Back in late December, reports surfaced in both the Star Tribune and MNSun that Doug Steele, a principal at Eagan’s Rahn Elementary School was on paid administrative leave while the district investigated a complaint against him. Today, through an article in the Star Tribune, we come to learn exactly why it is that Doug Steele is on paid leave.
Turns out that a six year old Kindergarten student had used a classroom bathroom and wiped his ass with paper towels (I hope they weren’t the brown ones you normally get at school–ouch) instead of toilet paper and when he flushed them, the toilet clogged bringing back flashbacks of Along Came Polly. When the teacher found out, instead of being an intelligent and level-headed individual, she probably freaked out that it was the doing of future terrorist and decided to contact the principal and this is where the shit hits the fan, so to speak…
Supposedly, the principal comes down and sees the mess and tells the kid to stick his hands in there and unclog the toilet himself. Now, I’m no stranger to clogged toilets and having to deal with them, but man, that is just a shitty thing to do to a kid of any age. Even if the kid was normally a little terror and had it in him to do something like that on purpose, there’s no reason to make him clean up his own shit covered paper towel clog by himself. Just tack it on to the list of reasons why he should be removed from class and get the poor janitor to do it–with gloves.
A Star Tribune commenter asks:
Did the principal overreact? Possibly – but he says he didn’t realize the boy had used the toilet. Lets take that … read more at face value and believe him. In that case I don’t see anything wrong with having the child clean out the paper. If he knew that the boy had used the toilet then it is a different matter and he should probably have called the janitor. Worst case scenario is that he knew and still made the boy clean it up. Probably inappropriate but worth losing his career over??
So, what do you think? Should the principal be reprimanded but not fired or do you think that he completely overreacted and is now trying to cover the shitstorm that has risen out of this and deserves to be removed from his post permanently? Comment on!
Related posts:
Dakota Complaints Map
Dakota Inmate Dashboard
Loading ...
Lazy Lightning Gear
BPAC Financials Archive
February 6th, 2009 at 11:49 am
It’s difficult to say simply based on the facts you presented. What was his career like? Was this an isolated incident or was there prior similar incidents? If this was an isolated incident, I would say that he should be reprimanded and allowed to continue in his employ.
February 6th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
I agree — if this was an isolated incident, serious reprimand and monitoring is seems appropriate. If this is part of a pattern of unconventional punishment, I would support an effort to have him dismissed.
February 6th, 2009 at 1:11 pm
i’m not hearing isolated, i’m hearing tyrant. if that’s the case out with him.
making a 6 year old kindergarten kid clean out the shitter with his bare hand! inexcusable! what kind of a label is the kid going to wear from now on. maaaaaan i hope mom and dad get his head on the end of a pike!
i hope the kid didn’t have any hangnails or sores on his hand.
bb
February 6th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
I’ll say this is grounds enough for dismissal. This is not the type of decision a fair and level headed person would make, especially in that type of disciplinary role. We are talking about a 6 year old here, this is beyond repulsive. Whether he knew there was shit in there or not is not the question, it’s that he thought this was a good disciplinary measure for a child of any age and it disturbs me greatly. That he thought this was okay in any way shows he doesn’t have the correct mental capacity for his role.
February 6th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Someone like that principal has no right to be employed anywhere. That kind of crap should never happen to a kid of any age. Doesn’t the school have a plunger or a janitor?
February 6th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
The Strib story is based on what sounds like a second-hand source with an obvious bias. I would not jump to judgment based on what the father says, because he’s clearly a loose cannon if he puts his ego over the best interests of his child in pushing this publicly. The district is required to respond to any complaint levied, substance or not. I would wait and see until an independent, or at least secondary, source provides some info. I have a few friends that work in Elementary Schools and they will be the first to tell you that you cannot talk sense into an angry parent. I thought Journalism 101 covered having multiple sources, but I suppose the Strib has made a few cuts and is sending out delivery to write their stories.
February 6th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
While, I will agree with Tubby above on most points, especially the parent-response issue, if the “facts” are true, then this is uncalled for.
I don’t care if it’s a 6-year-old or a 12-year-old. You want them to clean up their own mess, FINE. Hand the kid a plunger, that right there is a definite direct-to-world skill that the kid’s gonna use for the rest of his life. Regardless of whether or not the toilet had been used, the child should have been given the proper tools to clean up the mess.
