A teacher who said his contract was not renewed because of his conservative political beliefs will return to his Lawrence High School government and history classes for the 2009-2010 school year.
Superintendent Randy Weseman ruled Thursday on Tim Latham’s grievance, which stated that Latham did not receive all of the four mandatory classroom observations for first-year teachers that are laid out in teachers’ contracts.
“The observation data lacked appropriate documentation,” Weseman said. “I couldn’t tell from that when they were conducted.”
Weseman previously said that the formal grievance had nothing to do with politics and his investigation and the hearing was based solely on Latham’s grievance that his contract had been violated.
Latham’s attorney, Caleb Stegall, said both he and his client were happy with the ruling.
"I think that this is a tremendous victory for free political speech, for the open exchange of ideas and, frankly, for the American system of self governance." Stegall said.
Latham said in a press release that he is ready to return to Lawrence High in the fall.
“I couldn’t be more pleased with this outcome,” Latham said. “I will always be grateful to my students for actually putting what I teach into practice.”
School administrators are in charge of conducting the evaluations. Each non-tenured teacher is required to have one evaluation each semester, which includes at least two 20 minute classroom observations. Weseman said Latham claimed he had not been observed in the spring semester.
“Since they weren’t documented … properly, then they didn’t happen,” Weseman said. “If they didn’t happen, then the evaluation is contaminated.”
Latham has been a teacher for 19 years, most recently in Arkansas. This was his first year in Lawrence.
Because of Weseman’s ruling, the school board will not seek further action to not renew Latham’s teaching contract.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
edson443 (anonymous) says…
How many more Classified positions have to be cut to bring this teacher back?
bearded_gnome (anonymous) says…
first,
lhs was advertising for *another* teacher to fill his position, so *nobody* loses a job to "bring him back.
and Ajayhawk,
so your problem is with Randy Weseman now? are you saying he is a right wing "kook?"
***
Weseman's finding indicates that the substance of Mr. Latham's grievance had validity.
*Congratulations Mr. Latham. glad you will keep your job. please also reinstate your "too patriotic" website.
on my blog and under the previous article from monday's ljworld, many on the left were happy to get rid of Mr. Latham, based on his beliefs and associations. some even said that he did not deserve the rights of an american citizen.
no teacher should lose his or her position for personal political beliefs, whether liberal or conservative.
this is good for the students, too. a good teacher will be retained at LHS, a teacher who apparently presented both sides. I do wonder how often LHS students heard antibush smears in the past eight years. it seems that Latham did not smear Mr. Obama, though he had a McCain Palin bumpersticker on his car.
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
If the district failed to follow its own policies in reviewing untenured teachers, they really had no choice but to renew the contract.
And the sad thing is that even if this guy really really is a wackjob using a teaching position to reinforce xenophobic, fearmongering demagogues like Glen Beck and others, it will be very difficult to get rid of him in the future.
bearded_gnome (anonymous) says…
now,
we have far-left crazies claiming that Latham has a desire to brainwash his students. and, both saying basicly that because of his politics he should've been nonrenewed.
Boozo and Beo, thanks for illustrating exactly what Mr. Latham claimed in his public statements. though you are way out on the nutty fringe, you serve a useful purpose.
bearded_gnome (anonymous) says…
boozo and beo,
p.s. there are some noncrazy liberals who admit that it would've been wrong for Latham to be nonrenewed because of his politics, and they admitted things might've happened the way he has described. I can list at least four liberal posters who have stated that on my blog or under the ljworld's monday article.
denak (anonymous) says…
Whew, another lawsuit sucessfully averted....
just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (anonymous) says…
" claiming that Latham has a desire to brainwash his students."
Your reading comprehension is as a poor as ever, bearded troll. I made no such claim. What I said was that if such was his goal, because the district failed to follow its policies, if his goal truly is to "brainwash," it'll very difficult to fire him in the future.
