FACTS in a classroom, something is very, very sick in this situation.

Posted by: gus3 at October 3, 2004 11:14 PM

And they wonder why there is a major teacher shortage in this country.

Posted by: Spade at October 3, 2004 11:32 PM

Whaaa...?

Good lord, IIRC there was always a bulletin board, usually under the American Flag that displayed portraits of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and whoever was the current President.

It is always so ubiquitous, I'm afraid I haven't paid attention the last several years of back-to-school nights. I do recall such displays in elementary school..not as sure in middle school/high school.

Posted by: Darleen at October 3, 2004 11:41 PM

I'll have to run this by a friend who's student-teaching. He's from the "other side" of the political aisle from me, and I'm sure he'll have something interesting to say about this.

Posted by: gus3 at October 3, 2004 11:46 PM

It is not so clear to me. It depends on the picture. The third paragraph of the original excerpt (emphasis mine):

Pillai-Diaz, 33, a volunteer with the Bush campaign and an English teacher, has had a publicity picture of the First Couple hanging in her classroom since the start of the school year, she said.

No doubt, a simple picture of the president or even of the first couple should be allowed. But if the picture had a caption such as "Reelect George Bush", then I'd have to agree; the classroom is not the right place for politics.

I also went to the source article. Let me fill in the first two sets of ellipses:

The photo became an issue last week.

Parents e-mailed an assistant principal accusing Pillai-Diaz of suppressing free speech because the teacher refused to talk to pupils about why the color photo hung in the room.

"Students said, 'You like George Bush? He's killed people,' " Pillai-Diaz said. "As a rule I don't talk about my politics in the classroom."

According to Pillai-Diaz, Assistant Principal Mark Daniels said he had no problem with the photo, which hung next to posters of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. But Daniels told the teacher she should address questions that arose because of the photo.

"He wasn't giving me the power to direct conversation in my classroom," said Pillai-Diaz, who regarded the picture just as an image of the current president.

Thursday, at back-to-school night, the controversy exploded after a parent asked why the picture was up, Pillai-Diaz said.

I'm not sure how to read this. Was the teacher refusing any questions? (IMO, that would be bad.) Or did she defend her decision to post the picture of the current president while also explaining why she didn't want to discuss politics? (IMO, that would be ok.)

And from later in the article,

"I never once said 'I am a Republican' or 'I support the president,' " Pillai-Diaz said.

Which supports the contention that she was displaying the current president, not campaigning.

From 7Online:

Shiba Pillai-Diaz, Teacher: "There was no political intent, nor was there any political content in that photograph nor on the bulletin board."

School officials would not talk on camera but insist nobody here has been fired. To that, Ms. Pillai-Diaz asks what does it mean then when your boss asks you to hand over the keys and kicks you out of the building? She also says she is not sure if she'll be returning to school tomorrow.

Hmmmm, I seem to have talked myself into thinking this is pretty bad on the part of the school (and union) officials.

Posted by: Tomorrowist at October 4, 2004 12:56 AM

As you can see I updated the above article with several reports. You can click the link to view the video news report which shows the picture of George and Laura Bush.

Posted by: Digger at October 4, 2004 01:13 AM

A picture caused all this fuss? A couple of teachers at the high school where I work organized and encouraged students to go on an anti-war march during class time and nobody in the administration said boo.

Posted by: Achillea at October 4, 2004 09:49 AM

How is this different from the flap about liberal bias at the University level? In Colorado, the Legislature nearly passed the Academic Bill of Rights to reduce the influence (overt or implied) of liberal professors.

Two differences...
1. She's dealing with impressionable children, rather than voting-age and military-eligible, presumably mature adults.
2. Her actions (overt/facts) are conservative instead of liberal (overt/facts or implied/interpretation).

There was always a picture of the President in my school...Wyoming, naturally. Having a personal bulletin board of an overt partisan nature is worlds different from a dignified picture of the leader of the country.

If you support this sort of partisan exercise of First Amendment rights, you are not supporting the Constitution, you are supporting tWirp and his tWisted parody of the Grand Old Party.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass, baby. You quit; you weren't fired. You are not like any of my grade school teachers, and I don't want your 'tude anywhere near my kid.

