Carson City School District denies allegations it mishandled investigation into racial discrimination

The Carson City School District is facing allegations that they mishandled an investigation into whether or not a teacher used inappropriate comments during a social studies discussion about racial stereotypes.

The incident took place at Eagle Valley Middle School on Nov. 20 and was reported to the school's principal after a student complained to her mother. The teacher was immediately placed on administrative leave pending an investigation.

However, the mother said neither she nor her daughter were informed about the results of that investigation or that the teacher had returned to work until the student encountered him in the hallway at the school on Jan. 20.

According to the mother and Ray Bacasegua Valdez, Director of the American Indian Movement Northern Nevada (AIM), the family was not involved in any part of the investigation after the initial allegation of discrimination was made, which they said goes directly against the district’s regulations.

“They have their own district regulations that they didn’t follow,” said AIM's Valdez, who has also worked as a teacher for Washoe County School District for 22 years.

The district regulation cited by the mother and Valdez is #543, "Safe and Respectful Learning Environment Free from Bullying or Cyber Bullying" which requires school personnel investigating allegations to:

• Interview all students directly involved and their parents must be notified.
• Complete the investigation not later than two (2) school days after the report is received
• Write a report of the findings and conclusion of the investigation.
• Follow-up not later than 10 school days after the issuance of the report, the administrator shall meet with each reported victim to inquire about the well-being of the reported victim and to ensure that the reported incident is not continuing.

However, in this case the school administrator instead chose to investigate the allegations internally. Dan Davis, the district's public information officer, said it is the district's belief that because the family did not allege the teacher specifically bullied the student during the classroom event that they did not have a requirement to investigate it according to that policy.

The Incident

On Nov. 20 at Eagle Valley Middle School, a social studies class was held which led to inappropriate comments being made during a discussion of stereotypes.

The teacher, who has taught social studies for nearly two decades, including 13 years at Eagle Valley Middle School teaching U.S. History, was leading a discussion in his class regarding hurtful stereotypes. Certain statements were made by the teacher as examples of these stereotypes, including the statement “Native Americans can’t learn and that’s why they live on reservations,” among others.

The student’s mother stated that her daughter felt singled out since she was the only Native American in the classroom, and immediately left in tears.

“He said ‘brown kids can’t learn because they’re brown,’” the mother said. “He looked my daughter straight in the eye and said ‘For you Native Americans I have something to say: that’s why we took your land and will continue taking your land and you will enjoy it.’ And at that point it hit my daughter and she thought, ‘Am I being singled out? Because he’s looking right at me,’ and she’s the only Native American student in the class.”

According to the teacher, he was attempting to encourage students to disprove these stereotypes by working hard and doing their schoolwork.

The mother said she was called to the school not because of the incident, but because a Native American teaching aide called to say that an incident had occurred and her daughter needed her inhaler.

When the mother arrived at the school, her daughter told her what happened, and said the event had caused her to become upset, which triggered the asthmatic episode.

The mother immediately asked to see the school’s principal, Dr. Lee Conley, and together she and her daughter discussed the incident with him, and they stated they felt the teacher’s statements constituted harassment and racial discrimination.

The teacher was placed on administrative leave while an investigation took place, and he apologized to the student and her family in a Nov. 24 letter.

“I used generalized statements and stereotypes that people of color have had used against them throughout history,” the letter states. “I was not aiming these comments at any individual. I see that my words were perceived as offensive, hurtful, and frustrating. I had not established the rapport with you that was necessary for such a conversation. I was not intending to be discriminatory with my choice of words and I apologize for the hurt and frustration.”

The Return

The student began attending online-only school following the incident, but opted to return to school in person on Jan. 20 after her academics began to suffer. Prior to that, the mother sent a letter to the school district on Jan. 14, nearly two months after the incident, asking for an update on the investigation, and quoted directly from district regulation 543.

On the first day the student returned to EVMS, she encountered the teacher in the hallway, and was shocked to find that he had returned to school without her or her family being told.

“They never contacted me to let me know that he went back to school,” her mother said. “She ran into him at school and she was shocked. I was very upset. This whole investigation is supposed to be done by protocol and they haven’t contacted me once about the investigation. They could have let me know that he’s back at school so that way I could have had a choice to put her back or not, but it was a big surprise.”

The incident on Nov. 20 occurred on the Friday before Thanksgiving Break, which took place from Nov. 23 to Nov. 27. The teacher was placed on administrative leave following the incident, and returned to work following winter break on Jan. 3.

The mother said that while the school had contacted her several times regarding her children’s schoolwork, no one made contact with her in regards to the investigation or the fact that the teacher was returning to school.

While the investigation summary stated that “multiple calls by email and phone were attempted,” Davis could not provide dates on when those attempts were made.

Valdez said that what AIM and the family want is accountability.

“We’re just trying to hold him accountable,” said Valdez. “(The school district) is not just going to shovel this under the table, and they want to.”

Questions about Policy

Valdez said that since the district did not appear to be following their own policy, AIM has reached out to the Nevada Commission of Minority Affairs who agreed to help them and the family, as well as the Nevada State Education Association and the U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights in Washington D.C.

According to Davis, there was no policy in place for the district to reach back out to the student or family in this case since they were not investigating the incident under Regulation 543. Davis said it was out of courtesy that a summary of the investigation was provided to the family on Jan. 29 after AIM requested additional information.

The Summary of Investigation provided to the family on Jan. 29 is a stipulation dictated by Regulation 543, and appears to be formatted directly from that regulation.

When asked why it was the decision of a school administrator on whether this allegation of harassment and discrimination was investigated as a teacher performance review, which is handled internally with HR, as opposed to a public policy such as Regulation 543, Davis stated that “to the extent the District receives a formal complaint alleging bullying, the complaint procedure of Regulation 543 is fully implemented.”

However, he said, in this case, the family did not specifically accuse the teacher of bullying, and therefore, Regulation 543 does not apply.

“In this case, bullying was not specifically alleged in the context of the classroom event, and the family did not press that fact.”

When asked what procedure was used to investigate this complaint of harassment, since Regulation 543 was not employed, Davis stated the issue was investigated using procedures of an "Informal Resolutio"n as detailed in Regulation No. 903.

Valdez, who is a teacher himself, said that sometimes people can become “caught up in the moment” in a classroom and this incident could have simply been “for lack of a better term, a faux pas.” But what AIM wants to know is whether or not this has been a repeated offense with this teacher.

“Ultimately what we want to know is if he is a habitual offender, in a sense,” said Valdez. “We want to know that he doesn’t have a history of this kind of curriculum. If this came from a curriculum, that curriculum needs to change. If it came from a book, that book has to go. If (these statements) came from him, and he does it all the time, then he’s got to go.”

Valdez said that there needs to be curriculum reform across the state and natives need to be involved in constructing that curriculum so there can be better cultural awareness involved in the district.

AIM, along with family members of the student, plan to gather at Tuesday’s School Board Meeting to hold a prayer and ask for further information into the incident.