I have no objection to teachers making their political viewpoints known to students, whether it's right, center or left. But no matter the viewpoint, once they cross the line between teaching and indoctrination, it's time for them to go.
rdragon (M. Lindeman) says…
Glad to hear he will be back next year.
eugunieum (anonymous) says…
I heard racial slurs may have been invloved too. that one might not have been in ljw or fox. Maybe heard by some students who were not on fox. Sounds liked someone dropped the ball with evaluations to me. I don't think it was appropriate for him to be criticized for his bumper sticker either. Maybe it was his primary evaluator that said that, maybe not. Who knows. I just hope when he comes back, he does right by his students! That is why the place exists, for the kids.
Pywacket (anonymous) says…
Good posts, bozo and beo. Weseman caves. Coward.
artichokeheart (anonymous) says…
Congragulations Mr. Latham! This is a step forward for USD 497. Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy!
Bob_Keeshan (anonymous) says…
This isn't a victory for free speech, open ideas, or the American system of anything other than administrative procedure.
All the people who perceive this as a political victory, it is no such thing; this is a victory of a government bureaucracy.
Basically, the very type of government bureaucracy most of you would claim is destroying this nation just saved this man's job. I guess the evil bureaucracy isn't so bad after all...
saticon (anonymous) says…
I think we need to throw out the left/right talk and just look at his teaching. My son was in one of Latham's classes and often came home talking about what they were doing; what they were covering. Mr. Latham engaged our son and his love of history by asking for his input on some things that he knew our son had knowledge of. Our son felt a part of the class. And, as a result of this experience, our son has decided that he may well take his love of history and turn it into a career as a history teacher. Should Mr. Latham's personal life be of any concern of mine? No. Should his political views dominate his classroom? No. Do I know all about the man? No. What I do know is that he has placed a spark in our son to continue his learning and to consider sharing his love of history with others.
Katara (anonymous) says…
bearded_gnome (Anonymous) says…
on my blog and under the previous article from monday's ljworld, many on the left were happy to get rid of Mr. Latham, based on his beliefs and associations. some even said that he did not deserve the rights of an american citizen.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I need a shovel because the bullcrap is getting thick here. You know that is not true at all, bearded_gnome.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
bearded_gnome (Anonymous) says…
Weseman's finding indicates that the substance of Mr. Latham's grievance had validity.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The substance of the grievance was that he did not receive the evaluations required.
It does not mean that there is any validity to Mr. Latham's allegations of not being renewed for his conservative views.
And you should stop implying as such.
As a side note, I do find it incredibly funny that many anti-union posters on here are cheering Mr. Latham's success at winning his grievance. Irony at its finest!
Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…
I'm glad Mr. latham was reinstated based on the grievance and the findings of the superintendent. Due process in action.
_________________________________________________________________________
“The observation data lacked appropriate documentation,” Weseman said. “I couldn’t tell from that when they were conducted.”
Weseman previously said that the formal grievance had nothing to do with politics and his investigation and the hearing was based solely on Latham’s grievance that his contract had been violated.
_________________________________________________________________________
I'm also glad the grievance and the findings of fact had nothing to do with his political beliefs.
dandelion (anonymous) says…
No one still knows why he wasn't renewed, but the administrator who was suppose to evaluate this guy dropped the ball, and should be reprimanded. People complain about incompetent teachers, but bad teachers can be fired at anytime if the administrators evaluate correctly. Lazy administrators keep giving good evaluations to lousy teachers, then blame "tenure" on why they can't fire the teacher. Teachers new to the district should be evaluated closely, so they can be let go without much documentation. This teacher has just been granted tenure 2 years early. Now new teachers know how to keep their jobs. They just have to play the victim. I really hope he is a good teacher, because LHS is stuck with him now. He can get away with anything now.
artichokeheart (anonymous) says…
There are adequate teachers, there are good teachers & then there are teachers such as Mr. Latham. The teacher that engages & opens a child's mind to new ways of thinking. Like another commenter said " What I do know is that he has placed a spark in our son to continue his learning and to consider sharing his love of history with others." That kind of teacher is worth his weight in gold.
This isn't a political victory it is a educational victory for the community. There is bad in the best of people & good in the worst of people: party affiliation be damned. At the end of the day the only thing that really matters is what we have learned from it.
RalphReed (Ralph Reed) says…
I agree with you Kathy. Even though many won't see it, Weseman appears to have weighed the evidence and found that Latham's supervisors did not uphold their end of the contract.