February 6th, 2009 at 3:28 pm
I don’t know, I’m having a hard time buying into the idea that the teacher/principal just randomly went off the deep end and took the punishment to the extreme. I’m not saying it COULDN’T have happened that way, but I’m thinking that in the quest for privacy they aren’t mentioning any other disciplinary incidents with this child. If this kid has been doing this weekly since September, I can maybe see the point of the punishment, though I agree he should have been provided the necessary tools to clean up the mess. Regardless, I’m thinking the kid probably won’t use paper towel to wipe his ass next time…and isn’t that the desired effect for any punishment?
February 6th, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Whoa, we can rate comments now? *rubs hands together gleefully*
I’m sure there have been other issues with this child. Now I want to know what it’s like at this school. I think i shall go peruse the sub jobs at Rahn…
February 6th, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Ok, I’m not crazy. There was a little thing where I could click on stars a seond ago.
February 6th, 2009 at 3:59 pm
dm, yeah, I installed the plugin but the configuration page wouldn’t come up so I am troubleshooting that before I bring it back online. But you’re still crazy. Trust me, I know.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:07 pm
My guess is that this is a parent who doesn’t want to admit his kid isn’t perfect. And he went off the deep end.
There are a lot of inconsistencies with his story, plus it’s *the parent’s* story and not backed up.
Was the toilet actually clogged? Or did the kid decide to take a stack of paper towls and throw them in?
A stern reprimand – to the parents and the principal – seems to fit the situation.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Hey! hoser. meanie. booger-eater.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
If this incident happened in mid-December, and it is now Feb., I guess I can’t jump to criticize the parent as a “loose cannon” or acting out of ego (if he had called the media in December, maybe). In terms of the number of people involved, it would seem that it would not take much time for the district to investigate the incident and come to a conclusion about the facts of what happened, and discipline (whoever), or not, accordingly. If the parent felt frustrated enough with the process, maybe contacting the media was all they felt they could do to get action on their complaint. Again, I dont know if this is the case, but it may be one reason for the media being contacted. I don’t think was an appropriate punishment for a 6 year old. I dont care if there were prior disciplinary issues with the child or not. I’m all for meting out punishment, and I dispise the “Now Johnny, that was a bad choice” method of “punishing” a child (which kids, of course, love), but there are other options. Further, the health issues (whether the toilet had waste in it or not) would indicate that no matter what age of the student, to require barehanded cleaning is inappropriate. If it was my kindergartener, what would I have wanted the school to do, regardless of whether the clog was deliberate or not? I’m not sure, but this surely isn’t it.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
I meant, “despise”, of course. Whoops.
February 6th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
A lot was missing in the article. First and most important, WAS the toilet paper dispenser EMPTY? No kid is going to run out with his pants down to ask the teacher for toilet paper. Was the kid using ingenuity? Toilet training of child prior to leaving the house and entering the world alone ( Going to school) is one of the most important subjects a parent can teach. And how much TP to use……………. Hopefully this was not a racially motivated incident. Maybe he was not trained properly. Maybe the principal was attempting to educate…….. Just can’t judge this article without more info.
February 6th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
What on earth leads you to wonder if it’s racially motivated? It just seems out of left field, and I’m curious.
February 6th, 2009 at 8:18 pm
dawnmarie, I’m sorry, I was forming an opinion after reading a Strib article from this morning. Sometimes the imagination fills in the blanks whether right or wrong.
February 6th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
I guess I don’t associate the last name “Hannah” with one race or another. I was just curious if there was more to it than the article.
February 7th, 2009 at 9:58 am
the story is in this am’s st. paul p.p. and online. the gist if it to me is this.
“”On Thursday, the school board unanimously agreed to discipline Steele. But officials would not comment further on the move because Steele has 20 days to file a grievance. If he does, the incident would become public.”"
bb
February 7th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Heaven forbid this incident “become public” and end up in newspapers and fodder for local blogs and their comment sections.
I think it’s best we keep this incident private.
February 7th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
MSPD, I’m pretty sure the reasons behind it are union reasons. Nothing can be released unless the disciplined releases it or files a grievance.
Blame the unions :)
February 7th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
I’m guessing the reason why these allegations do not become public is because they’re simply allegations. I could just as easily say “XYZ teacher hosted an orgy in the teachers’ lounge.” Simply an allegation.
February 8th, 2009 at 5:06 am
Dawnmarie:
Before you reflexively “blame the unions,” and WRONGLY assume that the accused has SOLE control over release of information in his case, just pause.
Think. Research?
And consider that Minnesota has an entire body of law that — as I understand it — allows the governmental body to withhold details at this point in the case. As I understand it — I am open to correction! — the information is legally closed until the discipline is actually rendered (so far, there’s been only a letter to the accused), OR the accused runs the course of his due process and is thus disciplined.
