When top administrators fail to set a progressive tone of excellence in all facets of educational effort,
others will tend to fail as well, and jeopardize the larger educational mission. Important matters that
I have brought up are best not brushed aside, distorted, belittled or made light of by district leadership.
Otherwise, such disregard and educative myopia will erode essential aspects of the foundation
upon which our future education depends.
Problems with Continuing Education managers at West City Center resulted in Associate Dean Bill Grimes being asked to hold an Administrative Conference back in late February, 1999, serving as Disciplinary Officer. He attempted to focus on my frustrated behavior rather than address the actions and inactions of others that led to voicing my concerns more adamently, and challenging the work ethic of office staff. Because criticism coming from a "mere" student was unacceptable to staff, some of whom chronically overreacted to any expectation that office staff might perform their duties with at least minimal competency, instead of alternately slothful and bristley reactions.
The many concerns I expressed were listened to but ignored in the Disciplinary Officer's findings and recommendations. My extensive and detailed documentation of management's false accusations, exaggerated claims, a gag order resulting from my search for witness testimony, a serious breech of agreement and mishandling of my personal property, evidential cover-up, belligerent treatment,and other matters brought to his attention might just as well have been dropped in a recycling bin before I wasted hundreds of hours in seemingly futile document preparation and dialogue. At the "conclusion" of the Administrative Conference the Disciplinary Officer seemed surprised that I felt BETRAYED! This led to me to thinking that this kind of faux investigation is the rule not the exception when students are retaliated against by managers.
Since then, the District has gone after me again, thinking that one more wave of persecution will likely finish me off, with a more aggressive Disciplinary Officer, Dr. Martin, calling the shots. You'll have to read on, via the links provided at the end of each section to find the next connecting section in this tragedy of errors . . . and through further documentation, e-mails, and letters . . . my attempt to hang in there. Be sure to read on through all the correspondence posted to what Dr. Martin tried to do when he saw I was vulnerable. With no relief from all the District personnel I tried to get at least information from, I guess I looked like a sitting duck. Well, I geared up and got myself particularly focused when the Disciplinary Officer directed me to come to a Formal Hearing with the threat of being suspended for 2 years or more from all programs and premises of the San Diego Community College District. I'm telling you this now because my computer access will be cut off if the suspension is approved.
And guess what . . . at the public library the Internet computers and word processor aren't even integrated . . . so no uploading or downloading files are possible to fully maintain and upgrade this site as I have been. No, I'm not going to be "plucked" without coming to my own defense.
Now that the Internet allows issue documentation to have a longer and broader "life," perhaps students all over the world will be empowered in addressing reforms and suppporting each other with new ideas and visions of an oppression-free educational environment where students are no longer treated as an UNDERCLASS. Perhaps with public awareness sharpened and widened by the Internet really solutions can come forward without entrenched managers overstaying their welcome in the eyes of students and faculty.
I intend this site to reflect what can be done when good ideas aren't being listened to and acted on by intractable management. Perhaps someone with enough vision and liberal integrity on the Board of Trustees will rally the other members and take a "mere" student's concerns more to heart. Perhaps a few other within the San Diego Community College District will come forward and agree with me that the status quo in many areas has gotta go!
I view this site as a ramp to positive change, despite how administrators might view it. If it has scary implications for them, maybe they will swing into a positive mode instead of run to their legal counsel for reactive advice. I am speaking truly and not spreading anything false, and all my statements I acknowledge as JUST MY OPINION, although much of what I say can be checked out if one were to enroll awhile and keep your eyes and ears open. That's what current administration doesn't want: someone like me who is not so easily intimidated on the inside of their little game with the big plans and slick promotions that tend to mask what can't bear real scrutiny. I've had enough education on the inside and outside that I don't depend on anyone to keep learning. Life lived to it's fullest IS learning, and learning done with one's whole heart and soul is LIFE!
There seems to be a great fear of self-scrutiny on the part of Continuing Education administrators, and resistance to setting any strong proactive precedent for increased accountability, especially to students. I have been expected to hold myself accountable for behavior that was exaggerated or never happened, but their obvious unprofessional behavior, disregard for due process, non-reciprocal response, and non-accountability is brushed aside and left undocumented except in my own files. I believe the lack of administrative self-documentation can at least be partly explained by the motivation to avoid future accountability by documenting what and when various information was recived.
The documentation that was administratively generated has largely been to intimidate, deflect blame, stifle free expression, and suppress proactive participation in shared governance policy implementation. This has often been masked by seemingly offerring me channels for my input such as an off-site counselor, and an ASB that is a comedy of errors at the students' expense. It is incredulous that efforts keep being made to direct me to the ASB, whose performance has itself violated students' rights and impeded due process. I've often characterized being directed toward the ASB as being sent off in a leaky boat or encouraged to take a long walk off a short pier. Even the ASB advisor, Eric Cuellar repeatedly refused to provide a describe how he saw his role as ASB advisor, and refused to supply ASB minutes, or District policies related to the problems with the ASB I was having.
What chance do managers have of acheiveing excellence if they can't or more often won't recognize excellence in a student just because the student expresses a different opinion than theirs regarding campus conditions?