*****
My concern is evidenced by Latham's attorney's statement after the decision was made. From the article above,
"Latham’s attorney, Caleb Stegall, said both he and his client were happy with the ruling. 'I think that this a tremendous victory for free political speech for the open ideas and, frankly, for the American system of self governance,' Stegall said."
This statement tells me that Stegall saw the greivance as purely a political battle and nothing else. As he was / is Latham's attorney, I have no doubt that Latham also saw this as purely a political battle from the ouset, and nothing else. The only thing that will show me otherwise is Latham's denial of his attorney's statement.
The obvious extensions and conjectures (which will be stated as fact if they appear) are boundless.
*****
Once again, the decision was made because of procedure and for no other reason.
*****
Mr. Latham, I don't expect you to reply, but...
I truly hope you prove to be worth the trouble and lengths to which Glenn Beck and his 9:12 organization have gone to ensure your contract is renewed.
Remember sir, your contract was renewed because of procedure, not because it was non-renewed due to your political beliefs. That is the only reason.
**************
I'm me. Who are you behind your hood of anonymity?
JimmyJoeBob (anonymous) says…
It sounds as though there are a lot of happy parents and students out there so he must be an inspiring teacher. Those of us who don't attend LHS or have kids going to LHS should probably but out. Most detractors are left wing libs like beobachter which have no credibility when making comments in this forum.
ScaredOfAllOfYou (anonymous) says…
You liberals scare me. Honestly scare me. You scream about free speech and then wish to silence those who talk anything other than your liberal jiberish. The press release stated that the reason Mr Latham was reinstated was because of procedural error and let me tell you this, they wouldnt have done it if that was the only reason. They were scared, and rightly so. Say what you want, but they violated his civil rights. Yeah, they did. You liberal mushmouths can scream all you want to about how he was a radical right winger, but yet dont look at yourself as a radical left winger? You are proving it with each and every sentence you type on here saying that Mr Latham is a radical and way out in right wingism. Every teacher I had in high school was NOT SHY to say how they were either a right winger or a left winger and threw it in our face when we were anything OTHER than what they were. but the fact remains the students led the charge to get him reinstated. You adults should be ashamed of yourselves for doubting the ones he taught wanting him back. Does that not prove in itself that he is a worthy teacher? If he had been fired for being liberal I betcha you would be standing on a different podium screaming about how the right had taken down another on the left, but put the shoe on the other foot and your whining about what a crappy teacher he is fires into high gear. I am ScaredOfAllOfYou. Neither a right wing or a left wing, just an "Everyone needs to be treated fair across the board" guy. John J Phillips I'm me too.
Bob_Keeshan (anonymous) says…
Something else this is a victory for - the KNEA and the protections they have put in place for educators.
Something this is a defeat for - the misguided conservative proposals they like to call "merit pay."
This teacher was protected by the system the teacher's union fights for every day.
So what we have here is a victory for the government bureacracy and a victory for the teachers union. A great day for so-called "conservatives."
staff04 (anonymous) says…
Bob_Keeshan (Anonymous) says…
This isn't a victory for free speech, open ideas, or the American system of anything other than administrative procedure.
All the people who perceive this as a political victory, it is no such thing; this is a victory of a government bureaucracy.
Basically, the very type of government bureaucracy most of you would claim is destroying this nation just saved this man's job. I guess the evil bureaucracy isn't so bad after all…
------------------------------------------------------
Bob Keeshan, for the win. WIN. Thread closed now.
Godot (anonymous) says…
It is time to investigate how this misguided attack on an individual teacher's ideology lead to his original dismissal. The adminstrators and board members who attempted to destroy this man's livelihood should face legal action.
dandelion (anonymous) says…
It was not determined that his contract wasn't renewed for political reasons. Where in the article did it say that? If the NEA, remember that far right liberal group?, had not found a procedural problem, he would still not have his job. I do agree that the administrator who was suppose to evaluate him, and didn't observe his teaching should at least be reprimanded for not doing their job, but that won't guarantee that next year his contract will be renewed. Remember, the state (controlled by conservatives) are going to cut more education funding next year. I think a lot of teachers in their first 3 years will be let go next year, despite their political persuasions, and no one will be able to save them. Please feel free to write your state reps to be sure that there aren't any school cuts, so Mr. Latham can continue.
jkilgore (anonymous) says…
I'm clearly on the left, and I'm a teacher, but having a conservative teacher next to my room doesn't bother me at all. If you're teaching your subject matter correctly, your political leanings should be subtle, and best left out of the classroom. Values training is up to parents. I didn't mind teachers bringing up many points of view and examining them fairly when my children were in school.
