June 16, 2008

Ms. Hydra B. Mendoza
Board of Education
San Francisco Unified School District
555 Franklin Street
San Francisco, CA 94102

Re: The Continuous Harassment of Jonathan *****
  
Dear Ms. Mendoza, 

I am writing to you in regards to my brother, ******** *****, who is currently a sophomore at Lowell High School. He has been and continues to be the subject of harassment by Lowell teachers and administrators.  

Beginning October of 2007, due to back to back illnesses, ******** accrued a number of absences and began to fall behind in his school work. Our family was not notified in any way of his then unexcused absences and missed assignments by the Lowell Administration.  

According to the district handbook, and the Department of Education, the school is required by law to notify the parents immediately should a student miss just one class. When we mentioned this to the school’s principal, Andrew Ishibashi, he claimed it was not the administration’s responsibility to inform parents about a student’s truancy.  

In any case, we began to meet with all of ********’s teachers in part to introduce ourselves, and to get ******** back on track after he recovered from his illnesses.  

All of ********’s teachers were ecstatic to meet such a proactive family, and were more than happy to allow ******** to make up his missed work. In fact, many of them even took extra time to make sure he was properly caught up. Unfortunately there were two instructors who were not as accommodating: Ms. Jank, ********’s Physical Education teacher, and Ms. Nahle Pang, ********’s Chinese 3 teacher.  

Ms. Jank was on leave most of the semester due to an injury, and the substitute was Carolyn Sanders.  

Ms. Pang continued to ignore our telephone requests to meet. As it turned out, she had been gone for six weeks out of the semester, and hired a substitute that spoke no Chinese to teach the class. The substitute showed videos of Buffy the Vampire Slayer episodes in French during class time. Other times, the students would be allowed free time and play cards.  

Fortunately, we were finally able to meet Ms. Pang on December 14, 2007 as we waited for ******** to get off from school. She met with us for ten minutes or so, claimed that it was our family’s fault that ******** was performing poorly in her class, and that there was nothing she would do. When we asked what ******** was missing, she said 24 homework assignments. It just so happened that we had those assignments in our possession. She reluctantly accepted them and abruptly excused herself.  

Then on January 3, 2008, Ms. Pang asked ******** to stay after school and sit in the corner while she typed on her computer. She then printed out a document and told him to sign it before he could leave. This immediately raised red flags when ******** told us about the incident. How can an authority figure and teacher trap an underage child after school, and force him to sign any document? 

We reported this to the principal and requested a copy of this document from Ms. Pang the very next day, by facsimile and U.S. Mail. We even met with the principal in person where he promised to provide the document but never did. In subsequent meetings, he claimed that he had read the document, and that “there was nothing that raises a red flag in it.” We continued to request a copy, but have not received anything.  

The harassment began to intensify after we spoke with the principal and began to question Ms. Pang’s grading and teaching methods. Since she did not have the required course syllabus or any grading rubrics, we were wondering how she arrives at each student’s grade. On January 15, 2008 Ms. Pang announced to the class that someone had “accidentally stolen” the video cassette tape containing ********’s oral presentation. Since this was a big part of a student’s final grade, we did not know how Ms. Pang would grade ********. This sort of mental harassment continued till the end of the semester, with Ms. Pang always implying anything bad that happened to being ********’s fault. This became so blatant, that the whole class began to wonder what ******** had done.  

Then for the Final Examination on January 24, 2008, Ms. Pang singled out ******** and made him take the final test in her boyfriend, Dr. Yuan’s classroom. Unfortunately, he was still in the middle of instruction for the first hour that ******** was trying to concentrate on his exam. To top it all off, Dr. Yuan refused to allow ******** to have any tissue to wipe his runny nose because he was, “not in my class.” 

After the test, ******** informed us that the exam contained subject matter not found in any of the Chinese 3 textbooks or any supplemental material that was passed out in class.  
Having had enough of this continued harassment, we again complained to the principal, the Safe School program, and other Lowell Administration to no avail. We then petitioned to challenge Ms. Pang’s grade through the World Languages Department Head and the Vice Principal Mary Streshley. We received permission from them both to allow ******** to take a departmental final administered by a neutral third party, and whatever ******** received would be his grade. All that was required was the principal’s permission. He has yet to give it to this day, even with continued meetings, letters and facsimiles asking for an explanation.  

During the course of our investigation into all these harassment issues, we were shocked to find that ********’s attendance numbers were grossly inconsistent. The numbers on his report card did not match the teacher’s attendance book, or even the computer records, which Mr. Ishibashi pulled up in front of us. To this, the principal replied, “There’s something wrong with our computer system,” but did nothing to correct them. 

