There will be a bell-to-bell ban on smartphones next year at Staples High School.
There is no determination yet on when it will begin. It may or may not include seniors. It probably won’t involve Yondr bags.
All those elements — and many more — will be worked out, by an “implementation committee” of administrators, staff, students and parents.
They may be ready by opening day next fall. They may take longer.
What’s most important, said superintendent of schools Thomas Scarice at last night’s Board of Education meeting, is to get it right.
He has championed a “deliberative process” since first introducing the idea of a ban, and waited to see how Wilton High’s process (initiated this year) worked.
Board members — including the two non-voting students, Calum Madigan Souleye Kebe — agreed on the broad outlines of a ban.
Robert Harrington, who disagrees with Scarice on many issues, praised the superintendent for changing Harrington’s mind
“I work in technology,” Harrington said, “and it’s counterintuitive to me to take technology away.
“But I’ve been swayed by (Scarice’s) vision for the culture at Staples. I hope we move with speed to implement it. I don’t think it’s right to ban phones for seniors, and Yondr bags seem to treat students like children. But I favor the superintendent’s recommendation.”
Voices were far louder earlier in the evening, during discussion of the Board of Education’s vote on Monday to affirm Scarice’s non-renewal of boys soccer head coach Russell Oost-Lievense’s contract.
Board of Education members, and their mediator, at Monday’s appeal hearing. (Photo/Dan Woog)
Members Dorie Hordon and Jill Dillon began by explaining their votes, based on their narrow charge to determine whether the superintendent’s decision had been “arbitrary and capricious.”
Hordon called coaching “a privilege, not a right. I understand many people are disappointed. This was a difficult and painful situation. Anyone can reach out to me. I am happy to explain my decision in more detail.”
Olson said, “We followed the policy with the evidence that was presented to us, and the testimony we heard under oath. It was a hard and painful decision, and not made lightly.”
Harrington stressed the importance of all documents and emails — including those that had not been admitted as evidence — being provided to the board. He reiterated his call for the resignation of athletic director VJ Sarullo.
Several members of the public spoke. Steve Shackelford questioned why Sarullo reported a “physical assault” to the Department of Children and Family Services, while testifying under oath that there had not been one.
He added, “This is not going away. This is not a soccer issue. It’s an issue of how all of our coaches and teachers are treated by the administration.
Joan Gillman asked why 8 witnesses — including herself — had not been allowed to testify. “Decisions were made on incomplete evidence. You took away the coach’s right to defend himself,” she told the board. “What were you afraid of?”
There was one surprise during the public comments. Eoghan Scully, whose High Point Road property abuts Staples’ Jinny Parker Field, complained about the sudden locking of a gate through which many students walk to Staples and Bedford Middle School.
Scarice apologized for not answering earlier. He said that, after conversations with the Westport Public School’s risk management personnel, the gates would be locked during the school day.
They will be open, however, at all other times: before and after school, and on weekends.
Jinny Parker Field will be padlocked only during school hours. (Photo/Dave Briggs)
(If you follow school news — or anything else — on “06880,” please click here to support our work. Thanks for helping us do what we do!)
I think that since leadership by example is a concept that all Westporters (and Staples grads) have learned the hard way, it would be appropriate for ALL of us (not just Staples students) to support Principal Thomas and Superintendent Scarice and put all personal devices in a locked vault during school hours. I work in a nuclear power plant and my boss has agreed to let me participate.
“When an authority makes a decision without reasonable grounds or adequate consideration of the circumstances, it is said to be arbitrary and capricious and can be invalidated on that ground. In other words there should be absence of a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made. There should be a clear error of judgment; an action not based upon consideration of relevant factors and so is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion.”
Fact: Decision was based on wrong and incomplete evidence, i.e. physical abuse, Coach forcing the student to go in the golf cart with the offending Coach (he did not, which only came out at the hearing).
Fact: Decision was most directly based on the Coach violating a reporting rule when such rule didn’t and doesn’t exist. How would any reasonable employee know what rises to such a reporting level without official guidance?
Fact: Selective review of evidence and investigation/interviews, the definition of “adequate consideration of the circumstances”.
Fact: Refusal to give clarity to expectation in regard to the banquet appearance. “No contact with any player” the season was over so they are technically no longer “players”; the event was private, non school sanctioned and paid for by private citizens. Is it reasonable for an employer to have the right to control a person’s private life?
Fact: The “shed” incident’s use as evidence of poor judgement. Intentional mis-characterization of a daily practice team meeting room to support an intimated abuse allegation & poor judgement when DCF found nothing worth investigating. Further this “evidence” should have either been disqualified by the “moderator” or the Coach’s attorney should have been allowed to refute the evidence…she was not.
Fact: The school cited a pattern of poor judgement. The “shed” incident happened in 2022. There was no employee evaluation nor any record of the incident filed or noted. The employee’s 2023 evaluation also noted nothing questioning his judgement, actually a glowing report in all categories. Not until his most recent evaluation (after the incident) did his evaluation go from glowing to failing in every category.
Clear all the noise and the decision was centrally based on the Coach’s violation of a reporting obligation. A reporting obligation that doesn’t exist. The explanation that the “student handbook” suffices for a Coach’s handbook is totally disingenuous. I doubt there are “reporting” guidelines in that handbook anyway, other than “see something, say something”. If a player spits on the turf field, is that reportable? If a player gets a red card, is that reportable? If a player is late to a game, is that reportable? Aside from the overall questionable school decision as arbitrary & capricious I’d opine that the decision to label the occurrence at the retreat as “reportable” was, in and of itself, arbitrary and capricious.
So I have to guess that the “Moderator’s” explanation of A&C was as flawed as his performance during the hearing and that led the board members astray.
This entire situation, in my opinion, appeared to me to be a personal issue with the Athletic Director and the soccer program. Targeting the Coaches who have a long, strong connection with the “old guard” and then looking for a “good” excuse to exert control. Having had personal experiences with Staples soccer for many years I’ve seen the “cult” type attitude on display many times so this explanation strikes a chord with me. That said I still think this particular situation was a travesty.
Phillip, Read the documentation on how cell phone use is mentally hurting our youth and letting bullying go on unchecked. I have NEVER had any social media EVER. No C, no Facebook, no Instagram, no NOTHING. Banning cellphone use in school is a no brainer!
Jack,
U DA MAN!!!
Eric, Thanks, but this really just common sense!
Jack: While I appreciate your thoughts my response had nothing to do with the cell phone ban. Thanks anyway.
Phillip, How’d I misread that? The good news is, according to Eric, who has a 165 I.Q, I’m still DA MAN!