The likelihood of Latham being fired for being "too conservative" is very dubious to me. Those teachers who profess faith in the classroom, Mr. Nancyboy and others, are much more the norm than you would believe. Because of this, I have to wonder whether or not he is an effective teacher. LHS is probably no better for the dropped ball on the part of the administration.
kansas912er (anonymous) says…
I guess Edjayhawk hasn't been paying attention. We've been covering this for a month. That's why there is an article that he can comment on today!
ScaredOfAllOfYou (anonymous) says…
Hey Defender, how do you know what I have documented and what I don't? Are you in my office? Are you sitting next to me? Are you a member of the ACLU .... ? Do you have the paperwork in front of you that I do? No, I didnt think so. The documentation is astounding.
however, each and every one who is blasting Mr Latham needs to remember the students led the charge. This push was started by the students, who found out Mr Latham was not returning. the students started the push to have him reinstated. The students started a FaceBook page pushing for him to be returned to active duty. You each decide to ignore that fact. The students wanted him back and if it were not for them, Mr Latham wouldd not have pushed the issue. He would have left, I can almost gaurantee that fact.
Godot (anonymous) says…
Teachers: did you force your classes to view the fraudulent Al Gore movie about his view of climate change? Did you ever advocate for Obama for president? Did you ever advocate "hope and change?" Did you force our children to give up class time to watch the inauguration? Did you force our children to compose essays about the Obama presidency and grade their essays based on their relative support for Obama? Did you ever make a negative comment about Sarah Palin or her family? Did you ever make a comment in favor of one presidential candidate over another?
If you did any of the above, you are guilty of intimidation and harrassment, and, depending on what you said, of committing an hate crime. You are not qualified to be a teacher in a government funded educational system because you are not capable of separating your personal political idealogy from your responsibility to educate the children of your district. If you did any of the above you should, on principle, resign, immediately.
blakus (anonymous) says…
Weseman followed protocol. He found that procedure was not followed and renewed Latham's contract. The only people making this procedural occurance political are the ones who benifit from doing so.
kansas912er (anonymous) says…
That's the point Edjayhawk- it seems you should do your homework before esposing.
Maybe you should open your horizons beyond LJWorld.
Did_I_say_that (DIST) says…
The District has admitted that the evaluations were not performed or documented. The District previously stated that the non-renewal was due to the evaluations. Since the district did not actually have the evaluations to determine his quality of teaching and make a renewal decision, then it is only logical that some other reason must have been used by Jan Gentry to make the decision. Could it have been a personal bias on her part since she did not have required documentation?
Superintendent Randy Weseman demonstrated his ability to be a good leader. His reversal of Jan Gentry's botched and wrongful non-renewal of Tim Latham was an act of political courage.
OldEnuf2BYurDad (anonymous) says…
"A lawsuit that could have easily been defended."
No attorney would agree with that. The whole issue was they didn't follow procedure. No "reason" for his dismissal was documented, he was just let go.
ScaredOfAllOfYou (anonymous) says…
Defender, you stated: However, you choose to deny the facts and just make all sorts of baseless charges. That is what makes you disgusting. Don't lie, you'll go to hell for that one (it's in the Bible, believe me, I have proof).
*******************************************************************
What facts am I denying? How am I continued to be called a liar? You continue to attack me when all I ask is what do you know about me? If you say anything other than "nothing", then you, sir, are the Bible defined liar.
I DO have a tie to this case, haha, closer than you know and more than you know. Do I feel like giving you the facts behind my tie to this case? No. You know why? It wouldnt matter. You would continue your leftist slant and slander.