Posted by: dubyus at October 4, 2004 11:21 AM

..Don�t let the door hit you in the ass, baby. You quit; you weren�t fired. You are not like any of my grade school teachers, and I don�t want your �tude anywhere near my kid."

..you have children?..

Posted by: Rob_NC at October 4, 2004 11:48 AM

DUby

Isn't it a litte early to start drinking? Or is this your normal delusional self?

She had a picture of the GW and Mrs. Bush on a bulletin board ALONG SIDE the Constitution and the Declaration of Indepence. That's partisan?

Oh...I get it... for Lefties, those documents were written by evil white men and we should be ashamed of them rather than celebrate them. So sorry.

My advice to you still stands.

Seek.Help.Immediately.

Posted by: Darleen at October 4, 2004 11:56 AM

Rob

the idea that DUby might reproduce is, frankly, disturbing.

He doesn't want this teacher around his "kids" but has no problem with students sneering that "GW kills people".

bizzare.

Posted by: Darleen at October 4, 2004 11:58 AM

I echo the common sense question of "If the story told by the Superintendent is completely accurate, please explain why this matter deserves such strong action as opposed to all the other cases in public schools of encouraging (even offering extra credit for) protest participation, required essays against administration positions and policies, overt threats against Conservative Club members that are tacitly acknowledged and "understood" by faculty, etc. I'm not saying the situation described by the Superintendent (if accurate) isn't cause for action, but am meerly pinting out the blatant hypocracy.

Posted by: submandave at October 4, 2004 01:22 PM

..Darleen,that tought put a shutter up my spine also..but they say that there is someone out there for everyone.. :-o

Posted by: Rob_NC at October 4, 2004 01:53 PM

..s.m.d..bingo..as long as you promote their drivel you are fine..but...go againist their grain...
**************************************************************
"Don�t let the door hit you in the ass, baby."

Posted by: Rob_NC at October 4, 2004 01:58 PM

Digger?

Drudge is linking to the WABC story!

Posted by: Darleen at October 4, 2004 02:30 PM

http://www.channel3000.com/politics/3776992/detail.html

..the party of peace and compassion..sensitive to others well being...

Posted by: Rob_NC at October 4, 2004 03:59 PM

I am a classroom teacher with 13 years service. One of the things that every teacher knows is that the first rule of Administration is to C.Y.A. The only way that they can do that (if Diaz is telling the truth) is to lie. After reading their statement over at www.sbschools.org (watch for scroll at top) there is room for plenty of doubt in Diaz's story. Unless the District is lying.... On the whole, I concur with the Command Post's viewpoint.

Fox is now saying on their news that the Principal ordered Diaz off campus. Further confusing the issue.

Posted by: EdWonk at October 5, 2004 12:39 AM

Edwonk

I watched the teacher on O'Reilly tonight. If she is a liar, she's a damned stonecold good one.

What makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand at attention is the rather over-the-top accusations the Superintendent makes about the teacher. She stated as someone with six years as a teacher, she has always forbidden political talk in her classroom, even going so far as to refusing to answer questions about what party she belongs to (I suspect, in a Democrat dominated school that may have raised suspicions about her). She stated, too, that the pic of GW/Laura was the only pic of them on the board,,,NO dog pic. She did say she also had the Constitution, The Declaration of Independence, a poster with all Presidential signatures from G. Washington to present, generic postcards showing the White House. (does the signatures and the pics of the White House constitute "presidential artifacts?")

Not only do Admins engage in CYA, but they are vicious and I mean, down right close to breaking your knees with a bat vicious, if anyone goes "public" with stuff. When this teacher called the cops then told her story to the press, that was most likely when the Superintendent started the (IMO) smear campaign.

If I'm wrong, I'll admit it. But my own tilting at the windmills of Public Education cause me to believe the teacher at this juncture.

