Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Discipline Inclusion Curriculum topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents tell Wissahickon board they face disparate discipline, harmful curriculum images and gaps in restorative-practice implementation
Summary
Multiple public commenters at the Oct. 6 meeting described disciplinary disparities affecting Black and disabled students, cited instances they said conflicted with IDEA/FAPE and the district's policies, and asked for clearer restorative-practice implementation, parent involvement and curriculum review.
Several parents told the Wissahickon School Board on Oct. 6 that they have experienced or observed disciplinary practices and classroom materials that they described as harmful to students of color and to students with disabilities, and they urged the district to strengthen restorative practices, transparency and curriculum balance.
"This punitive response was not consistent with IDEA or with FAPE or with the district's own policies," parent Sayeda Stalos said of a suspension she described involving her 12-year-old child, who has an individualized education program. Stalos said written notice arrived days after an assistant principal suspended the child following a cafeteria incident and that the administrative response left the child feeling "unsafe, unsupported, and ostracized."
Public commenters also raised concerns about classroom imagery in a social-studies lesson that Stalos said displayed an image of an enslaved Black person with torn flesh and sent a "clear message of violence, submission, and fear" to students of color. Stalos urged that if the image remains displayed it be balanced with material showing resistance or liberation so children of color also see strength and defiance.
Another commenter, Sabrina (last name not specified in transcript), said restorative-justice work must be "more holistic" and include parents; she called teacher training alone insufficient and asked what steps the district will take to reduce office-discipline referrals and to address perceived bias in referrals for Black boys.
Separately, Karmina Taylor raised questions about access to district records and described repeated difficulty getting responses to right-to-know requests; at the meeting board officials clarified that the middle-school mural she asked about was a student project and not a donation requiring board approval, and that use of the district logo requires staff approval (Tim Bricker was identified as the staff contact for logo approvals). Board members noted district policy requires board approval for donations above a stated threshold (board discussion referenced an over-$500 threshold for formal donation approval).
Superintendent Dr. DeJuan described a district review of community engagement and said the district's 90-day entry report will be shared with the community; board members acknowledged the public comments and indicated staff would follow up on disciplinary and curriculum concerns.
Several commenters said they have pursued external remedies; one speaker said a complaint had been filed with the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission. The board did not vote on any procedural changes at the Oct. 6 meeting; members asked staff to follow up on the complaints and to circulate information about processes and timelines.