See what I mean Defender? I have not slandered you in any way, other than asking you what you know about me, yet you leftist can slander me. Its like I said in the first post, you lefty's believe in free speech only when it is something you would say. You have NO tolerance for someone stating something OTHER than your agenda. Whether it be on gay marriage, abortion, a teacher being discriminated against, car buying or whats for dinner. You sir are the reason I am scared of the radical left wingers out there. They wish to silence anyone that does not state what they agree with. They wish not to be fair and open minded, but rather closed off and punish others who believe different from what they believe. I am SO GLAD my child does not have to attend a class YOU might teach. I know what they would taught, and it surely isnt tolerance of others ideas.
Lie to me some more Defender, you make me giggle.
in123 (anonymous) says…
Forget all the arguments about the teacher and look at the issue that Weseman identified. The teacher's evaluations were not done properly by an administrator. Who was the administrator and what is going to be done about that? I believe, but could be wrong, that it was the new principal. If so, once again incompetence is rewarded in the school adminstration.
Number_1_Grandma (anonymous) says…
in123 (Anonymous) says…
Forget all the arguments about the teacher and look at the issue that Weseman identified. The teacher's evaluations were not done properly by an administrator. Who was the administrator and what is going to be done about that? I believe, but could be wrong, that it was the new principal. If so, once again incompetence is rewarded in the school administration.
***************************************************************
in123,
You are so right, incompetence is rewarded at LHS administrations. The good ol' boy system is alive and well. Sad to think in a p u b l i c school system.
To bad this didn't play out any further. I wanted to see how new principal Bumguard would have come out through all this. But who would have thunk that administrators at LHS dropped the ball to force reinstatement. Clean house of administrators and a few good ol' boys calling the shots.
redmoonrising (anonymous) says…
I find it sad and pathetic that politics, personal that is, comes into play here. All the conservatives applauding this, do you really think he is in there teaching his students all the "right" things? Or is he in there teaching what he is supposed to teach? I agree that his grievances were valid. I can only hope that the man is very careful in what he is teaching his students. A quality teacher would NEVER use his own political leanings to influence students. I'm not even sure they should have the right to express it in the school venue. Maybe teachers shouldn't even be allowed to put political bumper stickers on their cars parked where students see them. It also makes the teachers vulnerable to the wrath of students with opposite leanings. Then it becomes not debate but pure arguement, similar to this blog, and no one learns a thing other than to disrespect each other.
Satirical (anonymous) says…
And all the liberals who were defending his firing are sad today.
- The school board can fire him for any reason they want.
Yes, but if they breach his contract they have to pay damages.
- Public opinion doesn't matter.
Wrong again
- He is a right wing kook
Even though every poster who is either one of his students or a parent of his student has claimed the exact opposite, I guess I should believe you with your ample proof.
- This is a victory for bureaucracy
No it is a victory for contract law, and not firing an educator of our children for arbitrary reasons or because of personally political differences.
grammaddy (anonymous) says…
This liberal is not sad. I'm glad he gets to keep his job despite his political be liefs. Kids need to hear both sides in order to make an informed judgement. I am secure enough in my liberal-ness to teach my grandkids both sides of an argument. In our family *liberal* is not a dirty word.. it means forward thinker.
*conservative* isn't either...it means safely and slowly.
dandelion (anonymous) says…
Did_I_say_that (Anonymous) says…" Since the district did not actually have the evaluations to determine his quality of teaching and make a renewal decision, then it is only logical that some other reason must have been used by Jan Gentry to make the decision."
Well, I guess I shouldn't rail at you, since this is the shorter version of the article. In the printed paper today, it stated that there was evidence that the spring observation was not done. It did not, as law requires, state what was in the evaluation. There were observations done and an evaluation made, but not all observations were done or documented.
chic (anonymous) says…
OK. So, IF a hundred people see a teacher beat someone to death, but the school makes some procedural error in his/her evaluation and the police make a procedural error in obtaining evidence, the teacher MUST still be allowed to teach our children?
Somewhere, in amongst all the PC, surely there is some place for plain old comment sense???
...or maybe not
Where's the democracy? If this teacher does teach, there should at the very least be an option for kids/parents who do not want to be/have their child be taught by him to opt for another teacher. In fact, I think that whether or not teachers get a good review from previous students and/or their parents should be including in retention/hiring decisions. And, I don't mean evaluations such as, "oh yeah, he was so cool!!"
dandelion (anonymous) says…
ScaredOfAllOfYou , Defender is quite a moderate and probably right of center if you really need to categorize him/her. I think you are the scary one. Do you have pictures of Roeder, von Brunn, and the Minutemen members who killed a 9 year old girl on your bedroom wall? Of course, if you are a von Brunn fan, you must be into child porn too. What's on your computer?