Posted by: Darleen at October 5, 2004 12:57 AM

oops...grammar mistake

juncture = junction

apologies

Posted by: Darleen at October 5, 2004 01:00 AM

For those above that believe that politics do not belong in the classroom, have you been to school lately? Everything from PTA to your local school board has to do with politics. In fact, in elementary schools, children are campaigning to become their classroom representative as early as 2nd and 3rd grade.

What makes me so crazy about this is that once again there are children caught up in this. Has anyone gone and interviewed the parent that began this? Sometimes as parents we go overboard in what we believe. Do we have a right to place our opinions in the hands of our children, especially if they are so impressionable at the middle school age as it is suggested above?

What ever happened to the words "ONE NATION" that most children still recite every morning in the Plege of Allegiance? Why are we so determined to choose sides instead of educating our children to support their country and their leaders even if the person they choose does not win? It is possible to teach children that their opinions matter and that they have the freedom to say what they think and feel, and teach them to work together for a common cause.

It seems to me that this School Board has a lot of power, and she is one teacher. I hope that this school board will realize that they are equal in creating this mess, and that the impressions that the children in this district have of them as local leaders are as important as the ones the children have of past, present, and future presidents.

One last thought, are the Board members removing their pictures from district media content because some parents in the district might not agree with their views? If they stand by their request of this teacher, they might consider practicing what they preach! It is time for us to grow up, and start thinking about what are children see when they watch someone in power tell their teacher how it is going to be. Good luck to those that have to repare all that has been undone with this one!

Posted by: bergj at October 5, 2004 01:52 PM

Sorry, Pledge not plege and repair not repare!

Posted by: bergj at October 5, 2004 01:56 PM

Quoth bergj:

One last thought, are the Board members removing their pictures from district media content because some parents in the district might not agree with their views?

I should hope so. Those parents are the ones who put them there to begin with. The board members were installed to run the school on the parents' behalf. Liberal, conservative, neither... ultimately, the board answers to the parents for their jobs. And if those parents don't want pictures of GWB in the classrooms, then so be it.

(And to hell with "No Child Left Behind"!)

Posted by: gus3 at October 5, 2004 04:29 PM

As this story unfolded it baffles me how people across the country have taken this woman's side of the story at face value and completely dismissed the administration's response. I live in South Brunswick, NJ, my wife teaches at Crossroads South Middle School, my oldest son was in the Delta Unit that this teacher is part of and my youngest son is currently going to school at Crossroads North Middle School. Not that any of that matters much, but I guess I have a bit more of a close tie to the school than most of you, so I suppose it is relevant.

1). The issue isn't the picture, it's the fact that students in her class have said that she's openly criticizing them for having opposing views on politics. According to the school district's official statement, "Recently, the school administration began receiving complaints from students and parents that Ms. Pillai-Diaz was using her position, classroom and teaching time to engage in partisan politics. Students reported that she had made statements which denigrated one party over the other." Also, according to students she has stated, "It's a good thing you aren't old enough to vote" and "you should be ashamed to be a Democrat." She has said the school administrators are lying, now she's saying the students are lying. There are a lot of people on the other side of this issue that seem to be lying and she seems to be the only one that anyone believes....

2). A direct quote from Sylvia Lee, the president of the South Brunswick Education Association (teacher's union). "She was never relieved of her duties and there are expectations that she will be in tomorrow," Lee said. (from the Newark Star-Ledger, Tuesday, Oct. 5th). In other words, the Union isn't standing behind her (it's important to note that apparently because she is a first year teacher she isn't represented by the union, but I can't confirm that, I seem to recall my wife paying union dues from day one, but I just don't know). Instead of showing up for work, she hired and attorney because the school district put out what she calls a "press release that smeared her." Of course, it was OK for her to go to the New York Times, Good Morning America, the O'Reilly Report and who knows where else she'll show up and say that she was fired, when she never was, but it's not OK for the school district to put their side of the story out. From the beginning she stated that she was fired and that she was told to turn over her keys. I don't see her saying anything about the keys of her story in any of the recent interviews, did she forget that part?

3). During the first meeting on Friday, she was not asked for her keys, she was not fired, principals do not have hiring or firing authority in the South Brunswick School district (nor in any that I've been part of and I've been a member of a school board in the past).