After this, on March 7, 2008, we received an email from Mr. Ishibashi that stated, “Please contact Mr. Maggi at High School Operations. I will not communicate with you any longer without legal representation.” We were shocked to receive such a statement. We did not understand why the school principal would or could delegate his duties to someone at the Unified School District.  

On this same day, we received a hand written letter from Ms. Carolyn Sanders, ********’s substitute teacher in Physical Education regarding the D that was given to ********. In the letter, she claimed that ******** had a total of 8 absences, which she personally marked, and that she had personally spoken to ******** regarding his absences. ******** has not been absent nor have any recollection of speaking to Ms. Sanders. He also states that any of his classmates can attest to his presence in class. When we informed Mr. Ishibashi of this, he replied that he would not take the word of students. “Because at Washington [High School], students always lie for one another.” 

On May 28, 2008, we were finally able to meet with Ms. Jank, ********’s Physical Education teacher, since she had just returned from her leave of absence. We asked why ******** was marked absent 8 times in her class and why he received a D. She stated that his D was from his 8 absences. We then asked for the class syllabus, which she did not provide. We once again brought up the fact that ********’s classmates can attest to his presence in class. To this, Ms. Jank added that the other reason for ********’s D is that he did not take the Golf Test. When we asked what was on the Golf Test, she stood up and told us to direct all questions to the principal. Then to our astonishment, three security guards were summoned to escort us off the school campus!   

At this point and time, we received ********’s report card from his 2nd reporting period. He had received two A’s, three B’s, but two F’s! This came as a shock to all of us including ********.  

On May 29, 2008 we met with Ms. Da Rosa, ********’s AP World History teacher and one of the teachers who gave him an F. She claimed that ******** had 24 missing assignments, and that was the reason for his grade. We claimed that ******** had turned them all in. She then stated that she didn’t think ******** would be able to produce all the missing work by the next day, because the stack would be over 1-2 inches thick, gesturing with her finger and thumb. Fortunately, we have been very careful since the Ms. Pang incident, and had ******** make photocopies of everything he turns in to his teachers. We brought a copy of all of ********’s work to Ms. Susan Wong the following day as proof.  

To make matters worse, when we met with Ms. Rotter, ********’s Chemistry teacher who gave him the other F, she gave us the exact same story! Immediately, we realized something was seriously wrong. This chain of events was too similar and strange to be merely coincidental. We requested a conference with the SFUSD at once. 

On June 3, 2008 at around 3:15pm, we began our meeting regarding the student harassment issues against the Lowell administration, in the old Faculty room in the Art & music wing of the school.  

The following people were present:

Ms. Susan Wong, the Equity Coordinator from SFUSD,
Mr. Hoover Liddell, also a SFUSD employee,
Andy Ishibashi, Lowell High School’s current principal,
Tony, a member of the teacher’s union,
Ms. Rotter, ********’s current Chemistry teacher,
Ms. Jank, ********’s previous Gym teacher,
Nahle Pang, ********’s previous Chinese 3 teacher,
Ms. Yang, ********’s Grandmother,
David & Nancy *****, ********’s parents,
Alex *****, ********’s brother, Class of ‘99
Christine Ng, Class of ’01
******** *****, Class of ‘10 

The goal of the meeting, according to Mr. Liddell, was to FACT FIND.  

We began discussing Ms. Jank’s claim of ********’s absences first. Ms. Jank claimed that during the 4 days that ******** was absent, he missed the Golf Test. Ms. Susan Wong began questioning ******** regarding the contents of the test, the location, time, and surroundings, all of which ******** was able to answer. I am assuming Susan Wong had questioned Ms. Jank regarding this, and knew the answers before asking ********.
 
Another fact that was brought up during the discussion was that Ms. Jank had given three other students the opportunity to retake the test because they had been absent. She addressed this to the entire class but called out their individual names. It was interesting that since ******** had allegedly missed the Golf Test, his name was not called out.
 
During the discussion, Mr. Ishibashi again began to read the letter written by Ms. Carolyn Sanders, Ms. Jank’s substitute, in which Ms. Sanders claimed that ******** had been absent, and that she approached him regarding his absences. From Ms. Jank’s claim today, the absences in question occurred when Ms. Jank had returned to school. When we pointed this out everyone, Ms. Jank muttered, “Semantics…”  

Unfortunately, this did not satisfy Ms. Jank, Mr. Liddell, or Mr. Ishibashi. They persisted that Ms. Jank’s word was the end-all in this situation, and there was no way that she could have made a mistake. Mr. Ishibashi continued to refuse to take the testimony of any of ********’s classmates.  

