Posted by proudparent (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 1:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This post is a follow-up to my previous post dated April 2, 2009. Again, I offer this dialog with the caveat that I accept readers' right to disagree with my comments/questions.

Within in my own circle of acquaintances, friends, and family the subject of the Mr. Harris' conviction raised the following considerations:

1. As of Friday, Mr. Harris was convicted on four felony counts. Now what happens right here in our own backyard.?

2. What punishment fits the crime? Should he receive the lesser (e.g 1 year per charge or the maximum of 5 years per charge? Which scenario equates to "punishment that fits the crime?

3. Is Mr. Harris the only "guilty" party in this sordid mess? Are there others who failed to ensure the safety and welfare of children entrusted in Mr. Harris' care throughout his career? As mentioned in response to my April 2, 2009 post, it appears that the school system of Southampton County and its leadership (e.g. administrations, the superintendent, school board, etc.) failed to conduct due diligence in terminating Mr. Harris after his "alleged" sexual relationship with a teacher (and report of being caught having sex at school).

4. Did Mr. Harris' actions at SMS equate to "contributing to the delinquency of a minor" or "child endangerment", or similar statue? Do these actions constitute a criminal act? Why was Mr. Harris allowed to remain on staff at SMS? Who gave him professional references to move on to the correctional facility?

5. Is it time to question the leadership of our school systems and take a hard look at whether or not individuals are more concerned with making it appear as if all is well than dealing with issues head on? How would these individuals have responded if their child was the one that walked in on Mr. Harris and the teacher having sex (allegedly)?

6. What is the track record of Southampton schools in dealing with similar situations? Are folks "quietly removed", then only to resurface at the central office or another system? Is Southampton County aware of employees other than Mr. Harris that have engaged in similar behaviors, yet they are still employed?

7. As someone mentioned in follow-up to my April 2, 2009 post, when Mr. Harris was "quietly removed" from his duties, the school system failed to notify parents (in writing) that he no longer held the duties of principal. Does the school system afford the kind of transparency that is the cornerstone of a democratic society?

8. Is the Southampton County school system hostile in its communications with parents, families, and those in the media? Increasingly, it appears that whenever the public asks questions that the school system does not want to respond to, the superintendent and other administrators basically imply (in their comments) that the school system is not accountable to anyone.

Posted by proudparent (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 1:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is a follow-up to my previous post (too long!).

For centuries, the issue of what constitutes attributes of a good leadership has been debated. In terms of Southampton County school's decision-making efforts (in the collective sense, including the Harris incident and others), how would we rate them on a scale of 1-10 in terms of:

1. Visionary

The ability to define, communicate and inspire a practical, relevant and easily digestible vision (update as the times change).

2. Communicative

Succinct, consistent and optimistic communication to all levels within a company, regardless of the nature of the messages and encourages constructive feedback and disagreement.

3. Delivers on promises

Consistently "walks the talk" and to delivers on commitments.

4. Responsible

Effective leaders take responsibility for decisions they have made or participated in, regardless of whether the outcomes are successful.

5. Humble

Is free of arrogance and brashness and embraces modesty, humility and reserve.

6. Trustworthy

Selects the people to work for them because they are intelligent, perceptive and empowered. In turn, followers oftentimes follow without having to know the entire story or picture.

7. Capable

Leaders continually demonstrate competence, impressive aptitude, shrewd thinking, resourcefulness and apparently limitless capacity. They delegate with conviction. Leaders are passionate about teaching and mentoring, not training, their followers. And in each successful mentoring relationship there is an expectation for mutual learning - the apprentice from the leader and visa versa.

8. Decisive

Making timely decisions, which are intelligent and unwavering, means that in some instances, the outcome is failure. T

9. Authentic

Principled by both high ethics and unwavering integrity, leaders regularly demonstrate a high correlation between their core behaviors, beliefs and principles and those that they expect to be present in their followers. Consequently, leadership embodies the persona of the leader, and it manifests regularly, consistently and unwaveringly, without hidden agendas or questionable intent.

10. Genuine and respectful

Leaders naturally garnish respect primarily for who they are, rather than for what they know.

Note: The aforementioned criteria for leadership was extracted from the work of Kevin Grauman (co-founder and CEO of Outsource Group in Walnut Creek). Contact him at kevin.grauman@outsourcegroup.net.