4). This is her third school district in six years of teaching, why is she moving around so much? Has anyone called the school she worked for in Brooklyn to find out why she left, how about Tenafly, NJ? I wonder if this is a pattern...

Unfortunately I haven't had the opportunity to talk to other teachers in her unit to see what they think of this situation, but my wife has stated that they have some pretty strong opinions of her and what's going on and from what I understand there are very few, if any, teachers in the building that back her on this. That says a lot to me because as we all know, teachers typically stick together, but it doesn't seem like it on this one.

The bigger issue that I'm upset about is things like people sending emails to my wife, who has absolutely nothing to do with this situation saying things like, 'You people should be ashamed of yourselves...' So because my wife, who's taught in this district for nine years, happens to be in the same building with this woman, she should be ashamed of where she works and what she's done for her students for the past nine years? Are you kidding me? I'm also amazed that people who have no idea of this situation are comparing this to communism, calling for people to send letters and emails to the administrators, call the school, etc., without the whole story. I spoke to the woman that answers the phone at school today, a wonderful woman that is always cheerful on the phone when I call to speak to my wife, can you imagine what she's had to go through? Here's a woman that comes to work every day, goes about her business, it's an incredible 'voice' to our award winning school and she's being harassed by people all over the country because they think they know what went on in our school. Put yourself in her shoes for two minutes, what did she do to offend anyone? Why should she have to put up with these calls? And please, don't tell me it's the price you pay or anything else ridiculous like that, I assure you, she doesn't get paid enough money to put up with the stuff she's had to put up with.

The best quote I've heard through this entire thing is, "We are one lie away from being ruined." I'm not going to mention who said it, but it was said a long time before this, unfortunately for him, it's entirely possible that it might come true for him, which is sad, because he's a one of the good guys...

Posted by: baseballdad at October 5, 2004 09:03 PM

Excellent post baseballdad. I think the reason everyone is coming down so hard on the Superintendent is the vicious attacks he made against the teacher in his press release.

The original story was whether the teacher should be allowed to have a picture of the president hanging in class. What took it to the next level was the scathing words the Superintendent used in the press release totally destroyed any credibility the school may have had with most people. Such a vitriolic attack against a teacher smacks of "CYA" of the highest order.

If the press release would have been bland and common in tone the story probably would have not reached the exposure it currently has.

The real question is why would a teacher when asked nicely to return to class, storm out of the school, contact the media and obtain a lawyer? Common sense tells me that there was a confrontation between the two, the Superintendent said something along the lines of "fine well get your stuff and get out then!" and when she did he was caught in a position of trying to cover himself from a mistake.

The telling thing in all of it is his statement in a story that "people don't show any respect". This to me says "she didn't respect my demand to take down the item and instead decided to challenge me by walking".

I feel for the receptionist and any other teacher receiving any annoyance by this, but I still believe if the situation was handled differently and properly it wouldn't have gone to this level. Maybe the teachers and people there should take a look at replacing the incompetent people who let it reach this level of critique.

Posted by: Digger at October 5, 2004 09:26 PM

I am a student in Mrs. Diaz's class. Forgetting all politics, she was a bad teacher. She was intolerent of opinions and had gotten angry at some children for OVER participating. In all of my other classes you would have to be kicked to participate. I personally was not aware of her partisan opinions until oct. 4 According to a friend she said you should be ashamed to be democratic, something about him being 'corrupted', and glad he could not vote. Another classmate mentioned something about her saying farenheight 911 was a lie. Personally we have been told many things from our teachers and principals none though influencing my opinion. Though not so concerned about the principals, I am very unhappy with the possibility of the getting told hateful things as my teachers are the greatest most caring i have ever had, and i have moved some. I personally do not want her back simply because she is a bad teacher

Posted by: cloud at October 5, 2004 10:19 PM

Sorry, my BS detector just pegged. I guess I need to get it re-calibrated.

Posted by: gus3 at October 5, 2004 11:55 PM

Gus3 - Nonsense, middle school kids hang out in CommandPost all the time and know what words like 'partisan' and ''intolerant' mean.

