Blogging Central Bucks teacher is fired
Natalie Munroe says the Central Bucks School District is retaliating against her, violating her freedom of speech, for her blog posts that called some students "frightfully dim" and "utterly loathsome."
Blogging Central Bucks teacher is fired
The Central Bucks High School East teacher whose blog drew national attention for calling students "frightfully dim" and "utterly loathsome" was fired Tuesday for "poor performance.”
Natalie Munroe, an 11th grade English teacher for six years, was dismissed by a 7-0 vote of the school board. The board followed the administration's recommendation, based on a year of class observations and evaluations that Munroe's lawyer has called "retaliatory."
“Ms. Munroe was, at best, a satisfactory teacher and was experiencing performance difficulties well before her blog became an issue,” board President Paul Faulkner said, reading a prepared statement.
To keep her job, Munroe filed suit in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia on Friday, claiming the school district violated her constitutional right to free speech “by harassing and retaliating against her.”
The alleged retaliation was for her blog posts labeling some students as "frightfully dim" and "utterly loathsome." In an October 2009 post, she wrote: “My students are out of control. They are rude, disengaged, lazy whiners.”
The posts by “Natalie M” were meant to be anonymous and did not name the school, students or colleagues, but they included her photo.
Her dismissal “has nothing to do with free speech,” Faulkner said, “but rather [the board’s] obligation to have satisfactory teachers in its classrooms.”
Her performance was monitored and observed the same as other teachers, he said.
Munroe’s lawyer, Steven Rovner, said the board’s action was expected.
“They brought her back to set her up to fail,” Rovner said in a telephone interview. “That’s why we filed the lawsuit against the district.
Munroe was suspended for the posts in February 2011, after word of them spread on Facebook and other social networks.
Officials reinstated her last summer, citing her legal right to work, but rejected her request for a transfer to another of the district's two high schools. And, in an unusual move, students were allowed to opt out of her classes, leaving her with abnormally small classes.
Starting in October, administrators conducted “retaliatory, unannounced observations of Munroe’s classes,” according to the suit. They “would subject Munroe’s classroom efforts to ridiculous and overly critical evaluations, routinely concluding that lessons which Munroe had been teaching for years were unsatisfactory.”
After four unsatisfactory classroom evaluations, Munroe was ordered to submit daily lesson plans using a time-consuming template designed by the district, according to the suit.
“The sole purpose of this requirement was to retaliate against Munroe for her protected free speech,” the suit said. “Indeed, other teachers were not required to submit daily lesson plans.”
Throughout the year, the district created a “hostile and harassing work environment” for Munroe, who was in her sixth year at the school and had tenure, according to the suit.
On June 1, she received her third unsatisfactory performance evaluation and was told of the administration’s plans to recommend her termination at tonight’s meeting, according to the suit.
Munroe, who has done limited blogging since last year’s uproar, responded in a post, “In short, yes, I've been set up.”
She wrote, “I worked hard every day this year to prepare my students for whatever lies before them, to meet the challenges that arose daily, and to perform my myriad duties at work with pride and dignity. Though it will surely be implied otherwise, I know the truth, my colleagues know the truth, my students and their parents know the truth. I stand by my work this year, and every year before.”
Also in response, the Central Bucks Education Association filed a grievance with the district to protect Munroe’s contractual rights, union President Keith Sinn said Monday. He declined to say whether Munroe had been singled out with the classroom observations and evaluations and daily lesson plans.
Munroe’s suit asks that she keep her job, plus compensatory and punitive damages. It named the district, Superintendent N. Robert Laws and school Principal Abe Lucabaugh. Laws and , Lucabaugh could not be reached for comment by phone or email.
lets go central bucks east. Keep up the good work. If the teacher and her lawyer stay with this type of behavior by the Pricipal, they ought to be able to collect 2,000,000 and the teacher would then be happy to go away. Keep up the good work you Dim wits— rduexpress- Who didn't see this coming...— Fillygirl250
- She's a good teacher. Send her to Nashimany to do some real teaching.— tonyS
- Another example of how tenure makes it impossible to fire someone, and even enables them to counter sue the school district. This woman publicly insulted her students and then expects to keep her job. That is totally unacceptable. Publicly denouncing your employer and colleagues is a fire-able offense, with the notable exception of "whistle blowing". The lawsuit is especially upsetting to see. In short, in PA and NJ, if you have tenure, it is impossible to fire you unless you have committed a crime or stopped showing up for work.— MattPSU
- You're wrong. She is a union employee and as such, I'm reasonably sure that the collective bargaining agreement under which she is bound, must contain some provision or other that states she can't be fired without just cause. Just cause means that the offense for which she is accused must be serious and that it had adversely affected her job performance. From what little I've read about the matter, I don't believe, at least preliminarily, that her behavior has met that standard. I think she has a case. — jverlin
- Agreed. This is just another reason why teachers need the protection of a strong union.
- Hey Matt, get things straightened out in Happy Valley and then you can rule the rest of the world. The worst part of this is that most American high school students are dullards!— fire fighter
- @MattPSU: Well you got it all wrong. This teacher did NOT publicly post anything. She didn't name her district, school or the students. If not for her photo, nothing could have been proved.
The fact is that she was airing comments the same way you might if you were standing in a group of family or friends and complained to them. That's free speech. It's ill-advised to put anything derogatory about your job on the Internet but it is still free speech. Last time I checked, we live in a free country so there you go.
Lastly, the conduct of the admin at her school is obviously retaliatory. They may not like what she said and it put them in an awkward position with some parents, but it was not something she should be fired over.— nikki1231 - She should be teaching "The Crucible" because this is nothing but a fait accompli with hunt. Her constant scrutiny in the classroom revealed nothing but a professional educator who will summarily executed by the board. How pathetic. Great lesson for kids. NOT.— brio
- Hey Matt, 'nother dimwitted observation on your part - actually tenure did NOT protect her. She's fired right?— maxbernat
Comment removed.- Regretably, I think the same can be said for most anyone in most any field in one degree or another, especially with respect to people in her position.
Although I've never seen her teach and can't speak knowledgeably or directly to her situation, I'd be interested in knowing about her past performance, particularly, the favorability of her evaluations for the past 5 years. If satisfactory, it would indeed appear to be a set up.— jverlin - She is definitely a dope but to say that the district is completely innocent here would be absurd.— Bill E. Penn
- I don't think that dope is quite the right word here. Unprofessional, probably -- but not without good reasons: tired, angry, frustrated about the ostensible lack of administrative support. She expressed an opinion which she is certainly entitled to have done and I most definitely view the district's actions as retaliatory. As to her legal standing, that will be up to the courts to decide. — jverlin
- Of course it was a " set up," but they just did what was required by the books in order to get rid of her. They should be able to fire her on the basis of the post if they chose, but school districts especially, are not run like businesses or corporations. I'll hold my comments about school systems there. As for Miss Munroe and others who are coming of age in this tell-all-on facebook, twitter, blogs, etc. have to learn where to draw the line.— ptahan