In closing, I thank you all for you open dialog regarding this issue. It would be very easy to go about business as usual and simply wait until the dust settles. However you view the Harris case and its implications is a very personal matter. Moving forward, let us all agree to put children first and ensure they have the most honest and capable people are running our schools.

Posted by maxdoubt (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 2:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Proudparent

You have many valid questions.

If you have trouble getting answers from the superintendent and administrators you might try talking to a member of the school board.

Members of the board are usually open to inquiries.

Posted by proudparent (anonymous) on April 7, 2009 at 10:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

response to maxdoubt: Thanks for the suggestion. But my confidence in the system is really shaken at this point. Would it be prudent to remain optimistic that the school board did not play a role in keeping Mr. Harris employed after he was (allegedly) conducting an inappropriate sexual relationship with a teacher??

1. Based on the posts I have read, with respect to Dr. Tim Kelly taking over Mr. Harris' duties for the remainder of the 2005 school-year, wouldn't it stand to reason that everyone up the food chaining (including the Superintendent and the school board) was "in the loop". Did the County have an obligation to inform parents and/or the community in writing that Mr. Harris was no longer serving as principal at SMS? School boards employ teachers, and therefore have rights of employment termination?

2. In the process of following the Harris case, should be taking a closer look at the manner in which Southampton County handles (alleged) sexual harassment cases. Is it possible that the handling of these matters extends to even bigger problem(s) in that school district?

3. Should the community be looking at possible cases of sexual harassment or misconduct that have been filed against Southampton County school officials (let's say with the EEOC) within the past 3-5 years? These files are considered "public information." What would these files reveal? Should we all still be concerned that Southampton County still employs individuals that (allegedly) engage in sexual misconduct or have been investigated (internally or otherwise) and found guilty of such conduct?

3. Have there been at least one or more cases where Southampton County became aware of sexual misconduct whereas the offending party was terminated? If so, why was the Harris case (allegedly) handled differently?

4. I spoke to a friend who lives in another part of Virginia who recounted the case of a deputy sheriff who forged an sexual relationship with an inmate (a female, minor) - the deputy was charged and convicted of felonies and the inmate sued the county/state and won.

In the Harris case, could it be possible that a (civil) lawsuit is on the horizons that could potentially involve Southampton County and /or Chesterfield (where Mr. Harris was convicted)? If in fact Southampton County failed to meet certain reporting requirements/employment termination involving Harris' employment, could they have put the school district at risk?

5. Due to the school system being one of the biggest employers in the region, would it stand to reason that people fear retaliation if they were to expound on what [et 's say] may amount to "a history of sweeping things under the rug."

6. In light of the Harris case and recent events, at the state level, how is the Dept. of Education viewing leadership in Southampton County Schools?

7. What happens now? Do we, as someone suggested "pray for another Superintendent"?

Posted by proudparent (anonymous) on April 7, 2009 at 2:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I discovered this post (re: child hit by school bus) on a previous Tidewater News discussion board as it relates to the Harris case and the county’s history of handling sexual misconduct:
Posted by BlastFromThePast (anonymous) on January 16, 2009 at 8:35 p.m. (Suggest removal):

"Why I left Hunterdale/Riverdale: is becuase I everything I am reading in these forums. As most of us are aware, the Courtland/Franklin area has a negative and shady history. There is still a lot of racial tensions internal and external to the school system. I say this due to comments I heard from a couple the day after the incident, "If the bus driver was black she would already been found guilty and thrown in jail." Very pathetic comment, huh? I hope the comment was made out of hurt and not really their true feelings. What I am going to say next will make some angry but I think it needs to be said. In the past there was an incident at another Southampton school where the principal was caught having an intimate encounter with a teacher during and on school grounds. The teacher's employment was terminated and the principal was transfered and promoted to a position within our current school board. Since the transfer there have been other sexual harrassment complaints against this board member. Instead of firing, conducting an investigation, or being arrested, the head of the School Board keeps him under his protection. Oh, guess what? The sexual predator is not white and has now moved into an office at Riverdale. Sure hope it is a temporary move. He is not welcomed by a few of the black/white teachers. So, race is not a factor in this tragic accident. The problems within the system begins with the leadership staff. There is none and what little there may be is poorly delivered. Administration had better wake up and begin making changes based on the advice and recommendations from their teachers. They are intelligent people who are confronted and challenged with real-world issues of the students and their families. I am glad my jurisdiction is not having the problems. Probably because it is led by women."