They also know to enclose in single quotes words they want to emphasize as pertaining to particular intent or POV, such as the 'corrupted' reference in Mrs. Diaz's comments.

Plus it only takes them a day to figure out that a teacher's 'bad'.

These kids sure learn fast, huh?

Posted by: torpedo_eight at October 6, 2004 12:17 AM

Once the school district released their statement, then at least both sides of the story are out and you are obviously free to decide which side you choose to be part of. Unfortunately, the entire country had made up their mind based on the original New York Times article (which was written after the teacher called them on Friday, right after walking out of school). The phone calls and emails started over the weekend and kicked into high gear on Monday morning. My sister-in-law lives in the Midwest and heard a call in radio program having a field day with the story and blasting the administration for firing a teacher because she didn't take a picture down. She tried to call in to put her two cents worth in, telling them that she knew more about the story because her sister works in the school and had seen the press release, they wouldn't let her on the air. They didn't want to hear anything from 'the other side'.

The subsequent interviews she did with the various talk shows certainly helped her case, fanned the fire, so-to-speak, and then the superintendent released his statement. After that, she started playing even more of a victim saying that they were lying about her. Which, if you believe the principal, superintendent and vice principal, is exactly what she had been doing in the media, lying about them and the events that took place. I have no reason to doubt cloud is actually a student in her class, but her teaching style or competence isn't the issue here, what was said about the friend of cloud is. Maybe it was an isolated incident, maybe it happened in front of an entire class, but the bottom line is that according to students she criticized a student or a group of students about their political views, which is totally inappropriate and why she talking to the principal in the first place.

Personally, I agree that there are parts of this that might have been handled a bit differently, but I doubt that the any of the administrators told her to get out of the building. I do believe that the superintendent possibly told her that if she continued talking to the media that it would be a lot tougher to get through this by sitting down and talking. Look at what's happened, it's a global story (I don't have confirmation that it's crossed the big ponds, but I'm thinking that it probably has, it's certainly nationwide) and instead of dealing with this with the board of education, it's going to be dealt with by attorneys. In other words, it's out of the board of education's hands, as Superintendent McCarthy said it would be.

Posted by: baseballdad at October 6, 2004 06:47 AM

The interesting thing is that this story has become a national banner for whether the President's picture was allowed to be put up in a classroom or not. It seems to me that the actual picture had very little to do with the problem. As was stated in the School Board's statement, they originally allowed the picture. I think that what caused this situation was that the picture, for whatever reason, was causing a distraction to the learning process and was causing an unnecessary disruption. That is most likely why she was eventually asked to take it down. What caused the rest of the real problems was her refusal and her subsequent seeminly child-like actions by walking out in the middle of a school day and contacting newspapers to give them half the story. I have no doubt that the administrators maybe could have handled this better, but there are 2 sides to every argument, and the fact that she's acting like she's a hapless victim leads me to believe that she's hiding something to make it look that way. In a situation like this, there are rarely any sides which are totally blameless for their actions. If I had a child in that school district, I wouldn't want her to return. I'm all for children seeing a demonstration of someone standing up for their beliefs, but this was not a matter of the school not wanting a picture of the President, it was a matter of the school wanting her to remove something that was causing a disruption in the school.

Posted by: maxdaemon at October 6, 2004 11:38 AM

seemingly, that is, not seeminly

Posted by: maxdaemon at October 6, 2004 11:55 AM

(her teaching style or competence isn�t the issue here, what was said about the friend of cloud is.)
It is an issue a rather major one for we students who are going to be taught by some lying imcompetent. It should be my fellow students and my teachers who get to make the decision. We, if she comes back, will be the ones who have to endure her incompitence 30 minutes-and hour a day for over 130 days. Her political and in class comments may be aore popular issue, but i am MUCH less effected by those than horrendous teaching skills. I already have formed my political views and take something extremly radical to change them. Most of my classmates are decided as well. To prove i am in the delta unit of crossroads south and baseballdad can probably confirm, on tuesday oct5 delta unit day went like this. We went to gym/encore after homeroom. Then went to our classes and were directed to the auditorium. There we heard Dr.Warfel tell what truth was known. then we watched part of a movie called Ruby Bridges and went to encore/gym. After that we proceded to lunch. Then we went to the auditorium to finish the movie. Once finished we wrote 20 lines about what we found interesting/suprising/or learned. Then we went outside until activity period. If anyone still does not believe and can think of a way to prove myself without revealing infromation about myself please post. The point is I am a student one who spend over a 100 hours of my life enduring her incompetence where as i had no idea of her political views, though she did make comments to others, before it became a media event. So her competence is a pretty big issue if you are someone directly affected by it.

