Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF INTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA, ROBERT B SKLAROFF NO. 2016-09548 ABINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT NOTICE TO DEFEND - CIVIL You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you, You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE. LAWYER REFERENCE SERVICE, MONTGOMERY BAR ASSOCATION 100 West Airy Street (REAR) NORRISTOWN, PA 19404-0268 (610) 279-9660, EXTENSION 201 PRIFOO34 RIO/ICase#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA ROBERT B. SKLAROFF, M.D. 1219 Fairacres Road Rydal, Pennsylvania 19046-2911 Paint, v. ABINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT, et a. 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 Respondents Ahearing shall be conducted on CIVIL DIVISION - LAW NO. 16-09548 Jury Trial is Demanded Rule at in Courtroom By the Court DateCase#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION - LAW ROBERT B. SKLAROFF, M.D. 1219 Fairacres Road Rydal, Pennsylvania 19046-2911 Plaintif, : v. NO. 16-09548 ABINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al. 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 Jury Trial is Demanded Respondents Order Plaintiff shall be awarded Respondents shall be enjoined from altering alltted-times for public comment during School Board Meetings By the Court DateCase#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION - LAW ROBERT B. SKLAROFF, M.D. 1219 Fairacres Road Rydal, Pennsylvania 19046-2911 Plaintif, : v. NO. 16-09548 ABINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT 970 Highland Avenue Jury Trial is Demanded Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 and RAYMOND McGARRY, Esq., President 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 and Mrs. Michele R, Tinsman 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 and Ms. Susan D. Amhold 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 and Mr. Daniel Sean Kaye 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 and Ms. Marsha J. Levell 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 and Mrs. Tracy Panella 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 and ‘Adam M. Share, Esq. 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 and Joshua Stein, Esq. 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 and Mr. Barry J. Stupine 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 Respondents Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D. 1219 Fairacres Road Rydal, Pennsylvania 19046-2911 [215-333-4900] June 9, 2016 —pro se— SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT |, Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D. (Plaintif’}, certify that the folowing statements are true and accurate; prompting this filing are Preliminary Objections, for additional averments include elaborative narrative that undermines concern that invoking the Sunshine Act has been insufficiently justified...and that any other remedy exists.Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Parties Robert B. Sklarof is a resident and taxpayer of Abington Township in Montgomery County. Abington School District is a Pennsylvania politcal subdivision, within Montgomery County; itis a median-sized, suburban, public school district serving Abington Township and Rockledge Borough. Raymond McGarry, Esq, is the President of the Abington School Board Mrs. Michele R. Tinsman, Ms. Susan D. Ambhold, Mr. Daniel Sean Kaye, Ms. Marsha J. Level, Mrs. Tracy Panella, Adam M. Share, Esq., Joshua Stein, Esq,, and Mr. Barry J, Stupine are Members of the Abington School Board Controlling References The Pennsylvania Sunshine Act [65 Pa.C.S.A. § 702-716] {the “Act’} states, in pertinent part [http:/webpages.charter.net\gdsbmmilp/sunshine.htm] {emphasis added}: §710. Rules and regulations for conduct of meetings Nothing inthis chapter shall prohibit the agenoy from adopting by official action the rules and regulations necessary forthe conduct ofits meetings and the maintenance of order. The rules and regulations shall not be made to violate the intent of this chapter. 710.4. Public participation (2) General rule. — Except as provided in subsection (d), the board or council of a political subdivision or of an authority created by a political subdivision shall provide a reasonable opportunity at each advertised regular meeting and advertised special meeting for residents of the political subdivision or of the authority created by a poltcal subdivision or for taxpayers of the political subdivision or of the authority created by a political subdivision or for both to comment on matters of concern, official action or deliberation which are or ‘may be before the board or council prior to taking official action. 5Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Ifthe board or council determines that there is not sufficient time at a meeting for residents of the political subdivision or of the authority created by a political subdivision or for taxpayers of the political subdivision or ofthe authority created by € political subdivision or for both to comment, the board or council may defer the ‘comment period to the next regular meeting or to a special meeting occurring in advance of the next regular meeting... (c) Objection, — Any person has the right to raise an objection at any time to a perceived violation of this chapter at any meeting of a board or council of a political subdivision or an authority created by a poltical subdivision. 9713. Business transacted at unauthorized me ing void A legal challenge under this chapter shall be filed within 30 days from the date ‘of a meeting which is open, or within 30 days from the discovery of any action that ‘occurred at a meeting which was not open at which this chapter was violated, provided that, n the case of a meeting which was not open, no legal challenge may be commenced more than one year from the date of said meeting 714, Penalty Any member of any agency who participates in a meeting with the intent and purpose by that member of violating this chapter commits a summary offense and shall, upon conviction, be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding $100 plus costs of prosecution. §7t44. Attorney fees If the court determines that an agency willfully or with wanton disregard violated a provision of this chapter, in whole or in part, the court shall award the prevailing party reasonable attorney fees and costs of litigation or an appropriate portion of the fees and costs. If the court finds that the legal challenge was of a frivolous nature or was brought with no substantial justification, the court shall award the prevailing party reasonable attorney fees and costs of litigation or an appropriate portion of the fees and costs. §715. Jurisdiction and venue of judicial proceedings The Commonwealth Court shall have original jurisdiction of actions involving State agencies and the courts of common pleas shall have original jurisdiction of actions involving other agencies to render declaratory judgments or to enforce this chapter by injunction or other remedy deemed appropriate by the court. The action may be brought by any person where the agency whose act is complained of is located or where the act complained of occurred.Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 716. Confidentiality Al acts and parts of acts are repealed insofar as they are inconsistent with this chapter, excepting those statutes which specifically provide for the confidentialty of information. Those deliberations or official actions which, if conducted in public, would violate a lawful privilege or lead to the disclosure of information or confidentiality protected by law, including matter related to the investigation of possible or certain violations of the law and quasi-judicial deliberations, shall not fall within the scope of this chapter. The Abington Board Policy Statement regarding ‘Agendas’ states, in pertinent part {http/www.abington.k12.pa.us/policies/media/ sites/policies/BOARD-GOVERNANCE/AGENDAS- BOARD-POLICY-STATEMENT.pdf| (emphasis added} The Board of School Directors will release to the news media on or by 12:00 noon cn the days of the regularly scheduled and supplementary meetings preliminary copies of the agenda. The release will contain a statement indicating that the agenda may be modified at any time through action of the Board of School Directors, individual Board members, or the Superintendent of Schools and/or Secretary of the Board of Schoo! Directors. The Abington Board Policy Statement regarding “Procedures for Board Meetings" states, in pertinent part [hitp:/Wwwwabington.k12.pa.usfpolcies/medialsites/policies/BOARD-GOVERNANCE/PROCE DURES-FOR-BOARD-MEETINGS-BOARD-POLICY.STATEMENT.pdf] (emphasis added} ‘Agenda - In the transaction of business, the following order shall be observed: 9. Comments from Citizens (a 40-minute limit on this item with approximately 20 minutes for comments on the agenda and 20 minutes for comments on any matter regarding school affairs with allocations established at the discretion of the President) ... | Comments of Citizens on Matters Regarding Schoo! Affairs, excluding personnel (2 20-minute time limit on this agenda item. A citizen will be recognized once and each citizen’s comments will be limited to three minutes, except at the discretion of the President.) ... 15. If any member is aggrieved by a decision of the chair, the member ‘Shall have the privilege to appeal to the Board, and the vote on such appeal shall be taken without debate.Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 10. 1 12. Jurisdiction The Montgomery Court of Common Pleas has primary jurisdiction on any alleged violation of the ‘Sunshine Law, and there are no “confidentiality” concerns related to this litigation; this action is being brought by the aggrieved party, the Plaintif, in the county (Montgomery) in which the Board's transgression occurred (which is also where the Board is located). ‘The Act's tenets were applicable to all Board meetings (including that of 5/10/2016), for policies of the Abington School Board can't violate Commonwealth law (even ifany rule confcted with the Act). The Board, as a local agency, did not issue any “final order, decree, decision, determination or ruling affecting personal or property rights, privileges, immunities, duties, liabilities or obligations,” nor did itissue an (appealable) ‘adjudication’ when the Chair silenced Plaintif [vide infra}. Thus, a remedy pursuant to alleged violation of District policy can't be pursued first before the Board and then appealed to this Court under the Local Agency Law {see Pa.C.S.A, §§ 101, 105 et seq; instead, itis alleged that the conduct of the Board meeting is a tort that directly violated the Act Narrative Plaintiff was intimately involved inthe bipartisan passage of Act 70 and, during the May 2015 Board ‘meeting, asked that Abington provide a model curriculum; after having been informed of what was being taught in January, 2016, Plaintiff communicated profound concem that ulimately prompted the ‘Superintendent to recognize “there is a piece of unfinished business’ {Appendix A, page 1, last line} and to authorize his meeting with Abington School Administration Staff on February 5, 2016.Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 B. 14 16. 16. 17 Plaintiff immediately conveyed displeasure with the content of this meeting, prompting the adcition cof an agenda-item for a Social Studies Staff meeting on February 12, 2016; it was deemed necessary to discern ‘whether educating students in this realm would necessitate integrating entire units, rather than viewing tis as a subset of some larger annual initiative” (Appendix A, page 10, 13}. Instead of awaiting the annual (summertime) curriculum review, this entre process was accelerated; a a result, an inservice was held on Friday, April 27, 2016, focused on “Holocaust Education Professional Development’ [hitoy/www.abington.k12,pa.usinews/holocaust-education-professional- development-held-for-ibrarians-secondary-english-reading-social-studies:staft During the regularly-scheduled Abington School Board Meeting of April 8, 2016, Dr. James Melchor, Assistant Director of Curriculum, presented a time-line for the development of this curriculum, Plaintiff had no advance-knowledge this was to occur and, immediately thereafter, was denied the ‘opportunity to speak for as much as 40 minutes, pursuant to the Board policy and the Agenda, inasmuch as this topic (Act 70] was both an issue of public concern and a specific agenda-item. Plaintiff had concluded (as per “Follow-up memo XX’): “Abington is a double-outier regarding both its not having mandated 12 Grade Social Studies and its not having implemented a comprehensive didactcitested age-specific annual-curriculum for all students in 4-12" Grades; noted was the lack of reliance upon the ‘three E's’ [electives, English, enhancement] as methods to evade this rudimentary task, and oral/e-mail communications confi concem that interactions between the DoE (on ths issue, if not others) and the School Districts has not been optimal (if even extant.”Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 18. 19. 20. 24 22, 23, During the regularly-scheduled Abington School Board Meeting of May 10, 2016, President McGarry presided and all Members were present; the distributed Agenda {Appendix B, excerpted} contained identical operational language as was cited supra {see {7 items “g” and ""} specifically regarding “Comments from Citizens" that are invited at two times during the meeting [items #5 & #24] Plaintiff had determined that the Pennsylvania Department of Education's Social Studies liaison had not established direct communication with all of the 501 School Districts in the Commonweatth, Plaintiff had culled e-mails and had surveyed them directly; as confirmed both orally and in the reply e-mails, this had constituted the initial contact regarding Act 70 for many of these entities, despite the fact that House Bill 1424 had been signed on June 26, 2014 (almost two years prior) Plaintiff cited his having contacted Ms. Flaherty regarding intended implementation (Appendix C} and wanted to discuss his discovery of there having been deficient statewide implementation During the “Comments from Citizens” section of the meeting, Plaintiff rose and (as had also ‘occurred during the prior month's meeting) was erroneously told he had only three minutes to speak. Although these are grave concems that carry visceral personal import (as well as lament regarding under-appreciated contemporary manifestations), Plaintiff expressed no emotional outburst. Plaintiff said he wanted to address two issues regarding school affairs (the need to add at least a semester of mandated Social Studies during the 12 Grade and the need to develop a curriculum consistent with Act 70, addressing ‘Holocaust, Genocide and Human Rights Violations’). 10Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 24, 25. 26. 27. 28. 