Is it possible that the Harris case is only the tip of the iceberg? Does Southampton County still employ individuals that have been engaged in sexual misconduct (alleged?)? Do we have 'sexual predators' in Southampton County schools that our leaders/school board are aware of? What do you all think?

Posted by ChrisG (anonymous) on April 7, 2009 at 3:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Who knows, the Boykins Town Council might consider him for a job one day... http://www.tidewaternews.com/news/2008/s...

Posted by ohiored (anonymous) on April 8, 2009 at 10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I REALLY WANT TO KNOW WHO THIS GUY PROUDPARENT IS TALKING ABOUT THAT IS AT RIVERDALE, SO I CAN GET MY CHILD AWAY FROM THIS GUY.

Posted by GBKTOPS (anonymous) on April 9, 2009 at 9:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

My children are currently enrolled in Southampton County Public Schools. One is at SHS, and one is at SMS. It is a real shame that Mr. Harris basically brought all of this on himself as the alligations appear to be true per the jury. You would think that a man in his position would have known better.....NOT! I am not going to bash him because I could go into detail about an incident that happened with my oldest son when he was in 8th grade at SMS, but I don't want to bore readers this evening. The bottom line is that the teachers should be there to teach and the administrators should be there to do whatever it is they do. I have seen it time and time again, what goes for one, does not necessarily go for all. Gee, I am glad it is one down and one to go for me with the school system.

Posted by sand2sun (anonymous) on April 9, 2009 at 11:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

When he is sentenced for this crime, is he also banned from working in schools again, or is that up to the judge?

Posted by proudparent (anonymous) on April 10, 2009 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Response to GBKTOPS: I feel your pain here. You made a really great analysis: “…The bottom line is that the teachers should be there to teach and the administrators should be there to do whatever it is they do. I have seen it time and time again, what goes for one, does not necessarily go for all.”

Let’s say [hypothetically speaking], the CEO of a company signs a policy forbidding “fraternization amongst employees”, yet he/she engages in an illicit affair with his/her secretary. At some point, the CEO’s spouse finds out and there is a big “blowup” that results in the affair becoming “public knowledge”. Can you imagine the problem this CEO would have in terminating an employee for similar behaviors? Would it stand to reason that any high level official engaging in such conduct would find himself/herself in a “pickle” about how to handle such situations involving employees after he/she has put into place policies forbidding such relationships?

My grandmother use to say “the apple don’t fall far from the tree” – moral of the story being [let’s say] if Southampton County schools [or any other school district] has encountered issues related to sexual misconduct, could it be that the alleged [mis]handling of such issues points to even bigger issue(s)? Would it stand to reason that a school district would continue to employee those who engage in sexual misconduct if the policy makers are not adhering to and/or violating/failing to enforce the policies they sign? As my grandmother used to say could this be a case of [here in Southampton County schools and other school districts] that “the apple is rotten at the core”?

Posted by awysuiet456 (anonymous) on April 19, 2009 at 7:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Dr.Kelly did not take over for Mr. Harris the last year that Mr. Harris worked. Mr. Harris worked until the end of the year and chose not to come back. Yes, a student did catch him with the music teacher. It is a sad situation and hopefully, God will be with Mr. Harris, now.

Posted by shadow03 (anonymous) on April 20, 2009 at 6:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@awysuiet456
I do not know where you are getting your information from, but you are incorrect. Dr. Kelly did step in and take over for Mr. Harris, and Mr. Harris did not work until the end of the school year and "choose not to come back." I know this because I had children attending SMS at the time of this incident.

Posted by awysuiet456 (anonymous) on April 24, 2009 at 8:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Shadow03---you are wrong. Sorry, you are a parent and don't know all the info. Dr. Kelly was in and out, but Mr. Harris was there until the end of the year. He was not fired. He chose not to come back. He had already received his contract because they come out in April. The incident with the teacher (he actually being caught) did not happen until the end of May. True, he was "encouraged" to resign.

Posted by shadow03 (anonymous) on April 24, 2009 at 7:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@awysuiet456
When this incident happened with the teacher, Mr. Harris left. I do not know if he was fired or strongly encouraged to resign; however, he ceased working at the school after this incident with the teacher occurred. I am not just a parent. I know that he left because I have "inside" information from someone working within the school district that he left and Dr. Kelly did take over for him. Mr. Harris did not work at the school until the end of the school year. He may have still been under contract; however, he did not work at the school after this incident occurred and he was either asked to leave, strongly encouraged to leave, or chose to leave.