Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education Allegations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents at Richland County CUSD 1 allege special-education teacher violated student privacy, bullied pupils
Summary
At the March board meeting of Richland County CUSD 1, three parents and an advocate accused a special-education teacher of violating student privacy, making disparaging remarks about students’ mobility, and intimidating children; the board took no formal action during the meeting.
Three parents and an education advocate used the public-comment portion of the Richland County Community School District 1 board meeting to accuse a named classroom teacher of privacy violations and mistreatment of students with special needs.
Sandra Collins, who identified herself as the mother of Ronald Collins, told the board she had “called, talked to superintendent with him about this teacher” and said the teacher had “violated 2 laws of Ronald’s privacy.” Collins said she wanted the teacher removed: “I want this teacher gone. He should not be a teacher.”
Donna Rood, who said she attends classes with Ronald, told the board she had been in the classroom when the teacher allegedly told other adults that Ronald could walk and that “the reason why he’s not walking is due to his mother enabling him.” Rood said she reported the incident to the school nurse, who told her it should be reported: “So that’s what I did.”
Yvette Paddock, who described herself as the parent of two special-education students and a long-time advocate, said one of her children had previously been moved out of the teacher’s class because the child’s “mental health was breaking down because of this teacher.” She also criticized rules the teacher sent home and described classroom practices she called harsh, including denying bathroom passes: “He gives 0 bathroom passes.”
Speakers described students they said were frightened of the teacher and called for administrative action. None of the public comments in the meeting record a formal board response or a board vote to initiate personnel action; speakers said they had contacted school administration and other officials prior to the meeting. The transcript records no disciplinary motion, hearing, or other formal board action on the teacher during open session.
The allegations made at the podium referenced student privacy and special-education law but did not cite specific statutes or written findings in the board record. Parents said they had previously reported concerns to school staff and the superintendent.
Superintendent Jason Fox and district staff did not announce any personnel action on the record during the meeting’s public session. The board later entered executive session for personnel and student-discipline matters; the meeting record shows several confidential personnel and student-discipline motions were considered in executive session and votes were taken in open session afterward on separate items (see Votes at a glance in related article). The transcript does not link those executive-session outcomes to the specific public allegations reported here.
The parents who spoke gave the board documents and asked for the teacher’s removal. Board members did not discuss a specific next step for these allegations during the open-comment presentations recorded in the transcript. The parents requested further action and signaled they would pursue the matter further if the district did not act.
The board’s public-comment rules limit each speaker to five minutes; speakers used that time to describe their concerns and to ask the board to intervene.
For more information about district procedures for handling complaints about staff or student privacy, the district’s posted policies and the superintendent’s office are the appropriate points of contact.
