EDITORIAL: Trust the processes

Normally, the end of the school year is a time to exhale and reflect.

But for a number of Marblehead educators and administrators, recent days have been anything but restful.

The School Committee is expected to vote tomorrow night to approve hiring an independent investigator to look into “multiple formal complaints of harassment and discrimination” that have, at their heart, what interim Superintendent Theresa McGuinness described as the “strong emotions and divisiveness” that have been spawned by Hamas’ brutal terrorist attack on Oct. 7 and the ensuing war in Gaza.

Meanwhile, the district and several members of the Glover School staff have been named as defendants in a lawsuit over a series of student restraint incidents, which led to a group of teachers being placed on a leave and the dismissal of a pair of administrators and a student services chair.

Neither of these are criminal matters — though, disturbingly, teachers involved in the first matter were concerned enough about their safety to seek help from Marblehead Police. But the presumption of “innocence” — or at least an acknowledgement that we may not know all the facts — should be a guiding principle nonetheless.

In one sense, though profoundly unfortunate, it is hardly surprising that differences of opinion related to the war in Gaza have boiled over behind the walls of Marblehead High School. On the state level, we have seen the Massachusetts Teachers Association attempt to address the war, first with a statement and later with a webinar titled, “The Struggle Against Anti-Palestinian Racism,” only to be told forcefully that it had wildly missed the mark by its own members and the Anti-Defamation League, among others.

However, escalation is not the only way these discussions can go. Earlier in the same online “summit” that Veterans School teacher Brigitte Karns described what she called a “quiet crisis in Marblehead schools,” Marblehead High School freshman David Magen discussed his experience addressing an ahistorical — and, in his view, antisemitic — reference to Palestine on a school assignment. Magen, who has since founded an organization Fighting Antisemitism In Schools (FAIS), took it upon himself to communicate his concern to his teacher, which led to a meeting that also included the principal. Collaboratively, a decision was made not only to discontinue the use of the worksheet in question but to include Magan in the development of the curriculum moving forward.

Key characteristics of this interaction, it would seem to us, would be a willingness to listen and a lack of reflexive defensiveness or divisiveness — by all parties.

In terms of the complaints of harassment and discrimination related to the interpersonal disputes among adults working for the schools, we support the commissioning of an independent investigation, which seems necessary under the circumstances.

There’s a larger picture, too, related to the student restraint lawsuit, at least in the view of the organization that filed it, Lawyers for Civil Rights.

Earlier this year, LCR settled a similar matter against the Walpole Public Schools, where a 9-year-old Black boy was handcuffed by police and forcibly removed from the classroom. That settlement involved the district issuing a formal apology to the student and his family and committing to additional training.

To LCR, the Marblehead case is part of “a growing epidemic of unlawful physical restraint being used specifically against children of color in Massachusetts schools.” As in Walpole, the Marblehead case involves a student of color attending a predominantly white school district through the Metropolitan Council for Educational Opportunity (METCO) program.

Unless a settlement is reached, a judge or jury will decide whether the parallel LCR has drawn is a fair one. LCR notes that after another Marblehead school employee made an anonymous report to the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families, DCF sustained allegations of neglect against five Marblehead employees. An outside review has already determined that Glover staff did violate restraint policies, which prompted McGuinness to institute retraining and other changes. But whether the actions of the Glover staff also constitute assault and battery, negligence and a violation of the student’s civil rights is another matter.

Given that these situations, fairly or unfairly, raise the specter of antisemitism, Islamophobia and institutional racism, there can be a near-irresistible urge to make a snap judgment on which side is right based on our own biases and life experiences.

But it is precisely in such fraught situations where process serves its highest purpose.

We would all be well served to take a deep breath and let these processes play out.