In August of 2013 the Miami-Dade Office of the Inspector General (MDOIG) issued its final report on cheating in the industrial arts program at Norland Senior High School. One of the teachers found to have been complicit in the cheating was Brenda J. Muchnick. On November 19th the Miami-Dade School Board punished Muchnick with a 30-day suspension without pay (Agenda Item D55). After the thirty-day suspension Muchnick is expected to return to Norland SHS to continue as a teacher.
The MDOIG report, “[S]ubstantiated the allegation that the teacher proctoring the exams, Emanuel Fleurantin, in the presence of the assisting teacher, Brenda Muchnick, supplied students during the exam with questions and highlighted answers. Mr. Fleurantin and Ms. Muchnick also allowed the students to use the study guides provided to them in class to assist them in passing the certification exam. Allowing the students to cheat violates the Florida Department of Education Code of Ethics; the Miami-Dade Public Schools: Standards, Guidelines and Procedures for Test Administration and Test Security; Florida Statutes and Administrative Rules; as well as the Certiport Center Agreement, Certiport Procter Agreement and Administrative Manual.”
Let’s look at the players in this cheating scandal.
There were three Norland SHS employees who exposed the cheating. On May 11, 2012, Norland SHS librarian Trevor Colestock, and teachers Willie Gant, and Guy Halligan went to the local Auditor General’s office in Doral, Florida and turned over evidence and gave statements about test cheating at Norland’s industrial arts program. Colestock then appeared before two special agents of the Miami-Dade OIG on May 15, 2012. Mr. Gant, and Mr. Halligan were interviewed a few days later by the Miami-Dade OIG, to turn over evidence and give statements. Their efforts resulted in exposing what has become known as “Adobegate“.
Since the release of the MDOIG report the two teachers directly found culpable have been punished – sort of. Fleurantin was suspended without pay pending dismissal proceedings and Muchnick suspended without pay for thirty-days.
The three whistleblowers have also been impacted, perhaps more so than the two teachers who conspired to cheat. Gant was moved to another school, Halligan retired and Colestock has been involuntarily moved to another school. Colestock is currently negotiating with the district to return to his librarian position at Norland SHS, like Muchnick. Colestock has since been targeted by school district employees for exposing the cheating.
Many are questioning if those involved have been treated equally under the law.
How do other states deal with teachers who cheat? The Texas Education Agency (TEA) recently failed to accurately monitor and detect the cheating allegations in El Paso. TEA Commissioner Michael Williams has created an investigative division within the TEA staffed by personnel with investigative and/or prosecutorial backgrounds to investigate future allegations of test cheating. To date neither Education Commissioner Pam Stewart nor the Florida Department of Education have taken an interest in this cheating scandal.
In April 2013, Huffington Post blogger Christopher Emdin in his column “The 5 Causes of Test Cheating Scandals: From Atlanta to Washington D.C.” wrote:
This week, Lawyers for former Atlanta schools superintendent Beverly Hall proclaimed her innocence of charges leveled against her by the Fulton County District Attorney. This proclamation came after details of test cheating scandals in Atlanta, Georgia and accusations of teaching scandals by former schools chancellor of Washington DC, Michelle Rhee in recent weeks.
In the Atlanta case, Beverly Hall and other accused employees are being charged under a statute resembling the RICO Act (Racketeering Influences and Corrupt Organizations), typically used to bring down mobsters, drug dealers, and businesses like Enron. In recent news articles, the actions of the accused educators has been peddled to the public as an elaborate criminal enterprise, replete with a no nonsense criminal mastermind boss, underlings who served as her enforcers, and salacious tales of a quest for national recognition, fame and political power.
Interestingly, the Atlanta case has been presented in isolation from the other cheating scandals that have recently surfaced, including the one in Washington DC. I argue that the same letter of the law be applied to other school districts across the country, but also to the institutions in the United States that either create or support the contexts that create mass cheating.
With the assistance of cheating, Miami Norland’s school grade went from a “C” for the 2010-11 school year to an “A” for the 2011-12 school year. As a result, over $230,000 of combined federal and state incentives were paid out to the teachers at the school. The total federal funds (SIG, RTTT) given out due to a grade influenced by cheating was $100,560; the total state funds per the Florida School Recognition Program was between $130,000- $140,000; the total overall combined federal and state incentive funds were $230,560- $240,560.
In Florida cheating pays and those caught cheating get a slap on the wrist.
RELATED COLUMNS MAY BE FOUND HERE: http://watchdogwire.com/florida/author/trevorcolestock/