29, Plaintiff viewed both issues as being “matters of concer, official action andlor deliberation which had been and are anticipated to be before the board prio to taking official action” but, because the Administration was not updating Plaintf [and, indeed, was also refusing to schedule any type of follow-up meeting or dialogue}, it was not possible to discern when such action might occur. Plaintiff initaly cited an article (that had been posted on Facebook moments earlier) that illustrated how curricula have been corrupted regarding these sensitive issues and, subsequently, an effort was made to summarize points that had been unearthed and then communicated to the Superintendent (and to selected administrative-staff) within 25 memos (comprising 145 pages). Mr. McGarry interrupted this discussion before the preliminary results of this laborious initiative had been conveyed, claiming six minutes had elapsed; yet, no one else from the public rose to speak and—when surveyed by the Plaintiff—no one expressed a desire to speak regarding any issue. ‘Any Member could raise an objection at any time to a perceived violation of the Act but, despite Plaintf’s expression of concem that he had a right to speak longer than 180 seconds, none did so. It was not possible to “appeal the ruling ofthe Chair” because Plaintf is not a Board member and, thus, Plaintiff attempted to prompt a journalist (who was covering these meetings) to follow-up these trenchant queries (both locally and in Harrisburg) due to Plaintiffs obvious personal imitations. Plaintiff meshed his two concems by demonstrating the inability to comply with Act 70 untivunless mandatory 12" Grade Social Studies were restored, at least for the first semester. uCase#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 30, 31 It had been stated, in muitple memos, that Plaintiff had planned to pose these seven queries: if there was no information generated internally related to the decision to abolish mandated Social Studies in 12" Grade (as per the right-to-know data), then what level of due-diligence (if any) did you {Abington} exhibit prior to effecting such a ‘monumental change in the entire structure of the senior year? ._ Have you {Abington} inquired as to the policies of other Pennsylvania school districts regarding whether any (at the very least) mandate a semester of 12% Grade Social Studies? |. Do you {Abington} recognize the need to implement an a cific didacticitested curriculum each year for all students in 4.12 grades (focused on the Senior High School years, notwithstanding whatever might be covered via English, electives, and enrichment) encompassing the “Holocaust, Genocide and _Human_Rights Violations"—drawing upon ‘resources’ but not assuming that ANY of them will be invoked unless explicitly mainstreamed in the specified lesson-plans? |. How will you {Abington} be able to accommodate the program you plan to use as a ‘mode! for inter alia 11% and 12 Grades [“Echoes and Reflections”), when numerous didactic points are to be conveyed [“Addressing Common Core State Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies] through a curriculum that only mandates study of American History in 11 Grade? Did your {Abington’s} 4/26/2016 inservice address how anything mandated in your chosen curriculum can be encompassed in 11" Grade American History, noting 12" Grade may merely comprise English, electives and enrichment? To what degree has flexibility in the implementation of Lesson Plans been integrated into your {Abington's} curriculum, particularly regarding the “genocide and human rights violations” component that is inherent in Act 70? Will you {Abington} have conveyed anything “special” to the (4-126 grade) students on 5/5/2016, Holocaust Remembrance Day? [Wil the aforementioned Mississippi event have been discussed, particularly with younger students?) After Plaintiff had read the first item [supra], Mr. McGarry interrupted; he refused to reply to it and, indeed, refused to permit the remaining six queries to be read (and to be heard by the public, both on-site and via cable-TV), thereby yielding a disjointed presentation of both key issues.Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 32, 33, 34, 36, 36. 37. Upon departing, Plaintiff pointedly failed to reciprocate a verbal expression of ‘pleasure’ after having heard my aborted comments, as conveyed by Mr. McGarry immediately thereafter. Implications alistic Plaintiff notes the distinction-with-a-difference between the two 20-minute time-frames allotted for public comment in the Agenda; the latter explicitly cites the 3-minute rule, but the former doesn't The Agenda was not modified (at the beginning of the meeting) and there were no other public speakers (necessitating the meting-out of allocations at the discretion of the President); therefore, there were neither chronological nor operational pressures upon the President to abruptly curtail the Plaini’s presentation of necessarylappropriate new-information to the Board and to the public Implications ~ Pedagogic Plaintiff senses resistance to the concept of re-insttuting mandatory 12" Grade Social Studies that would encompass World Cultures, noting that this might be the last time some of the students would be exposed to a non-ethnocentric perspective; the core curriculum contains Civies (10 Grade) and ‘American History (11% Grade), but there is no age-specific education for these mature teenagers regarding the global concerns that have evolved throughout recorded history (let alone those that have resulted in both Western Judeo-Christian Culture and the venal forces leading to the Shoah). Plaintiff also senses a false sense of security regarding the degree to which the curriculum is ‘compliant with Act 70, regarding both the Holocaust (and its “perfect storm” origins) and the other types of genocide and human rights violations that have occurred both historically and currently. Plaintiff views self-referential claims that Abington had been a ‘pioneer’ in this regard as irrelevant, 13,Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 38. 39, 40. 44 42, 4%. Plaintiff explicitly cited excerpts from the program claimed to be the model for what is occurring in Abington ["Echoes and Reflections’; emphasized was the need for explicit study of myriad ideas in 414 or 126 grades, noting that this rudimentary set of didactic goals could not be achieved through 4% Grade (American History) or through 12% Grade (absent a mandated Social Studies curiculum). Plaintiff anticipates the need to revisit the School Board meetings to discuss these two matters (and, perhaps, others that may arise); for example, one year ago, at Plaintf’s behest, the Board pledged to provide reports regarding two additional issues (seat belts in schoo! buses and use of school- libraries after-hours, in lieu of depending upon the Roslyn Branch library, for example). Plaintiff anticipates that preserving this 20-minute public-comment period for himself and others {accommodating for times when multiple speakers may be in-attendance by remaining unti the ‘meeting's completion, for a briefer “second bite of the apple’) would serve the commonweal; it is noted that neither the Administration nor the Board had attempted to ullize the time-frame extant between meetings to rectify recognized concerns that have been carefully, repeatedly documented. Plaintiff recognizes the potential desire to minimize the public airing of discordant viewpoints; yet, Plaintiff views such behavior—when carefully researched—as manifesting a citizen's civic duty. ‘Count #1 - Abington School Board and Mr. McGarry: Paragraphs 1-41 are adopted herein as if reprinted here in their entirety. Mr. McGarry, President of the Abington School Board, violated the "Sunshine Act” when he failed to provide Plaintiff the opportunity to discuss two key-issues for up to 20 minutes. 4Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 44, 45, 46. 47. Therefore, because each entity committed a summary offence, each should be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding $100 plus costs of prosecution Count #2 ~ The Members of the Abinaton School Board Paragraphs 1-44 are adopted herein as if reprinted herein their entirety The Members of the Abington School Board failed to ensure compliance with the “Sunshine Act” when they failed to ensure Plaintif had been provided the opportunity o discuss two key-issues for up to 20 minutes. Therefore, because each entity committed a summary offence, each should be sentenced to pay a fine not exceeding $100 plus costs of prosecution Respectfully Submitted, Robert B. Sklarlf. Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D. 1219 Fairacres Road Rydal, Pennsylvania 19046-2911 June 9, 2016 —pro se—Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL DIVISION - LAW ROBERT B. SKLAROFF, M.D. 1219 Fairacres Road Rydal, Pennsylvania 19046-2911 Plaintf : v. NO. 16-09548 ABINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al. 970 Highland Avenue Abington, Pennsylvania 19001 Jury Trial is Demanded Respondents Verification |, Robert B. Sklaroff, do verify that the following documents are true and correct: 1, Appendix A [Act 70 Implementation @ Abington ~ Database, Critique, and Projected Time-Line’] 2. Appendix B [Agenda of 5/1012016 School Board Meeting} 3. Appendix C [Implementation of ACT 70 of 2014] This verification is made pursuant to the penalties under law for the falsification of unswor statements or filings withthe Court Rebest B. Sklar Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D. Date: 6/9/2016Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D. —pro se— 1219 Fairaores Road Rydal, Pennsylvani rsklaroff@amail.com (215) 333-4900 19046-2911 ROBERT B. SKLAROFF, M.D. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS Plaintif, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. ABINGTON SCHOOL DISTRICT, CIVIL ACTION RAYMOND McGARRY, MICHELLE R. NO. 16-09548 TINSMAN, SUSAND. ARNHOLD, DANIEL ‘SEAN KAYE, MARSHA J. LEVELL, TRACY PANELLA, ADAM M SHARE, JOSHUA STEIN, BARRY J. STUPINE Defendants REPLY TO PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS TO AMENDED COMPLAINT ‘AND MOTION TO ACCEPT FILING OF “SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT” Plaintiff, Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D., hereby provides his reply to preliminary objections to the Amended Complaint and simultaneously moves for acceptance of a Second Amended Complaint, as follows: 1. Prodromal narrative was added to provide the evidentiary foundation for Plainti's claim— uoting from the Sunshine Act—that the matters he was attempting to address were “matters of concem, offical action andlor deliberation which had been andlor would be anticipated to be before the board prior to taking official action,” thereby undermining the claim that this averment had been solely “conclusory.” 2, These matters were not on the Agenda of the May Board meeting (although they had been the subject ofa presentation atthe April Board meeting) and they are tobe revisited—although Plaintif does not know when—inasmuch as the Superintendent views implementation of Act 70 as “unfinished-business.”Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 3. The introductory comments are otherwise accurate, except for the necessity to clarify one subtle-error that recurs in Count |, so as to undermine any perception that Plaintiff engages in hyperbole. 4. Specifically, in 4, itis stated that ‘Plaintiff was not permitted to speak for the entire {emphasis added} 20 minute public comment period” while citing 30 of the Amended Complaint, despite the fact that this claim (now | 43] was that Plaintf had wanted to speak “for up to’ 20 minutes (not just 3). 5. This mischaracterizaton also emerges in § 20 [...speak for 20 minutes..." 6. Both Counts dim the Complaint is legally insufficient [Demurrer Pa.R.Civ.P. 1028(a)(4)] the first due to the claim that no facts are pled “to establish that the policies adopted by the District and School Board are unreasonable...and his entitlement to speak for 20 minutes” and the second due to the claim that no facts are pled “establishing the matters on which he was commenting upon [sic] were on the agenda andior were otherwise within the scope of 65 Pa.C.S.A. § 710.1(a) {"The Sunshine Act}, that asserting a legal conclusion did not suffice, and thatthe District could “restrict public comment to matters which involve current business of the School Board.” 7. First, ithas notbeen pled that the Board policies are in any way “unreasonable” and, indeed, the Proposed Order was explicity fashioned in a conscious effort to preserve them unscathed 8, tis the faulty implementation of these Board policies that is the gravamen of this effort. 9. Second, again, no “entitement" was averred by Plaintif that Plaintf should be able to speak (regarding Act 70 or, indeed, regarding any other topic...such as glaring deficiencies he had unearthed regarding the activities of the Pennsylvania Department of Education) for an “entire” 20 minutes. 10, _Atissue isthe ability to speak “up to” 20 minutes (assuming no one else wishes to speak). 11, Third, itwas not necessary for the issues being discussed to be on the Agenda tobe raised AraWIOS}UOYW 38 P2}9490C] 9-RFS60-9L0T #98ED_Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Robert B. Sklaroff, M.D., F.A.C.P. Medical Oncology/Hematology @ Telephone: [215] 333-4900 & Facsimile: [215] 333-2023 1219 Fairacres Road Rydal, Pennsylvania 19046-2911 5_rsklaroff@gmail.com ® 2/5/2016 To: — *Dr. James Melchor, Assistant Director of Curriculum, Abington School District Ce: *Dr. Jeffrey Fecher, Assistant Superintendent, Abington School District *Ms. Judy Bomze, Director of Pupil Services, Abington School District Dr. Amy F. Sichel, Superintendent, Abington School District Dr. Ann Bacon, Director of Curriculum, Abington School District {School Board Members ~ Please Distribute} Ms. Deanne Comer, ‘choolteacher & “Holocaust Voices” Author ‘Ms. Rhonda Fink-Whitman, Cinematographer ‘Ms. Holli Cooper, Schoolteacher & Parent [Council Rock] Joseph Rooney, Pilot & Concerned Citizen Dr. Paul B. Winkler Peter Fredlake, Director, Teacher Education and Special Programs, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum Karen Mulchanow, Executive Director, Pennsylvania State Board of Education Stephanie Jones, Administrative Assistant, Pennsylvania State Board of Education Sally Flaherty, Curriculum Advisor in Social Studies, Pennsylvania Department of Education Pennsylvania State Senator John C. Rafferty, Jr. Pennsylvania Representative Michael Vereb Re: Act 70 Implementation @ Abington — Database, Critique, and Projected Time-Line Our “hour-long” meeting [with those who are denoted by an “*”....supra] started early and ended a half-hour late; lots of info was exchanged and a rntative battle-plan was articulated. This is being shared with interested-parties who have been encountered during recent days, for the curriculum-development process in this enlightened school system will undoubtedly affect how others integrate this concept into their existing programs (in PA and elsewhere). Indeed, an ulterior motive is to ensconce a paradigm that captures the mindsct of those who have advocated for this to be accomplished over the decades, lest “historical revisionism”, alter the thrust thereof. Envisioned is formulation of a succinct power-point presentation, for a public that depends upon pedagogic professionals to implement a lifelong intervention for all students, particularly those who might not be initially motivated to appreciate the vital import of internalizing the FACTS of what has transpired [particularly in the Shoah]. ‘The goal of this memo is to summarize how an effort has been made to repair ASAP what Dr. Sichel recognized [after a bit of give-and-take, after sh ared last month’s PowerPoint summary of what is occurring @ Abington] as “there is a piece of unfinished business.” 2Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Personal Perspective — Dramatis Personae After I learned of the need to facilitate passage of bipartisan legislation to mandate this type of education within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Messrs. Vereb and Rafferty were alerted and graciously/assiduously labored to accomplish this, over the objections—sadl of the Pennsylvania Jewish Coalition. Multiple misconceptions feg,, “unfunded mandate” were identified, exposed, and punctured...multiple fam: compromises were rebuffed...and the result was a bill that focused properly on the need to convey awareness of the history of “Holocaust, Genocide, and Human Rights Violations” as they occurred, occur, and could predictably recur. Thereafter, I remained alert to the need to track the implementation of it, although [candidly] I didn’t do so tenaciously; it was recognized that people needed “space.” T have preserved in the “ce”-list those who have acted forthrightly [and have excluded those who have demonstrated inability to follow-through on their allegedly-heartfelt belicfs— knowing what they know—aware that they will undoubtedly learn of this initiative}. ‘Thus, educators who candidly claimed some aspects of this effort are “above their pay-grade” are included herein, because it is felt that they will properly employ the information herein. Due to a suddenly-rescheduled meeting, Ms. Cooper coulde’t attend but, in lieu of her being present, she e-mailed [@ 2:16 a.m] a sct of in-the-weeds considerations [that were partially read @ the beginning of the meeting] which illustrate the type of approach we adopted: ‘You need to ask tomorrow for specifies vs. General Curriculum. As in; What do Lesson Plans look like from grade level teachers (real lesson plans used in past) In those Lesson Plans, what type of presentation and flow is followed in the diff grades? ‘Opening comments and/or journal responses? Interactive whole group class work or homework review? The same with small group interaction? Use of any individual or ‘group projects assigned as assessment tools (with certain amount of time given at beginning of Holocaust Studies) in addition to quizzesitesting for retention for future and lifetime/long-term core knowledge? These projects in class time or out of class? (my colleagues and self always had out of class as preferable with 4-wks time) ~-Books assigned to read: one book for whole class or a shor list, grade/age appropriate to pick from and commit to? Book report or oral presentation on the book and feedback (grade appropriate oral presentations are excellent assessment tools, as well as, segues into open dialogue, practice with expanding speech/language’ expression/vocabulary, etc., which is always appropriate, despite whatever subject matteridiscipline class students are in-Social Studies, Science, Math, Reading, etc.) Whatever the course may be, still always great to keep students using oral expressive skills b/e curriculum all over now, don't get in enough spelling, vocabulary, language skills!!! ~-Speakers or films being presented, to bring this period of time, that now seems so long ago to our students, "stark reality"?? Is this interactive? For classes only? Entire school? Or open to parents? Seeing or hearing curriculum is not so impressive from James, WITHOUT a showing of ‘example Lesson Plans, Specific Assignments, Whole And Small Group Reading/Writing Activities, Interactive Dialogue, Homework sent that parents required to review and sign (some type of back and forth exercise~grade specific) Please plan on follow-up with him. Please!Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Hope what I wrote above is clear and able to be shared with him. He will understand ‘Think his replies were very general with you. I wrote specifics that teachers must put down in our lesson plans and turn in to our Dept. Heads andor principals atthe start of each week Don't accept GENERAL CURRICULUM INFORMATION!!! Throw all that I wrote above out at him, A flip chart in the Lower grade classrooms may not suffice, particularly if it is merely @ rote memorization exercise? Are any out of school trips ever taken or permitted in district??? 1 complied with her request, recognizing that preparation for this mecting was extensive; textbooks were ID'ed with stickies [that we discussed only in a cursory fashion, although it is hoped that they will be pursued during a subsequent meeting}. Candidly, I was focused on the core/didactic curriculum in the social-studies realm that would be tested and, thus, was far less interested in the English and/or Elective curriculum that might “enrich,” Preparatory to this meeting, I remitted a series of e-mails that summarized my explicit goals; excerpts thereof include, also, the resource-hyperlinks that often mirrored what had been disseminated via the National Holocaust Museum, the PA-DoE, and others, for emphasized resolutely was the trenchant desire was to demonstrate how they might be applied; merely knowing they are extant simply would not suffice. Mustrative of the fact that this view resonated was how my having discounted the “sound of one hand clapping” led to its being cited as a quotation from J. D. Salinger {citing a famous Zen Koan in the beginning of Nine Storie; flexible application was assumed, but a working-bypothesis was needed. https:/ /books.poogle.com/books?id=oBPBiaBBE24C&pp= PA8A&lpe= PAS, id--salinger+sound-of-+one+hand-+elay My preconceived notions: Please let me know if I should read anything ahead-of-time via attached- ‘memo, to maximize efficiency; | simply plan to probe two issues: 1, Ensuring that all key-topies have been compassed, based upon multiple resources @ multiple levels [plus people]. 2. Ensuring that the three elements of Act 70 have been included in the core-curriculum [not “clective”] pre-graduation Will then “work backwards” from the bottom of this e-mail chain, with the process completed [I hope] prior to the next School Board Meeting,= 30.00 1. L would want to acquire confirmation that no other core-course in the High Schoo! addresses these Act 70 requirements except for the 11" Grade [ethnocentrically-entitled] “American History: World War Il; Creation of Israel”; note that I would not probe any electives and/or any readings. 2. Regarding “American History: World War I; Creation of Israel,” 1 would want to read the overall-curriculum, lesson-plans and testing-criteria that are intended to satisfy the Act 70 requirements [“Holocaust genocide and human rights violations”) 3. T would want to be able to review the resource[s} that were invoked when formulating these data. 4, Once this “High-Schoo!”-level analysis has been completed and an appropriate remedial plan has been synthesized [and adopted, THIS YEAR], it will be easier to formulate an approach to applying these concepts to the core-curriculum of EACH/EVERY grade from 4-12, in an age-specific fashion. 5. I would want to know which other core-course touches upon any aspect of the Act 70 criteria and, if so, how awareness of the Shoah is referenced within that disparate context. Please allow me to review the panoply of offerings throughout 4-12, even as you educate me regarding how much didactic info is conveyed via the English-lit channel Yd like to review ahead-of-time whatever might be e-mailed, to minimize the desire to copy items on-site, for I would then be able to x-ruff these data with info available elsewhere. Omitted from your agenda-summary is reference to how retention is measured, both via essay-assignments [perhaps] and _routine-testing {assuredly}, for this is the type of info that will presage the ability to implant a robust “lifetime-learning” level of interest [particularly when exposed to current events}. Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee In another e-mail, I “telegraphed my punch” on the state-level, for I would envision the ability of next year's survey to expose the type of deficiencies that currently exist here. and that should be repaired ASAP [rather than being tackled routinely over the summer} 1 spoke with Ms, Karen Mulchanow, Executive Director of the PA State Board of Education, and replied to the below-communication. The former said that a survey will not be produced—in all probabitity—until 2017, although she is now acutely-aware of the cascade of political/regulatory events that led to this desire to ensure that the survey will differentiate core/elective courses. The latter will meet with me in one week. I will end this “string” @ this point, although an update will be provided after the curriculum-review process has been completed.