At either of those points, it’s my understanding that the REASONS for the discipline and the facts of the case become public, according to statute. The degree of detail in the required disclosure, I don’t know.
I’m “pretty sure” (your phrase) that the accused doesn’t hold all the cards. Why do you assume that?
If you’re blaming “the unions” (is it possible to specficy which union applies here, which specific bargaining agreement?), you might as well also blame “the management,” since the offending provision DID have to be negotiated.
Or, you can use your half-knowledge to just spout. That’s cool, too.
I haven’t professed to have all the answers here, but I’ve done a better job than you of ATTEMPTING to glean the facts.
Must mean I’m a member of some …. vomit …. union or something.
February 8th, 2009 at 8:48 am
i know that the teechers are represented by unions. but this guy is a administrator, correct? i don’t know if ‘management’ personnel are in unions or not.
any techeers out there, comments??
bb
February 8th, 2009 at 8:55 am
Sheesh, I’m a member of a union. Likely the same one the principal is a member of, since Minnesota has only one educator union. I do not know which bargaining unit the principal belongs to. Administrators have different rules than the lowly teachers. . (isn’t that always the case)
In my former (non-education, to be fair) union, disciplinary actions were not public information unless the disciplined person filed a grievance. For that reason, it wasn’t a far reach for me to take a guess that the disciplined (not the accused anymore, if the board is disciplining him, right?) may very well hold all the cards in whether or not it does become public, because of union policy with regards to grievances, IN ADDITION TO state statute.
I could be wrong, that would be why I said “pretty sure” versus “I know”. Since graduation from college, I have worked in professions that required membership in one union or another. I wasn’t really spouting, merely making an educated guess based on my experience. I think you over-reacted a wee bit, making assumptions about my opinions of unions.
February 8th, 2009 at 9:01 am
bb – I can’t get the union website to come up. I assume administrators are a part of the union, because the union is the most accessible place to obtain liability insurance required to work with children in an educational setting. I believe the only school personnel not required to have this insurance are general office staff, though I fully admit I could be mistaken.
February 8th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
remember what happened to the principal at Apple Valley High school a few years back when it was discovered that an illegal immigrant “student” had been living at the school undetected for a couple weeks-NOTHING! The same thing will happen here, Education Minnesota politically is too big, too strong for anything to happen.If you are skeptical of that fact,just watch what happens to your wallets in the next couple years.Nothing will change unless people educate themselves and get out and VOTE!
February 10th, 2009 at 7:17 am
Sheesh – If you are going to reference statutes, or knowledge of them, you should cite to them so that others can read the same body of law and reach their own conclusions. To make conclusions without revealing your premise entirely is one of the things you accuse DM of doing. (Reference your words: I’m “pretty sure†(your phrase) that the accused doesn’t hold all the cards. Why do you assume that?
If you’re blaming “the unions†(is it possible to specficy which union applies here, which specific bargaining agreement?), you might as well also blame “the management,†since the offending provision DID have to be negotiated.)
May 18th, 2009 at 7:03 pm
I was one of Doug Steeles students when I was in Elementry. He is a great guy and does not deserve what the media is doing to him! The fact of the matter is this is not the way the situation should have been handeled. But he should be reprimanded but not fired. You are making him sound like a monster and he is not! My little brother is a student at Rahn right now. He has turrets and Doug steele is amazing with him. He makes him feel comfortable with his condition. I feel sorry for this boy and his familiy. But I don’t think that this sort of situation would ever happen again!
May 18th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Jessica,
I think it would be a sensitive move on your part if you to learn to spell your brother’s condition, correctly – Tourette, not ‘turret,’ unless your brother is suffering from a ‘small tower that projects vertically from the wall of a building such as a medieval castle?’
(thanks Wikipedia)
May 19th, 2009 at 7:00 am
“But I don’t think that this sort of situation would ever happen again!” Jessica states. You are right Jessica, it won’t. But it never should have happened in the first place.
May 19th, 2009 at 8:07 am
did he or didn’t he get his hand slapped!!
bb
May 19th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
Well I don’t think me spelling my brothers condition wrong has anything to do With Mr. Steele. But thank you for looking that up for me!
Whit o’ whit- I totally agree but I don’t think he should lose his job over it. That child does have problems in school with behavior cause he has been removed from the class that he was in because of it! (and not from this incident)
BB STACKER: No! The little boy did not get slapped!
May 20th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
j, not the little boy, the big boy that caused the problem in the first place!!
bb
May 20th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
bb, he lost his job.
May 21st, 2009 at 7:50 am
Dawn
They have not released that information yet. Rahn still has a sub-principal.