In response to a recent Observer article, “District 220’s Lack of Transparency,” we received the following from a reader regarding Superintendent Winkelman’s and the D220 Board’s response to his concerns over the D220 Educator’s social media post:
(Click on image to enlarge)
In fact, there are D220 policies that require its educators to:
“adhere to the high standards for Professional and Appropriate Conduct… at all times, regardless of the ever-changing Social Media and Personal Technology platforms available. This includes employees posting images or private information about themselves or others in a manner readily accessible to students and other employees that is inappropriate…” 5:125.
We think that’s a reasonable policy. D220 policies further hold that:
“The District will not tolerate harassing, intimidating conduct… that creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive educational environment. Examples of prohibited conduct include… threatening or causing physical harm…” 5:120.
What’s more intimidating to a parent or student that identifies as a Trump supporter to learn that one of the District’s educators is comfortable enough to publicly post her vitriol of the U.S. President, threatening the wish of physical harm to him? Seems to us that the Board policies referenced by Winkelman clearly allow for this D220 educator to be reprimanded, suspended or even terminated.
Why aren’t we, the taxpayers, parents and students of D220 entitled to know the outcome of the Board’s discussions on this matter, assuming there were any?
Related: “District 220’s Lack of Transparency”
Leave a Reply