Bob_Keeshan (anonymous) says…
It needs to be stressed, again, that while Tim Latham and his attorney Caleb Stegall have argued several points in public, they argued none of those points in trying to save Mr. Latham's job.
There is a lengthy discussion on this website about what Mr. Latham did or did not say, and about what the high school administrators did or did not do.
None of that was argued before the Superintendent by either Mr. Latham or his attorney.
What they argued is that proper procedure was not followed. They argued administrative law and they prevailed.
I'm not sure how the statements about Mr. Latham's conservative beliefs or the administrations reaction to those even come into play.
Neither was ever an issue in this case, and both Mr. Latham and Mr. Stegall admit that. They argued procedure to the Superintendent and they prevailed. It is disconcerting that Mr. Stegall would, after conclusion of the case, attempt to inject issues which were not part of his arguments for protecting Mr. Latham's position.
salad (anonymous) says…
Mr_Nancy_Boy_To_You (Tom Shewmon) says…
And, the tide is turning in America, like myself, bunker-mentality America has had it up to their eyeballs with the irritating and deleterious forces of rationality.
-fixed
salad (anonymous) says…
How about we give our kids some credit. If they can be brainwashed by anybody, then quite frankly, we/they deserve it.
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…
Jesus H. Christ! Quit feeding the troll with that garbage! It only makes it stronger.
Satirical: From where I'm sitting, there appears to be far more posts that could be classified as gloating than there are that can be classified as sad at the results, and I'm pretty sure after a quick review that I could quantify that.
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…
Whoops, too many spaces between, that was meant for the dandelion post at 8:12
jonas_opines (anonymous) says…
"I'm not sure how the statements about Mr. Latham's conservative beliefs or the administrations reaction to those even come into play."
Because here on the ljworld they pretty much Have to come into play for certain posters.
newmedia (anonymous) says…
CYA my friends, CYA. Where did the KNEA side on this one?
texburgh (anonymous) says…
Keeshan says, "This teacher was protected by the system the teacher's union fights for every day."
He is absolutely right and what is missing in this whole debate is that the teachers union - KNEA specifically - has worked hard to defend the right of a teacher NOT to be fired for political beliefs. KNEA takes a lot of grief for being a "liberal" group - they are not - they are simply fighting for the right of teachers not to be treated capriciously as was Mr. Latham.
The system works. Thank God for the KNEA. If not for their work, Latham would be just another unemployed teacher who paid for his beliefs.
artichokeheart (anonymous) says…
No the political allegations in this case did not weigh in on the final result. The grievence hearing was a first step in the appeal process. The determination by Weseman to renew Mr. Latham's contract based on procedural error was appropriate. Had Weseman not done so I'v no doubt this matter would have gone to the courtroom where the political matters would be heard. This would have cost the district alot of money no matter the outcome.
A child need not be considered brainwashed to support a teacher who has inspired them. In the printed version of this story Mr. Latham was quoted to say something to the effect of him being very proud of his students that took what they learned from class & used it in real life. That is the ultimate goal of education, to take what you have learned out into the world & apply it. So if even a hand full of Mr. Latham's students came out to support him & succeeded in that venture, it has been proven that Mr. Latham is a valuable teacher to our district.
beatrice (anonymous) says…
It appears that we have no idea why the teacher's contract wasn't renewed, only that he had to be reinstated because all of the proper and necessary procedures for his nonrenewal weren't followed.
Congratulations proceduralists, you've won another one! May no technicality go unpunished!
From bearded's first blog, this has been a case of hearsay and innuendo, of people not closely involved with either party making wild accusations, which is what I found most annoying when reading the blog in the first place. Similarly many of the comments continued this trend, from conservatives and liberals alike. These included tales of his being "fired" for his bumper sticker (highly doubtful) to his use of racial slurs (repugnant to accuse someone of this without evidence or firsthand knowledge).
