Board deliberates fate of Farrell, Pa., principal
The principal’s entire career could be at stake, his attorney said.
FARRELL, Pa. — When Lee V. McFerren came to the Farrell School District in 2005, it looked like a win-win situation for both.
The high school, where McFerren was to be principal, was in trouble and wanted a tough, no-nonsense administrator. Academically, students were struggling, and the school had to take corrective action to satisfy the state. There were also discipline problems. Kids were roaming the halls instead of going to classes. Kids simply walked out of their classes, or walked in to other rooms to talk to their friends. They mouthed off and cursed at teachers.
McFerren, with the blessing of then-Superintendent Richard Rubano, said he was to fix all that.
He had come from the Franklin School District, an elementary school principal there. Now, he would be a high-school principal. He also expected to fill the superintendent’s post when Rubano soon retired. There he was, in his late 30s, on track to become a superintendent. It was a career move that excited him.
But neither the school district nor McFerren achieved what was desired.
Farrell High School finds itself still facing the possibility of a state takeover because of poor academic performance. Distinguished educators, who are agents sent by the Pennsylvania Department of Education to help the school get back on its feet academically, are still there.
For McFerren’s part, he’s facing the prospect of losing his job at this point in his five-year contract. He was stripped of a title of assistant superintendent, given in 2006, at the end of 2007. He applied for Rubano’s post after Rubano retired in June 2007, but his letter of application was never acknowledged. He was suspended without pay in February pending the outcome of a dismissal hearing.
That hearing before the school board covered three days in March and concluded Wednesday after three days last week. Now, the board will deliberate his fate.
That fate may include the loss of his entire career, not just his job, his lawyer, Barbara Seman Ochs, told the board at the hearing’s conclusion Wednesday.
It was lies, innuendo and rumors that put him in the situation of defending his career, Ochs said. He had upset teachers by trying to make them take control of their classrooms and quell the chaos that had taken over the school, she said.
He made them take paper off their windows and unlock classroom doors, she said.
During his testimony, McFerren said he made teachers stop drinking coffee and “acting like they were on vacation.” He made them get rid of coffee pots, microwaves and refrigerators in their rooms.
He wanted them to stop sending problem students to the office as a solution, and he wanted them to try to resolve differences and take control of discipline in their rooms.
He made it clear to them, he said, that he expected them to do their jobs and teach, or they would get poor evaluations.
There were reports that McFerren was “drunk or high” at a graduation practice in 2007. Ochs said those were unsubstantiated and the board should not consider them.
She said that complaints he’d said, “hello, guvna,” in a British accent at the senior breakfast before the practice wasn’t a big deal, because it was not a solemn occasion and he was joking with students. His subsequent speech, in which he referred to hunting groundhogs in his underwear, was not an inappropriate violent reference, she said, but rather an attempt at an analogy.
Hunting groundhogs is hard, because they often change course. Life will be the same way while you’re trying to pursue your goals, he was trying to tell students.
He was misunderstood, he said. A staff meeting at the end of 2007, in which he told teachers to pray and ask God for forgiveness, just meant that they should reflect on their jobs over the summer. He included himself in the remark as well, he said.
When he told acting Superintendent Carole Borkowski in a phone conversation to “be careful,” it meant simply that she should be careful, or they might end up where they are now, he said.
Staff members who testified, though, painted a picture of a man who was arrogant, confrontational, demeaning to teachers, unprofessional in his conduct and even incompetent in his administrative duties.
McFerren testified about insubordinate teachers who challenged his authority and went behind his back to conspire against and complain about him, but there was also evidence presented that he himself was insubordinate.
He did not submit a request to Borkowski before taking his vacation in July 2007, and did not tell her when he was leaving the building during a school day, argued Atty. Andria B. Saia with Levin Legal Group, the administration’s lawyer.
He dismissed students and staff early on the day before Christmas break in 2006, and that was against school policy, Saia said. Reports circulated that after the early dismissal, students had sex in the building.
There was testimony that he yelled at teachers in front of students, and that he threatened them with bad evaluations.
“If questions were asked, he would yell, put people down. Morale was very low,” said June Allenbaugh, a math teacher who has filed a grievance against the district based on McFerren’s conduct.
There was even a report he was seen kissing an employee named Barbara Blue, who counseled at-risk students at the school — a report he and Blue denied in testimony. An angry student started the rumor, Blue said.
Staff testified he left them unprepared, with no notice that they were to begin a math and reading course to take the place of remedial tutoring sessions. The remedial classes were also too large, math coach Annette Pawluk testified, and they mixed gifted, basic and below-basic education students.
Lynne Powell, the district’s community outreach specialist, testified McFerren was combative and unhelpful when she tried to ask him for information so she could write grants.
Saia said that by requiring more teachers to be in the cafeteria to take care of discipline problems there, he wasted 47 1/2 hours of instructional time while the district was already in an academic crisis.
Was McFerren a tough disciplinarian who simply rubbed people the wrong way as he did what was necessary for the betterment of the high school?
Some supporters who attended the hearing said they believe that to be true.
Donna Marie Lee called the hearing a “total lynching.”
“These are trumped-up charges,” she said.
She believes that McFerren’s insistence on not letting athletes play sports if they didn’t keep their grades up was good for the district.
Grace and John Bernat, who were also at the hearing, say they don’t support him.
They had four children in the school district, said Grace Bernat: “My children came out of there with great educations.”
The Bernats said there were problems with their grandchildren — other kids were teasing them. “I tried to talk to him,” Grace said. “He didn’t want to hear it from me.”
“He doesn’t handle his frustration right,” said John Bernat. “He’s a little too immature for the job.”
Two-thirds of the board, or six of its nine members, must vote to dismiss McFerren for his removal to be effective. James Nevant, the district’s solicitor, said there is no specific deadline for deliberations to end.