Back to Square One after School Investigation in South Philadelphia High School Attacks

from Helen's blog in Young Philly Politics

 

by Helen Gym

 

It’s hard to look at the findings of the District’s independent investigation into the December 3rd violence at South Philadelphia High School without significant shock and outrage. After all, this was an incident in which more than two dozen Asian immigrant students were assaulted throughout the day in multiple attacks which sent 13 youth to the hospital at a school with a documented history of violence in general and against Asian immigrant students in particular.

 

Yet nearly three months after the December 3rd violence, we have a report (see below) that – while providing some insight – mostly sets us right back where we were before: with glaring discrepancies between accounts of student victims and witnesses and findings which appear to absolve the District of any responsibility. The investigation was based on interviews with only a fraction of student victims and witnesses and contained vague innuendos that served to distract from the main question: could the school/District have done anything differently to avoid or minimize the assaults?

 

The report documents in detail widespread violence on Dec. 3rd that began first thing in the morning.

 

Before 9 a.m. a student was attacked in a classroom (p. 6: previous testimony indicated that more than a dozen students had rushed into a classroom as part of an attack on an Asian student where, among other things, they threw a desk on top of him). By mid-morning there was a "surge" of 30-40 students whose "probable . . . intent was not benevolent" (p. 11) into a hallway while school staff frantically moved Asian students into classrooms. Security footage documented a "wave of 60-70 students" (p. 12) in the lunchroom hallway "surging forward" toward an attack on a small group of Asian students (p. 13). School police detained three to five students who had dragged an Asian girl down the stairwell by her hair (p. 15). After school, more than a dozen Asian students, most of whom required medical attention, were attacked by 20-40 students with more than 100 onlookers surrounding them (p. 23).

 

And yet, at no point does the report question the actions of school officials. Officials escorted students to the lunchroom (ignoring the students' expressed fears of going there and where they were subsequently attacked) and escorted them outside where large crowds had gathered, again ignoring students expressed fears of leaving the school and despite the fact that school officials "had the sense that the crowds on Broad Street were not only larger than normal, but were not dispersing quickly" (p. 22).

 

It doesn’t question why the principal sent home a letter to families the next day that made no mention of the repeated in-school assaults and instead characterized the violence as simply: "As you may have heard in the news, an incident occurred at dismissal, outside of South Philadelphia High School on Thursday, December 3, 2009."

 

Nor does it ask why District officials continued to mischaracterize the events of the day in public statements. Regional Superintendent Michael Silverman referred to the December 3rd violence as a "blip" and School Safety Chief James Golden said there was only a "minor incident" with no injuries.

 

Update: Most surprisingly, the report indicates that the accusation that Asian students had attacked a "crippled/disabled" African American student the day before was based on little more than hearsay (p. 3-5). Judge Giles could not confirm whether the African American student was a victim or was a part of an attack on Asian students that left one Asian student "unconscious." This explosive allegation had been first uttered by Superintendent Arlene Ackerman in her first remarks on the Dec. 3rd violence. The allegation heighted racial tension, fueled suspicion, and was widely interpreted as justification for the Dec. 3rd violence. It also resulted in the suspension of at least two Asian students - and it was hearsay.

 

Instead, the report essentially absolves the District and school leadership of any responsibility. In fact, the report seems to imply that if we were to revisit that day on December 3rd the administration of SPHS could have made the exact same choices.

 

When pressed on why his findings didn’t address school responsibility, Judge James Giles said he didn’t believe in "Monday-morning quarter-backing." Let's be clear" This was an incident which garnered national and international expressions of concern, where more than a dozen students were sent to the emergency room, and which sparked a boycott by more than 50 Asian students who feared for their safety after more than a year of relentless harassment. You darn well do Monday-morning quarterbacking, slow motion replay, and every possible investigation and review to see how things could and should have turned out differently. Any suggestion otherwise is a frightening analysis.

 

There are many areas where the report falls short:

 

·       No review of the history of violence at SPHS: For more than a year, students and community advocates documented dozens of incidents of harassment and assaults on Asian immigrant students at the school. Yet, Judge Giles said he was directed to limit his investigation to only two days, December 2 and December 3rd. Only three sentences in the report (p. 28) reference prior violence at the school. The investigation also ignored documented efforts by students and community advocates to implement critical changes to address racially motivated violence at the school.

 

·       Limited interviews: The investigation only involved a fraction of the student victims and neglected the majority of victims, as well as other witnesses, school staff and community advocates who were at the scene on December 3. In a number of instances, those individuals interviewed expressed concern that they were denied a chance to tell their full stories and were cut off when they attempted to do so.

 

·       Limited attention to racial bias: While the investigation acknowledged the role of race in the assaults and harassment against Asian immigrant students, it does not recognize racial bias in the failure of the District to respond to that harassment and communicate with families and students. In particular, it does not address how the on-going harassment of Asian immigrant students and the school’s failure to respond creates a hostile climate for Asian immigrant youth at South Philly.

 

·       Innuendo and rumors as deflection: I was particularly troubled by the use of innuendo and rumor to suggest that the events of Dec. 3rd may have been gang-related. Two pages are devoted to references to gang activity despite the fact that no credible evidence was presented other than the suggestion that group activity is "reminiscent of a street gang conflict" (p. 5). In any investigation, it’s essential that innuendos, gossip and rumors be addressed and put to rest. It's troubling that a stereotype of urban youth is so casually deployed in this report to deflect attention away from school accountability.

 

Without a full understanding of the problems and mistakes made at the school, it’s not surprising the recommendations in the report are mostly punitive to students, don’t address harassment or racial bias, don't address staff and administration missteps, and are at times petty (banning hooded sweatshirts, for example). The recommendations don’t address how to build a positive school environment or work with school staff and students to address the climate and interpersonal dynamics of the school.

 

Finally, there is the selective outrage of Superintendent Arlene Ackerman who only a week ago had railed against mob violence on Center City residents. Yesterday, upon the release of the report, the Superintendent was all too eager to accept the findings and recommendations of the investigation as a way to close the chapter on Dec. 3. She declared:

 

"Let's move forward because we'll never be able to really get a handle on what happened in the past. . . . It would take us another 10 years to unravel the intricacies of what happened."

 

No one would like to move forward more than the students, families and advocates who have been addressing the violence and failure at South Philadelphia High School for more than a year. Unfortunately, a report like this is further proof why the District continues to repeat the mistakes of its past over and over again.