‘on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Case#f 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotai | felt my efforts were consistent with statute, which called for a survey to include: (IV) A DESCRIPTION OF THE MANNER IN WHICH SCHOOL ENTITIES ARE OFFERING INSTRUCTION IN THE HOLOCAUST, GENOCIDE AND HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS INCLUDING THE NUMBER OF HOURS OF INSTRUCTION OFFERED, THE GRADE LEVELS AT WHICH SUCH INSTRUCTION IS OFFERED AND THE COURSE WITHIN SUCH INSTRUCTION IS INTEGRATED. Thus, cast-aside was the claim that Abington complies currently with Act 70, inasmuch as ‘merely doing something that is “encouraged” would suffice; this is the relevant legal-lingo: To provide children with an understanding of the importance of the protection of human rights and the potential consequences of unchecked ignorance, di ation and persecution, it is a matter of high priority that children in this Commonwealth be educated concerning the Holocaust, genocide and other human rights violations. ‘Therefore, the General Assembly strongly encourages school entities in this Commonwealth to offer instruction in the Holocaust, genocide and other human rights violations. My initial reaction should be recognized to have survived the subsequent back-and-forth; herein are reprinted {from slide #5} the entire High Schoo! curriculum and my response: ‘The only Abington coursework [minus book-readings] is encompassed in “Social Studies": + Required Courses ‘© Grade 11 American History: '* World War Il; Creation of Isracl + Elective Courses (0 AP World History * Religion Unites and Divides; + Global conflicts and their consequences; (© Global Issues in the Twenty-First Century * Terrorism (Nazi state as terror state, role of anti-Semitism in 20 century terror ‘groups, role of U.S. support for the state of Israel) © AP European History: * Interaction of Europe and the World, Poverty and Prosperity; States and Other Institutions of Power; Individual and Society 9 America as A World Power: * Growing Influence of the United States in the Middle East ‘Superficial review yields the following observations: | like the age-specific seeds that are planted and that readings are mainstreamed. | would prefer use of the phrase “Re-establishment of the State of Israel.” 1 do not see anything regarding the specifics of genocide and its contemporary manifestations.Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 When secking to review the DETAILS [“primary data] of what is being employed in the age-specific courses throughout 4-12, from lesson-plans to testing, | rephrased my goals: Buried in your comments is the conclusion that “We have required Lessons on the Holocaust in elementary grades 4, 5, and 6 and secondary grades 7,8, 9 and 11.” As I have written repeatedly, your reference in the High School grades {“11"] states that the ONLY “Requited Course” encompasses ONLY “American History: World War Il; Creation of Israel.” Notwithstanding my nomenclature-suggestion that you change the latter point to “Re- Establishment of the State of Israel,” this hardly satisfies ANY of the requirements in ANY of the provided references, regardless of whether they have been sufficiently updated; indeed, as discussed with Ms. Flaherty, the major goal of her educational efforts is to probe multiple etiologies for what transpired before/curing WW-I [in all three realms of the Act} and to ensure it conveys “living history” regarding other older/contemporary forces [and not just ethnocentrically focused on “American History,” which is the rubric under which this MODICUM of detail currently is slotted) | would also like to know the stats regarding how many students are [and have been} taking the AP-“World History” class; know that I have a call into the State Board of Education [717-787-3787] to ensure that its survey [next year] will detect the deficiency that I continue to allege is extant under your watch, ‘This happens to be Holocaust Remembrance Day, and itis ironic that I must persist— today—in requesting (politely, resisting the temptation to deliver a “diatribe” when faced ‘with someone who “doesn’t seem to GET it"] that you NOT delay [1]—fixing the program ASAP, and [2}—allowing me to read the details of what you are teaching [*soup to nuts”). | recognized that some databases required updates, but felt it desirable to cite a few: bhitp://wwwlegisstate.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/ PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=PDP&. sess¥r=20138esessInd=0&billBody=H&bill xp=Bé&bill Nbr= 14248epn=3712 hup://www.ushmm.org/educators/beyond-our-walls-state-profiles-on-holocaust- education/pennsylvania hutp://www.ushmm.org/educators/teaching-about-the-holocaust hurp://www.ushmm org/educators/ teaching-about-the-holocaust/gencral-teaching- guidelines bup://www.ushmm org/educators/beyond-our-walls-state-profiles-on-holocaust- ‘education/pennsylvania hutp://wwv.ushmm,org/educators/lesson-plans bup://www.ushmm.orp/educators/teaching-materials This was how you conveyed your expectations for our meeting: Review of the planned courses of study, which provide information regarding course content, methods of instruction and assessment, and resources. The planned courses of study will also frame our dialogue regarding how the content meets Pennsylvania Academic Standards, the goals delineated within Act 70, and the Guidelines for Holocaust, Genocide, and Human Rights Violation Education.Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Candidly, the most appropriate resource appeared to be that which was acquired in Ni} hutp://wwvista jucation/holocaust/curriculum, us It has a subset of PDF-documents that carry the action-oriented structure that provide the type of comprehensive conceptual review that promises to encompass myriad forces that led to the Shoah and that, by extension, must be monitored when safeguarding against other Genocidal events. ..presented in a broadly age-specific fashion: + K-4 Holocaust/Genocide Curriculum Guide: o caring Makes a Difference (13.1 MB, PDF) 5-8 Holocaust/Genocide Curriculum Guide: Bro Honor All Children, part one (1.81 MB, POF) BtoHonor All Children, part two (6.82 MB, POF) o Bro Honor All Children, part three (2.34 MB, POF) o Bro Honor All Children, part four (6.15 MB, POF) * 9-12 Holocaust/Genocide Curriculum Guide: co Bithe Holocaust and Genocide: The Betrayal of Humanity, part one (6.31 MB, POF) oo Eithe Holocaust and Genocide: The Betrayal of Humanity, part two (2.95 MB, PDF) Icis recognized that Abington doesn’t deal with this among children until the 4* Grade and, inasmuch as my greatest interest remains the High School curriculum, | had no problem deferring discussion of K-4 [supra] and, indeed, accepting uncsitically the discussion of how Abington handles 4-6 [vide infra]. I know a method to help kids rclate is to depict what was happening to kids who lived in that era; one point I didn’t make—but which should be viewed as a possible enrichment [along with showing the 1993 film Schindler’ Lis|— would be to show the 1965 film Ship of Fools, for it starkly captures how highly-educated people [Jews and Gentiles} ignored/rationalized the unambiguous growth of Nazism. ‘The goal, here, was to provide a bit of “informed consent,” so that the import of what has been envisioned could be appreciated by all readers, Invoking “Greek Logic,” this memo comprises the initial “analysis” that is anticipated to yield a preliminary “synthesis” that ‘would then be refined sufficiently to yield a succinct summary of the salient features of what is occurring [and/or what is now explicitly envisioned to occur ASAPCase#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 I was shown a video that introduces myriad generic concepts of prejudice and survival that are conveyed in Grades 4-6, and I was told that explicit readings arc assigned in Grade 6. ‘These approaches are consistent with the PA-DoE’s presentations [Ezhaes and Reflections] that ‘were summarized in a one-page handout touting an upcoming MontCo event [3/15/2016] that will accommodate its 23 school districts without their having to travel to Harrisburg. In 7* Grade, the focus is on geography, but this encompasses migration of myriad groups [including Jews); writings