Now, it is all settled because all the right forms weren't filled out and evaluations held. Nothing to do with conservative views and liberal administrators. Nothing. It had to do with procedures.
Is he a good teacher and are the students the winners in this case? Let's hope so. Only time will tell.
penguin (anonymous) says…
I think this has a far greater impact than most can anticipate. I imagine that every teacher who was non-renewed this year (especially in USD 497) is checking to see if the procedures of teacher evaluations were followed in their school. I would imagine that he was probably not the only teacher who received lax attention when it came to teacher evaluation in the school and district.
The outgoing superintendent just set a pretty dangerous precedent with regards to non-tenured teachers. I do not believe it is necessarily harmful to employees, but budgets. I am just wondering how many other folks were non-renewed from USD 497. Also I wonder how this will effect staff and budget issues.
It's easy to see this as an involving one teacher, but I can see this becoming a much larger issue now that this precedent has been set of reinstating a non-renewed teacher because of an administrative misstep. Again, the decision makes sense with concern to procedure, but this is probably just the beginning.
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
I predict no fewer than 10 observation visits to Mr. Latham's classroom during the 2009-2010 school year.
As I said before: I don't believe teachers should be fired for any religious or political beliefs that they hold.
Again, operative words in that last sentence: “that they hold.”
rooster (anonymous) says…
Weseman didn't sell out or cave.
He followed the letter of the law. The proper eval was not done and therefore he deserves to continue in his position.
I think that somebody should have their feet put to the fire for not properly reviewing and/or documenting the monitering. Regardless of his political beliefs all teachers need to be reviewed.
KansasVoter (anonymous) says…
It sounds like the school knew that Latham wasn't a good teacher so they didn't need to bother with the four mandatory classroom observations. Why waste the time on a guy that they knew they didn't want back? Lucky for this crybaby that he's a member of a Union, otherwise he'd be out of a job.
Irish (Leslie Swearingen) says…
“I couldn’t be more pleased with this outcome,” Latham said. “I will always be grateful to my students for actually putting what I teach into practice.”
Sounds a bit dodgy to me. We don't actually know what the man told his students.
Oh, well, what is the worst damage that a teacher can do?
Did_I_say_that (DIST) says…
KansasVoter (Anonymous) says…
"It sounds like the school knew that Latham wasn't a good teacher so they didn't need to bother with the four mandatory classroom observations."
Your conclusion is the opposite of reality for any employer with an experienced Human Resources Department.
First, how would the school determine "that Latham wasn't a good teacher" without the mandatory observations? They could not determine that; therefore, the non-renewal had to be based on something else - a preconception known only to the assistant principal charged with the responsibility, Jan Gentry.
Second, an employer who is planning a termination or non-renewal will always document evidence to support their decision. This was not done; there was no documentation to justify the non-renewal. Hence, the non-renewal was based upon the personal choice of the assistant principal. That is why Randy Weseman corrected the error by renewing the contract.
Katara (anonymous) says…
artichokeheart (Anonymous) says…
Had Weseman not done so I'v no doubt this matter would have gone to the courtroom where the political matters would be heard. This would have cost the district alot of money no matter the outcome.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is incorrect. Grievances don't go to court. The next step would be (if Weseman did not renew his contract) to go to the next level of authority (I believe the school board would be it). If both levels of grievances were denied, then it goes to the state level or perhaps arbitration. None of which would cost the district a lot of money. The only money out would be if he was due back wages or pay for vacation time lost during the process and if the arbitrator recommends, compensation for his legal expenses and perhaps a small compensatory payment for his time spent.
sunny007 (anonymous) says…
Congratulations, Mr. Latham. Here's to a great school year!
artichokeheart (anonymous) says…
K:
The next step would be court. Check your resources
Valkyrie_of_Reason (Kathy Getto) says…
No, artichoke, you are incorrect. The next step would be an appeal to the board of education. Study the simplicities of administrative law a bit better next time.
Agnostick (anonymous) says…
C'mon... we all know that for artichokeheart/enforcer, the next step is **always** "court."
:rolleyes:
Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
Boston_Corbett (anonymous) says…
I fear that those who have suggested an ideological issue with Mr. Lathams situation may have done him a serious wrong.