A judge’s ruling earlier this month that ordered Shining Rock Classical Academy — a charter school in Haywood County — to turn over public records requested by a mother and this newspaper is a win for taxpayers across this state who fork over their hard-earned cash to fund both regular public schools and charters.
Despite being less regulated than traditional public schools, charter schools still must comply with laws regarding public records.
The case was also a win for Rebecca Fitzgibbon, the mother who filed and suit and has claimed for years that Head of School Josh Morgan bullies and even ridicules students, an accusation backed up by former teachers and employees who testified under oath at the trial.
Finally, the ruling and court testimony raise some important questions about school discipline. Many of Fitzgibbon’s public records requests surrounded school policies regarding discipline and subsequent follow-up when parents weren’t satisfied with the outcome. And speaking of discipline, the school resource officer at Shining Rock admittedly used a “come along” hold on an 11-year-old student who was described as unruly, breaking the child’s wrist. Is this what we want from SROs in our schools, whose costs are routinely justified to local elected officials as a deterrent to school violence and mass shootings?
This whole court case stems from Fitzgibbon’s efforts to make sure the school had policies to follow when it came to disciplining students. As a former member of the school’s board, she first tried to work within the system after an incident involving her son. Stymied by Morgan and others on the board who refused to recognize their own shortcomings, she eventually had to seek relief through the judicial system.
Charter schools enjoy greater autonomy than traditional public schools. They are subject to fewer regulations, particularly in terms of governance and academic accountability. In this case this lack of oversight — no elected school board running things — led to instances where Shining Rock under Morgan’s leadership routinely ignored public records requests or, even worse, tried to charge outlandish fees. Fitzgibbon had raised concerns about her child’s treatment and was met with resistance and even a countersuit for defamation filed against her (the judge threw it out) when she requested access to certain public records that could have clarified the school’s handling of the situation.
The denial of access to public records in this case is a significant problem. Public records laws exist to ensure that institutions funded by taxpayer money are held accountable to the public. When charter schools withhold these records, they effectively shield themselves from scrutiny, preventing parents and community members from holding them accountable for their actions. This lack of transparency undermines public trust, especially when it comes to handling sensitive issues like student discipline or allegations of misconduct.
Moreover, the public’s right to access these records is vital for maintaining a check on the power of charter schools. When records are withheld from the press, it fosters an environment where mismanagement or unethical behavior can thrive without the risk of exposure. The legal victory in the defamation part of this case highlights the need for charter schools to respect the principle of transparency, ensuring that parents and the public can access relevant information when concerns arise.
This case also raised questions about the role of school resource officers in administering discipline. Originally, SROs were introduced to schools to provide a safe and secure environment, acting as law enforcement officers on campus. However, in many cases, not just at Shining Rock, roles have expanded to include disciplinary responsibilities. This blurs the lines — are SROs primary function ensuring safety or are they there to get involved in non-criminal behavioral issues?
In the case of Fitzgibbon, an SRO was involved in disciplining her child for a behavioral issue. This raises important concerns about the appropriateness of SROs handling situations that are not criminal in nature. SROs are law enforcement officers, and their presence and authority can create a power imbalance in situations that may be better handled by educators or counselors.
This case serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of transparency and accountability in charter schools, as well as the potential dangers of over-relying on SROs for school discipline. Charter schools must respect the public’s right to access records, ensuring that they operate with the same transparency as traditional public schools. Additionally, the role of SROs in disciplining students should be carefully considered, with a focus on maintaining the separation between law enforcement duties and educational responsibilities. Addressing these issues is crucial to ensuring that all students, regardless of the type of school they attend, are treated fairly and with respect.
(Scott McLeod is the editor and publisher of The Smoky Mountain News. info@smokymountainnews.com.)