WHY IS IT THAT SOME SDCCD ADMINISTRATORS
IGNORE REASONABLE RESPONSE PROTOCOL?
A WELL-INFORMED STUDENT BODY
IS A RESPECTED STUDENT BODY.
Bill Grimes, Associate Dean
Educational Cultural Complex
4343 Ocean View Blvd.
San Diego, CA 92113
Bill,
Re: Grievance forms, concerns and clarifications, and request for more complete timely response.
Do you recall my remark from a message to you on 7 May 1999? . . . . "Shielding and insulating other administrators and staff from accountability and abetting retaliation against me has played havoc with my classroom momentum and attendance at the Pt. Loma campus." Do you feel this is an unfair statement which has no real basis in fact? Your 18 June 99 letter has done nothing to lessen this concern. In fact, it has produced an even more alarming situation on several fronts, discouraging mutual exploration of more progressive solutions that will better serve the district.
Please indicate when I can expect a response to my 28 June 99 E-mail to you. I have yet to receive word from Jim Smith regarding my request on 28 June 99 for an extension on the 30-day limit for filing grievances, nor clarification about filing multiple grievances, selection of a Grievance Officer other than Barbara Penn, etc.
Please provide contact information for the Grievance Committee members as soon as possible, as well as several additional Statement of Grievance forms. Would you also please provide several Grievance Hearing Request forms. I don't understand why you didn't include this form with the other you gave me. I want to be clear what information this second form asks for and can thereby address any need for clarification with the Grievance Officer in a timely way.
Do you recall that Jim Smith said that I had to only file the Statement of Grievance form within 30 days but not the actual Grievance Hearing Request form within 30 days? Please confirm whether this is what you recall.
Regarding the 18 June letter hand-submitted by you to me at the 28 June meeting with Jim Smith at West City Center:
1. Please provide background information about how this letter came about and what input or direction did Jim Smith, or others, provide. Please be specific regarding the statement that ends: " . . . all concerns, questions or informational requests that you may have of West City Center (WCC) staff outside the classroom are to be directed to Mr. Hernandez, Mr. Lyon, or Dr. St. John of WCC."
2. Do you recall that Jim Smith threatened me with an Informal Hearing if I did not agree to the letter's demands (stated in the paragraph above). Does this threat seem appropriate to you under the circumstances? Since the demands were effective on 18 July 1999, according to this letter, is it proper that I not be informed until ten days later? It reflects poorly on the district when the Continuing Education division fails to appropriately use E-mail, part of the information technology it is promoting to students. Wouldn't it have shown reasonable courtesy to set up a meeting in advance, rather than interrupt my class time without warning and so unnecessarily?
3. After an hour and half of frustration talking with you and Jim Smith, I was unable to shake the added despair following this encounter, and do not feel comfortable with memories of Jim Smith jabbing his hand in my direction, not far from my face. Someone who claims they cannot help it, "that's just the way I am", shows lack of self-control and appropriate behavior necessary for a person taking over as the President of Continuing Education and expected to exercise his power, authority, and responsibility in an exemplary way. It's ironic that a meeting called in part to condemn my behavior should be so full of offensive and inconsiderate behavior. This is a similar story with regard to my other "accusers". I don't think my accusers can tolerate much self-scrutiny or scrutiny by others. Rather than see how services and professional response can be improved and promote a higher standard for all to follow apparently denial, defensiveness, exaggeration, threats, retaliation, and reactive group-think are more acceptable within the current Continuing Education administration. To expect students to lower their expectations so that district employees only do just enough to get by if that is incompatible with the district's goals.
4. Do you have an explanation for why neither you nor Jim Smith has been specific enough about office staff complaints for me to give my side of specific events that occurred? I believe I am entitled to a written list of complaints and exact or approximate dates of their occurrence so that I might present my side of each situation. Under the circumstances, in regard to your letter of 18 June 1999, I don't feel that the stated RESTRICTIONS on my behavior that directly or indirectly impose limits on my right to free expression, reasonable access, freedom from discrimination etc. are warranted or in full accordance with Policy 3100 and the mission and goals of the district.
5. Your letter left out a great many facts, such as the difficulty I had in receiving policy information; the lack of policy compliance at WCC; the failure, in my view, of the Administrative Conference to fulfill its function; evidence of retaliation; threatening, belligerent, and demeaning behavior by district employees; inconsistent enforcement of site policy and directives; the spreading of rumors that resulted in my being denied access to one of my classes; breaking of an important agreement and improper handling of my personal property, indeterminate continuation of an existing gag order by Associate Dean Lyon which he repeatedly refused to put into writing; site dean irresponsibility; false accusations; denial of access to public records; and slow response from many district employees, including yourself, to my written requests for information and guidance, including clarification of practices with respect to policy. This is not a complete list of my concerns, but I am troubled that you made no specific acknowledgement of any of the above matters in your 18 June 99 letter. I trust that you are still holding dozens of documents that detail many of the above concerns, with little written follow-up or investigation on your part which severely impedes problem resolution and has fostered additional problems, undue stress and suffering.