are encouraged—per the recommendation of the PA-DoE—and this is why much of the material is mainstreamed via English classes [through 12" Grade). {The reliance on this approach was disputed, as is probed candidly in the below discussion} In 8" Grade, the focus is on America, encompassing “politically incorrect” issues ranging from the plight of Native Americans [Trail of Tears”) to slavery; Anne Frank's diary is also included [presumably, the newer, unabridged, version thereof}, among other on-point books. In 9" Grade, World History encompasses both the Holocaust {and its multiple etiologies} and other “Human Rights” concerns (¢g., Apartheid and Women’s Rights}. This is where the specifics of curriculum-content [and testing] begins to be of-interest, for in-depth info can casily be introduced in an age-specific fashion; it is vital that the forces that led to the cold mechanization of death-camps be examined within the context of the “Perfect Storm” that led to the Shoah, for components thereof can then be isolated and identified as affecting prior/subsequent slaughters fincluding, in particular, justified worriment triggered by the global Jihad confronting Western Civilization]. {Time constraints precluded this task being pursued during the meeting, but itis anticipated that others will do so promptly, vide infra] In 10" Grade, the focus is on Civies and Government; encompassed are units dealing with Civil Rights and Human Rights, albeit from an American [ethnocentric] perspective. Again, reviewing details [because the number of stickies in the text appeared to have diminished] would be desirable, inasmuch as students should learn how to apply the ability to act as 4 quality-citizen when awareness of “crimes against humanity” are detected. In 11" Grade, the American History course [consolidated from 2 years to 1 year] again deals with Slavery and Women's Rights, but it also encompasses the 1945 liberation of the camps. In 12" Grade, only English is mandated, and it is felt desirable to maintain flexibility due to the fact that students may opt for a Senior Seminar. The electives include many topics related to Act 70, noting that, currently, 80-85% of the students take Social Studies. Specifically, in my view, too few students take AP-History (World) [76], AP-History (Europe) [21], America as World Power [46], Global Studies (encompassing U.N. Human Rights Commission and Human Trafficking) [58], Interdisciplinary Studies (meshing Social Studies, English, Music and Art) [46], and other courses (such as African Studies) cited in the online “Let's Look Ahead” guide [150]. Social Studies was dropped from the mandated 12" Grade experience ~5-10 years ago, so as to presage the type of specialization that colleges offer. It is within the above context {and any error in depiction of the current state-of- affairs should be viewed as inadvertent} that the information in the 2003 curriculum [c/o NJ] must be analyzed. The Introduction thereof fleshes-out the rationale for this endeavor, and the highly-structured historical presentation appears to encompass precisely what I had felt to be mandatory in satisfying the “etter” {as well as the “spirit”] of Act 70.Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Consider merely, the distillation of this 1101-page documes STRUCTURE OF THE CURRICULUM GUIDE ‘The Holocaust and Genocide: The Betrayal of Humanity (Grades 9-12) is structured into seven units: 1, An Introduction to a Study of the Holocaust and Genocides: The ‘Nature of Human Behavior 2. An Introduction to a Study of the Holocaust and Genocides: Views of Prejudice and Genocide 3. The Rise of Nazism: Prelude to the Holocaust 4 From Persecution to Mass Murder: The Holocaust 5. Resistance, Intervention and Rescue 6. Genocide 7. Issues of Conscience and Moral Responsibility Each of the above units contains the following components: + Introduction * Unit Goal * Performance Objectives + Teaching/Leaming Strategies and Activities + Instructional Materials and Resources (List) + Copies of Select Recommended Readings At the conclusion of the curriculum guide, Appendices include support materials that may be useful to educators in the curriculum development process, The appendices include the following items + New Jersey Legislation Mandating Holocaust Education + Holocaust Memorial Address by N.J. Governor James E. McGreevey + Holocaust Timeline * Glossary + Holocaust Statistics + The Holocaust: A Web Site Directory / Intemet Sites + New Jersey Holocaust Resource Centers and Demonstration Sites + Resource Organizations, Museums and Memorials + Oral History Interview Guidelines. (U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum) * Child Survivors: Suggested Questions + List of VendorsCase#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Mirroring precisely what Ms. Cooper and I had (perhaps inartfully) composed is the way this, document suggests how this knowledge-base could/should be applied. Granted, some of the hyperlinks are now broken; granted, refinements surely could be made in this document. But, overall, it seems to encompass precisely what the current task-order should entail. HOW TO USE THIS CURRICULUM GUIDE: SUGGESTIONS The following suggestions are offered in an effort to assist educators in their design or redesign of curricula on the Holocaust and genocides using this curriculum resource guide. 1, Design of Rationale Statements for Teaching the Holocaust and Genocides 2. Identifying the Placement of the Subject in the Curriculum 3. Selection of Unit Goals and Performance Objectives 4, Selection of Teaching/Learning Strategies and Activities 5. Selection of Instructional Materials/Resources 6. Assessment of Student Progress ‘The decisions that will have to be confronted by multiple entities including the probe by the Social Studies Department, to be held on 2/12/2016] include whether educating students in this realm would necessitate integrating entire units, rather than viewing this as a subset of some larger annual initiative. Much core-info [such as FDR’s not having bombed the RR-tracks and denial of what was happening by Jewish groups, allegedly due to fear of being perceived as harboring dual-loyalties] must be included, if only to explain why the Nazis proceeded without impediment...despite outside knowledge of their actions. After the Social Studies teachers have ensured that the 7 aforementioned units have been covered properly [not merely superficially], they should then please provide sufficient feed-back to yield generation of a cross-walk between the lesson-plan and the N.J-curriculum topic. And, if anything is missing, it will be desirable to fix it. This challenge yielded a major discussion-point, namely, whether it would now be necessary to reinstitute a Social Studies core-curriculum in the 12 Grade, for it can be argued that this is the last chance students will be exposed to this topic [even if they matriculate]s further, it seems uncanny to jettison an entire [last] year of opportunity due to the trenchant desire to allow maximal flexibility regarding course-selection. Indeed, itis the 15% sample of the entire population of Seniors that potentially and preferentially NEEDS such instruction. Although y'all made no promises, it would seem that something tangible could emerge by the end of March, after which time the specifics of the instructional plan can be scrutinized. T have read of the turmoil that currently is transpiring, but this will subside; you will then be able to address the points made [as succinctly as possible] in this comprehensive e-mail, This 10-page memo includes merely a broad-brush distillation of what core-curriculum should include; the goal was to afticulate the rationale for having become somewhat “exercised” after having learned that the High School curriculum is so very deficient. Site-visits by Shoah-survivors would ideally serve as a dramatic explanation-point for students who have been pre-educated by annual exposure to this