Posted by: cloud at October 6, 2004 05:57 PM

As a note. I VERY offended by the sites out there that say 'no wonder children no nothing about politics' and giving the diaz case as an example. NOT a single one did anything that i would call research. Neither did the major news stations who first broadcasted it. If i turned a paper with as many holes, lies, and lack of research as that i would fail if I got lucky and they didnt just not accept it and give me a zero. I personally understand politics and how stupid most modern politicans are. This post is for the ignorant blithering idiots who said 'I' didnt know about politics, and used something they knew next to nothing about as an example.

Posted by: cloud at October 6, 2004 06:08 PM

Cloud, or whoever you are, you admit by your own comments that Ms. Pillai-Diaz did not spend class-time espousing political views. Your whole commentary seems to revolve around her alleged teaching incompetence. Judging by the grammatical value of your own entries, you may be right. But she is not being skewered fo her teaching skills, but for POSTING A PHOTO of a sitting president on an American-culture themed bulletin board. All the surrounding hysteria, and the character-assasinating letter from the administrator sounds like a bloody witch hunt straight out of 17th century Boston.

Posted by: collegeprofmom at October 6, 2004 07:17 PM

I am writing a comment on internet so i really aint carin bout my grammer. She did say political things to students. She did not preach to classes but did so to single students, groups, and tables. If you had read my first post you would have known that i did mention her politics. What i am saying is that I am one of u the ones who will have to go through an incompetent and lying teacher for a whole year. the bush picture is something she is indeed being skewed for. The only reason the picture was asked to be taken down was because it was causing controversy, but instead of doing what any decent half-brained teacher would and taking it down she went to the press and made it media issue. That is nto the kind of moron i want teaching me.

Posted by: cloud at October 6, 2004 07:39 PM

Mrs.Diaz does has not been respectfull of her student and sometimes insulting and that is my problem with. Out.

Posted by: cloud at October 6, 2004 07:59 PM

Yo McCloud, her job ain't to respect you, bro, but to teach you. Judgin' by yo posting, she ain't doing such a great job in teachin' you to write and think. But dissin' her and callin' her "moron" for puttin' up a pix of the sitting prez shows what levels public education has fallen to. The "morons" are the ones who find that simple action "controversial" and "offensive." I'm thankin' God my kids are in private school, if you get my drift. (Hope speakin' like y'all gets my point across.)

Posted by: collegeprofmom at October 6, 2004 08:16 PM

Mrs. Diaz is not a moron. i have indeed been too strong. I did not call her a moron for putting up a pic of the prez I have no problem with a bush pic up. i said that because instead of taking it down or settilng the problem in school she went to the media. She does not have to respect. it is part of her job not to insult us though. The warped interpritations and insults about my comments tells me the level of society. Can someone please awnser me y i am being attacked for my grammer when i am using the same as most others who chat, talk in forums, or play mmorpgs?

Posted by: cloud at October 6, 2004 08:35 PM

Cloud, I have no doubt that you are a student at Crossroads, we probably know each other through the 'circles'. I don't disagree with you that teaching incompetence is important and after the discussions I've had today with a classmate of yours, it's certainly an issue here. On the other hand, her teaching skills aren't what the media, blogs or websites are talking about, they all think that she was fired for not taking down a picture of President Bush. My point was that the issue here is that she has been openly criticizing your classmates for having opposing political views. Of course, I wasn't in the classroom, but I'm going on your word and the word of a few of your classmates, whom I've now had the opportunity to speak with. I've also been told that she told a class that she really didn't like teaching 7th and 8th grade students and that she was afraid of them (that from a 7th grader that I coach who's in her morning class).