6. Would you please catch up by E-mail on all related correspondence that you have not yet responded to since it affects problem resolution greatly. I respectfully request response to due process matters by the end of this week so that I can do my part to comply with district policy and procedures.
7. If you or Jim Smith expect Roy Hernandez to handle such weighty matters as I have outlined, I believe he should have the resources and assignment to specifically cover such imposing matters, or you are being unfair and unrealistic. He has indicated that he was tasked with counseling me with regard to staff-reported "problem behavior". To address my behavior as the" problem without due consideration for all the previously stated conditons and the resulting grief, pain, and suffering the District has put me through is misguided and works against the creation of more lasting solutions.
8. Your letter also notably ignored the fact that there is a long history of administrative inattention, unresponsiveness, misdirection, and other problems associated with addressing my concerns to Mr. Lyon and Dr. St. John. Since so many of my concerns have been directly related to their actions or inactions, including a lack of response to Roy Hernandez, other avenues for redress must be considered and under the circumstances encouraged. I remind you, if I may, that virtually all of my concerns would never have come up if this site was effectively managed, conformed fully to policy and goals of the district, and functioned on a proactive concern for every student's welfare and educational progress.
9. Just because district policy may currently encourage individual sites to solve their own problems, West City Center's long-standing inability to do so in a number of areas should be ample reason to try other avenues for resolution that acknowledge the damage already done and take swift measures to avoid further damage, including to the integrity of the Continuing Education division of the San Diego Community College District.
10. As I mentioned to Jim Smith, at the outset of our first conversation five months ago, I enrolled in Continuing Education classes to make a positive contribution and I look at problem-solving as a chance to also learn how to work better together in an exemplary way. I don't think he really heard me then and I don't think he wants to now. When top administrators fail to set a progressive tone of excellence in all facets of educational effort, others will tend to fail as well, and jeopardize the larger educational mission. Important matters that I have brought up are best not brushed aside, distorted, belittled or made light of by district leadership. Otherwise, such disregard and educative myopia will erode essential aspects of the foundation upon which our future education depends.
Mr. Jim Smith, Vice-President of Instructional Services
Educational Cultural Complex
4343 Ocean View Blvd.
San Diego, CA 92113
Mr. Jim Smith:
It would be a mistake to assume the patience I have exercised in allowing you and others sufficient time to address my grievances can best be interpreted as clear indication that the grievances have been resolved. Was it not reasonable for me to assume that once I formally submitted my grievances, using proper District protocol, that my grievances would receive prompt and thorough attention? Instead, only a small fraction of my grievances was addressed, and even then not satisfactorily.
Your offer to "work with" Dean St. John on some issues has resulted in little if any improvement in the issues I have raised. Associate Dean Lyon continues his belligerent ways, Otis Williams persists in trying to provoke me, and Associate Dean Grimes has left the Administrative Conference in disarray, expecting a part-time counselor to take over for him. After many meetings with counselor Roy Hernandez, it is apparent that he lacks the clarity, focus, and initiative required to intelligently discuss and adequately explore the issues I've raised. Furthermore, Mr. Hernandez has repeatedly violated confidentiality policy, has been unprepared for or missed meetings, and has allowed the ASB to flounder.
I have provided both Mr. Grimes, and Mr. Hernandez adequate documentation to draw from to assist any serious grievance review and further investigation by Ms. Neault or yourself. I see no indication thus far that either Ms. Neault or you have made a sincere and conscientious attempt at processing this information in ways that will move the grievance process forward in a thorough and efficient manner. To expect even more documentation from me without taking sufficient interest in what I've made available is unfair.
Since the grievances were submitted in July, I have not just been idly sitting by. Firstly, I have watched for signs that documentation provided to Mr. Grimes was being used to further a deeper investigation into incidents and events that took place at West City Center. I have seen neither detailed not incisive reference to many of the key documents that I so carefully prepared and shared with Mr. Grimes and others mentioned. What consideration was given to my grievances regarding Mr. Grimes and Mr. Lyon? Can you understand why I might doubt the degree of professionalism versus internal politics afoot here? Secondly, I have allowed time to observe the extent to which the relatively meager promises you made to "work with" Dean St. John on some of my concerns would pan out. And many of these promises haven't and there appears to have been a lack of monitoring, and faithful documentation to completion.
Actions and inaction on the part of Ms. Neault and yourself indicate to me that for the majority of my grievances you prefer to ignore, brush off, or brush them under for whatever reasons you may have. Therefore, in my letter to Chancellor Gallego on 12 October 1999, I asked him to personally address the poor response I've received regarding so many issues awaiting further investigation and resolution.
That my increased concerns regarding the fairness and adequacy of the grievance process apparently did not filter down through the chain of command is very troubling. So troubling, given the circumstances I've outlined above, that I request additional statement of grievance forms be sent to me as soon as possible, along with any instructions regarding continuance of the grievance process already underway.
Tom Darling
Google the words accompanying links if any links are on the blink.
I am not responding to email at the current time while I work on other projects.
(Thomas James Darling)
San Diego |