We came away with an unclean feeling. There are too many inconsistencies with Ms. Jank’s story. She could not decide on a proper timeline on who did what in regards to ********’s attendance, between her and her substitute. We wonder why the substitute felt the need to write a letter addressing this. Ms. Jank claims she is not involved. But then who told the substitute to write the letter and for what purpose? To top it all off, if ******** was truly absent for all the days Ms. Jank claimed, WHY DIDN’T anyone notify the parents, again?!?  

And then there is Mr. Ishibashi, refusing to hear, entertain, or investigate anything to the contrary of what Ms. Jank says, no matter how unclear, inconsistent, or wrong it was. His position is to provide children a safe and proper environment to learn. Not to score brownie points with the teachers. When asked why he specifically instructed Ms. Mary Streshley not to provide us with the school’s handbook, as instructed by Ms. Susan Wong, he refused to answer.  

Moving along, we next spoke to Ms. Rotter, who strangely enough, followed the exact same path as Ms. Pang and Ms. Da Rosa, claiming that ******** did not turn in any of his homework. When we informed Ms. Rotter last Friday, that we have copies of ********’s homework, in anticipation for a tactic such as this, she physically grabbed ******** in class and told him, “I don’t have them!” During today’s meeting, she informed us that she would accept any and all of ********’s homework.  

Ms. Rotter was visibly distraught during the meeting and just wanted to leave.  

We then spoke to Ms. Pang. She began reading the documents or “contracts” as she called them signed by ******** and his classmates (Xxxxxxx Xxx) to us. In the letter, ******** claimed himself to be a delinquent, and missing several assignments. In our opinion, ********’s writing abilities was not the same as that “contract.” When ******** claimed that she had forced him to sign it, she began reading another “contract” signed by Xxxxxxx Xxx in which he praised her as being a great teacher. Again, the language of the letter was well beyond that of a typical 10th grader. ******** claimed that Xxxxxxx Xxx can and will attest to being forced into signing that “contract.” However, no one would listen to him.  

Ms. Pang then continued to read from her journal where she claimed to have met with my parents for hours at a time. To this, we replied that she was blatantly lying. At this point, ******** could not hold his anger back anymore and asked Ms. Pang, and Mr. Ishibashi, “Why are you doing this to me?” “Why do you keep lying?” “What have I ever done to you?” “Why can’t you just leave me alone?” This stunned the entire room.  

To hear a child, much less ********, ask these questions with such emotion truly broke our hearts. And for just a moment, everyone in that room felt it. Unfortunately, the need to cover up mistakes, for personal preservation, and to come up with a solution that will allow all parties to part ways civilly, immediately covered what moral obligations that briefly surfaced.  

The meeting ended inconclusively, as the allotted time set aside for this issue had run.  
On June 9, 2008 we were once again at school meeting with Mr. Jeff David (********’s Counselor) and Ms. Holly Giles (Assistant Principal). Apparently, someone had changed ********’s course schedule for the following semester. Mr. David claimed to have met with ******** regarding his classes and brought out a form written by Mr. David of ********’s proposed classes. We also brought out a copy of ********’s course schedule, in ********’s writing, but ours was signed. We got the sense that someone unfairly altered ********’s next semester’s class schedules.   

Note: In addition, we learned the principal had instructed Mr. David that whenever we are on the Lowell campus, we need to be accompanied by an administrator. That was why Ms. Holly Giles was in our meeting.  

Now it brings me to the alarming incident that occurred on June 11, 2008. It was Lowell’s graduation day and many administrators were not on campus. Out of the blue, a concerned teacher approached ******** and asked if he was walking home that day. When ******** replied with a yes, this teacher said, “If you are walking home today, you should walk straight home immediately after school. There are strangers from Burton on the campus.” ******** did not want to have a confrontation, as that would be grounds for expulsion. He was frightened, and called us to pick him up. 

What did the teacher know? 

Later that same evening, ********’s classmate Cynthia warned him over America Online Instant Messenger that “ur gunna be living a life of hell … I heard this during 4-5 … ******** is going to be jumped by dean during the self-scheduling …im telling u how to watch ur back …”  

This has gotten too far, to threaten the safety and life of ********. This incident is currently under investigation by Dean Cordoba. We have yet to get to the bottom of this.   
********’s10th grade are destroyed by the above mentioned instances. We as parents and guardians do not believe that these unfortunate events are coincidences. We also do not believe these are acts of solely students, but that there are adults behind this. These attempts at making ********’s life miserable have now escalated to a safety issue.  
Your prompt attention on this matter is appreciated.  
 
 Very Truly Yours, 
 
 Alex