Unfortunately, unethical behavior is occurring more frequently in the field of education. Given the nature of the profession, when a school district employee engages in unethical behavior, it is always a newsworthy event. I have several family members who are district employees and/or district leaders in several schools across the country. I interviewed many of my family members while completing this assignment. The following come from several different large school districts in Indiana, Florida, Louisiana and Texas.
Standard 1.3 The educator shall not submit fraudulent requests for reimbursement, expenses, or pay. One school district did not require it’s employees to submit receipts when requesting reimbursement for travel - hotels, fuel, food, etc. As a result, many employees were inflating the cost of their meals and gas expenses. One employee actually submitted a request for a hotel room that they never stayed in. All employees in that district are now required to submit a receipt when requesting reimbursement and there is a cap on all meal reimbursements.
Standard 1.5 The educator shall neither accept nor offer gratuities, gifts, or favors that impair professional judgment or to obtain special advantage. In one of the districts, a prominent community member and his wife owned several restaurants. The wife was an employee of the school district. The couple would provide the Superintendent with free meals any time he visited one of their restaurants. They would also deliver food to the Superintendent for free while he was at work. It appeared that the wife was treated differently by the Superintendent.
Standard 1.6 The educator shall not falsify records, or direct or coerce others to do so. One Superintendent was dating a single parent in the district. He brought the woman’s children to school one day and they were late enough to be counted absent. He asked the attendance clerk to mark the children present for the day, which affected the district’s funding for that day. His rationale was that the children were with him and they talked about school things while they were driving down the road, so that counted for them being at school.
Standard 2.2 The educator shall not harm others by knowingly making false statements about a colleague or the school system. A principal in one district was unhappy with members of the School Board because he felt they were not supporting him. The principal proceeded to complain very vocally about the Board Members in an administrative staff meeting and discussed the drinking habits of one of the board members.
Standard 2.6 The educator shall not use coercive means or promise of special treatment in order to influence professional decisions or colleagues. A Superintendent (#1) was pretty close friends with the Superintendent (#2) of a neighboring school district. The Superintendent in district #1 could not hire a potential employee because her father served on the School Board and he was a big supporter of that Superintendent. The father was planning on stepping down so his daughter could work for the district. The other Superintendent (#2) had a teacher in his district that he knew was interviewing for a job district #1. Superintendent #2 really needed her to leave because of the problems she was causing on the campus she worked on. The two Superintendents made a deal to hire the teachers. Superintendent #1 convinced the campus principal to hire the teacher causing problems and Superintendent #2 convinced the campus principal to hire the board member’s daughter.
The consequences of the above actions is that eventually people talk and most of the time everyone finds out about the unethical behavior. It ruins your credibility with all stakeholders in the district. The unethical decisions made can also ruin a career that took years and a significant amount of time and money (to pay for college) to establish.
The unethical behavior regarding fraudulent reimbursements could have been prevented by requiring receipts for all reimbursements. This measure would have prevented everyone from submitting inflated and completely false requests. This standard and preventive action correspond to the Superintendent Competency that states, “The Superintendent knows how to model and promote the highest standard of conduct, ethical principles, and integrity in decision making, actions and behaviors.”
The unethical behavior regarding the falsifying of attendance records could be prevented by having the children’s parent bring them to school or by not making the phone call to a secretary to make the attendance changes. This corresponds to the Superintendent Competency that states, “The Superintendent knows how to model and promote the highest standard of conduct, ethical principles, and integrity in decision making, actions, and behaviors.” It also corresponds to, “The Superintendent knows how to apply laws, policies, and procedures in a fair and reasonable manner.”
The unethical behavior regarding the principal who bad-mouthed the board members should be addressed by the district Superintendent. The Superintendent should meet with the principal and discuss his unethical behavior. This corresponds to the Superintendent Competency which states, “The Superintendent knows how to interact with district staff, students, school board, and community in a professional and ethical manner.”
No comments:
Post a Comment