facet of [primarily] teenage education; it is no substitute for graduates to have learned the details of the Shoah [discounting “deniers”. Call “26 hours/day, 8 days/week” if/when feedback is available. nndix B 15 00°08 = 994 WY 9F:F 9107/60/90 Wo S4tjouoyyorg Kuno: K49UOF LOY 38 P>}>490q 9-8FS6O-9107 H9ED,Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 NOT OFFICIAL COPY Tuesday, May 10, 2016 Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Abington School District Administration Building - Board Room 970 Highland Avenue Abington, PA 19001 7:30 p.m. 1, Meeting Opening Subject. * 1.1 Call to Order Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 1. Meeting Opening Type Procedural subject 41.2 Roll Call and Pledge of Allegiance Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 1. Meeting Opening Type Procedural Subject 13 Announcements-Additional Agenda items Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 1. Meeting Opening Type Procedural Subject 1.4 Comments of Board Members and Superintendent Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 1. Meeting Opening Type {information 2. Student Council Representatives Subject 2.1 Student Council Representatives Meeting, May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and SecretaryCategory 2, Student Council Representatives Type Report 3. Board Honors Subject 3.1 US. News & World Report: Silver Medal as a Best High Schoot Meeting May 10, 2016- Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 3. Board Honors Type Recognition File Attachments ‘America's Rest High Schools 2076 pdf (291 KB) 4. Board Orientation Subject 4.4 Abington School District, Abington High School Facility Presentation Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 4. Board Orientation Type Information Ms. Danielle V. Hoffer of Gilbert Architects, Inc. will be providing an overview of the feasibility to upgrade and construct an addition to the Abington Senior High School. At the end of Ms. Hoffer's presentation, Dr. Jeffrey Fecher will review the next steps regarding implementation to accommodate grades 9t0 12 at Abington High School. File Attachments, Abington High School Facility Presentation.pdf (6,233 KB) Abington High Schoo! Facility Next Steps,od (301 KB) 0n 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Subject 4.2 2016-2017 Proposed Final Budget Update Meeting ‘May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 4, Board Orientation [ - an] 5. Comments from Citizens Subject 5.1 Comments from Citizens (a 40-minute limit on this item with approximately 20 minutes for comments on the agenda and 20 minutes for comments on any matter regarding school affairs with allocations established at the discretion of the President.) Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 5, Comments (rom Citizens Case#f 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County ProthonotaiCase#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 catego? 19, Reports and Recommendations by Administration tegory ports Type Report File Attachments, Capital Improvernent Report - April 2016.pdf (168 KB) 20. Any Other Business that Appropriately May be Brought to the Attention of the Board of School Directors Subject 20.1 Announcements of Board Committee Meetings Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 20. Any Other Business that Appropriately May be Brought to the Attention of the Board of School Directors Type Information Subject 20.2 Committee Reports Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 20. Any Other Business that Appropriately May be Brought to the Attention of the Board of School Directors Type Minutes, Report 21, Comments from Ci ens Subject 21.1 Comments from Citizens on Matters Regarding School Affairs, excluding personnel (a 20-minute time limit on this agenda item. A citizen will be recognized once and each citizen's comments will be limited to 3 minutes, except at the discretion of the President.) Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 21. Comments from Citizens Type Information 22. Closing Comments of School Board Members Subject 22.1 Closing Comments of School Board Members Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 22. Closing Comments of School Board Members Type tnformation 23. Adjournment Subject 23.1 Adjourn Meeting May 10, 2016 - Combined Report and Agenda of the Superintendent and Secretary Category 23, Adjournmentndix 16 OU70S = 224 “INV 9F°F 9107/60/90 Wo SxE;oUoNJo4g AjuNO:) KawIO UOYY Je pay>r}I0C 9-8PS6U-91OT H2SEDImplementation of ACT 70 of 2014 Holocaust, Genocide and Human Rights Violations Instruction Pennsylvania Department of Education “The General Assembly finds and declares as follows: To provide children with an understanding of the importance of the protection of human rights and the potential consequences of unchecked ignorance, discrimination and persecution, it is a matter of high priority that children in this Commonwealth be educated concerning the Holocaust, genocide and other human rights violations.” “Therefore, the General Assembly strongly encourages school entities in this Commonwealth to offer instruction in the Holocaust, genocide and other human rights violations.” Pennsylvania Public School Code of 1949 Act of June 26, 2014, PL 776, No. 70 Responsibilities of the Department of Education (Taken from the legislation) |. Establish curriculum guidelines which shall encourage the inclusion of: A. Breadth of history of the Holocaust 1. Third Reich dictatorship 2. Concentration camp system 3. Persecution of Jews and Non- Jews 4. Jewish and non-Jewish resistance 5. Post WW II trials 8. Definition C. History B. Response and actions taken in the face of genocide (including the holocaust and any other genocide perpetrated against humanity, including the Rwandan genocide and other genocides committed in Africa, Asia and Europe. E. Human rights violations F. Anti-Semitism, racism and the abridgment of ci rights . Work in consultation with organizations and individuals that provide educational expertise and resources related to the Holocaust, genocide and human rights violations to develop the curriculum guidelines. The guidelines shall state the minimum amount of instruction necessary to adequately educate students on the Holocaust, genocide and human rights violations. MI Make available to all school entities ‘A. INSERVICE training programs based upon the instruction provided for Holocaust, genocide and human rights B. Distribute information about appropriate curriculum materials Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00Case#t 2016-09548-6 Docketed at Montgomery County Prothonotary on 06/09/2016 4:46 AM, Fee = $0.00 Tentative Plan 1. Research reputable organizations for established guidelines which can be utilized to create a document for the Department of Education to fulfil this section of legislation. 2. Present for review, draft of guidelines to stakeholders who were instrumental in creating legislation 3. Meeting of all stakeholders will be convened for review of guidelines and materials and resources gathered from reputable organizations 4. Accepted guidelines will be published on the Standards Aligned System (SAS) website {www.pdesas.org) 5. Holocaust, Genocide and Human Rights Education will be featured content on the SAS homepage with links given to materials and resources 6. Materials and resources which support instruction as outlined in the legislation will be Published on the SAS website through Publish Your Best venue. 7. Information on the guidelines, Materials and resources will be communicated through the state wide system of support Timeline | Fali 2014 Winter 2015 j Spring and | Fall 2015 September, January Sumner 2015 Septenber October, February April, May, Novenber March June, ‘July, August, Weotings with | Review and © Publication on | Taolenentat stekehoiders | packaging of the | exe'see ton of | oyivania BG omnation to e statewide system of support + LEA's cae materials for | inservice legislation