On the topic of grammar and spelling, while most of us aren't perfect (I know I'm not), you are judged by how you write and when you write in abbreviations, poor grammar, poor spelling, etc., you lose credibility and fuel the fire of those saying that our education system isn't doing it's job. It might be appropriate to type in code on Instant Messenger, but kids need to learn that it's not appropriate to type that way when others (specifically adults) are reading.

Posted by: baseballdad at October 6, 2004 08:49 PM

In that kind of enviroment I would not trust officials. I smell that school officials are covering their rear. I wonder if some of the posters here are people poisoned and blonded by what others told them. Maybe these kids are at fault for ignoring what she teaches or even the parents for respecting. Could the parents and SB have an agenda because of the opposing party. The situation is that EEOC may get involved in this because this is a hostile work enviroment or the ACLU., I suspect heads are going to roll

Posted by: eecherry at October 6, 2004 11:08 PM

Cloud--OK, I get it now. You're saving your "real writing" for your next New York Times editorial. Anyway, baseballdad, I don't live in New Jersey, but I'd hesitate to take the word of a 7th grader over a teacher. I used to teach middle school and I saw the hysterics that surround situations like this and the kids often want to feel important by giving the adults more info the stoke the flames. As for the teacher not taking it down when it became controversial, again I ask (since no one has answered), WHY is it controversial to put up a picture of the siting president on a bulletin board--especially an American-culture themed bulletin board??? What's the matter with everyone???

Posted by: collegeprofmom at October 7, 2004 01:52 PM

Well, between baseball dad who posted to my blog, and the very very revealing comments from "cloud" ...lets just say the stink I'm detecting doesn't mean I'm about to find a pony.

Cloud reveals a bit more than s/he thinks... ie admits that the teacher did NOT talk politics to the class but allegedly said some to a student "911 is Lies".... that dear cloud is OPINION about a movie. Would you be that anxious to have a teacher fired because she told a student outside of class that hip-hop was junk? And why, pray tell, should a picture of a sitting President be "controversial?"

Only one reason I can think of, that your parents were wholely remiss in teaching you that you can disagree with a Presidents policy BUT YOU STILL RESPECT THE OFFICE AND THE MAN WHO HOLDS IT.

Cloud, your parents are IMMORAL MORONS. They sound like the parents of the teenagers that were caught causing thousands of dollars of damage to PRIVATE PROPERTY by destroying Bush/Cheney signs and they feel they were justified because they don't like Bush.

Baseball dad, if you don't "get it" by the so-called testimony of "cloud" then you are just as immoral.

Posted by: Darleen at October 7, 2004 09:31 PM

I have a WORLD WIDE EXCLUSIVE!!!! The EdWonk interviewed Teacher Shiba Pillai-Diaz and have learned what will be happening next. Interview conducted at 6:45 PM Pacific Time.

Posted by: EdWonk at October 7, 2004 10:25 PM

My parents did not attend back school night so shut up. I say you are a MORON for assuming that my parents went to the meeting just because I have feelings on it. I agree that a picture of the president should not be controversial. THIS WHOLE THING IS ABOUT HER SHARING HER OPINIONS AND INSULTING CHILDREN. it was though and when asked to take it down I feel she should have. I AGREE. The fact is though it created controversey (right or wrong) and it is the school officials job to stop that. To finish infromation that diaz was not coming back was released today to me and my fellow students.

Posted by: cloud at October 8, 2004 04:45 PM

I just read the edwonk post. She did not want to amke this a media matter yet right after the metting she called the newpapers. My personal solution would just to have printed out a kerry poster hung it up and be done with it

Posted by: cloud at October 8, 2004 05:05 PM

I think that if Ms. Diaz was not being partisan she should have had every President who held office up on the bulletin board. This would have showed the class that she was not leaning towards either side.

For the person that called Cloud's parents a moron, you are telling a child that he should respect the President because of the office he holds and yet you disrespect his parents because of what you think that they are teaching their child. I am thinking you should take your own advice.

Posted by: J. Mills at October 10, 2004 05:31 PM