https://paloaltoonline.com/square/print/2015/09/22/berkeley-high-school-under-ocr-investigation----whistleblowers-celebrated-not-attacked


Town Square

Berkeley High School Under OCR Investigation -- Whistleblowers Celebrated Not Attacked

Original post made by A Tale of Two Cities, Adobe-Meadow, on Sep 22, 2015

This article describes a student and parent group, Stop Harassing in Berkeley in which the entire community (other than the school board, predictably) has rallied to the side of those who called for an OCR investigation into the lack of Title IX compliance in Berkeley High School.

What is the difference between Palo Alto and Berkeley in terms of community culture that may have led to the very different conduct by our communities. The problems in the 2 schools are depressingly similar. Is it the history of activism in Berkeley versus Palo Alto? Is it the rise of new money here and the increasing social conservatism that comes in its train? The "defend the schools no matter what" mentality does not seem to be operating in Berkeley.

I have been shocked by the attacks on board member Ken Dauber that seem to be instigated in part by teachers at both Gunn and Paly. We all have heard the attacks for years on the character of those who have filed the OCR complaints as well. Here is Berkeley standing up for complying with the law, and here is Palo Alto attacking whistelblowers and families of disabled students and girls who have been stalked, beaten, bullied, and raped.

Here is an excerpt from the story:

Parent Heidi Goldstein, who supports the OCR complaint called for "action, leadership and accountability to substantially improve the culture in the Berkeley schools around sexual harassment,” and described the district’s actions to date as “a mix of tepid, ‘check the box’ compliance that has repeatedly overlooked the injustices visited on students who have been forced to endure a hostile learning environment that violates both their civil rights and entitlement to participate in an educational setting free of fear and intimidation.”

Goldstein said the district has not been aggressive enough in hiring a Title IX compliance officer — currently vacant — to make sure the district is following federal laws related to gender discrimination, and said the district should not wait for feedback related to the federal complaint before “taking more definitive steps.”

Another Berkeley High parent and advisor to BHS Stop Harassing, Rebecca Levenson, told council about some of the experiences she has had in the past year.

"Students told me about being called a slut, a whore, seeing pictures of their friends and themselves on social media —with horrible captions, sometimes clothed, sometimes nude, sometimes passed out,” she said. “They told me stories of helping a friend after she was thrown down a flight of stairs by her boyfriend at a party. They told me about having sex they didn’t want to have because they were afraid to say no. They told me everything you never want to hear a kid say.”

Levenson, too, said the school district has not taken strong enough steps forward.

“As someone who has worked in this field for 25 years, they haven’t done anything more than check boxes,” she told council. “We need evidenced based programming, we need to do real primary prevention education specific to sexual harassment and violence and we need to teach students and staff how to intervene when they see it.”

Web Link

See also: Web Link

This seems like the appropriate response by parents and community members to student civil rights. Yet here in Palo Alto we have experienced, sadly, such a different community response. Why is Palo Alto so much less supportive of those who have had issues? Why is Ken Dauber the only board member to publicly support the right of the public to file complaints, or to welcome the technical assistance that OCR can provide to ensure the safety of all our students?

Educator sexual harassment of students is a very serious issue and one that has occurred in Palo Alto (think of the coaches who have had publicized sexual abuse of students in recent years). Then there was Phil Winston and the out of control situation of students exposing themselves at Paly -- as many as 100 students per month. There was Gossip Girl, in which terrible slut-shaming and rape-shaming occurred online, also at Paly. There was the highly publicized situation of some untold number of girls being raped by classmates and then slut-shamed at school when they reported.

At Berkeley, these events provoked parents to organize to protect their daughters from abuse.

In Palo Alto, male students with the encouragement of teachers have said that such matters should be handled "in the family" a horrible, chilling, and frightening argument that should prompt Kim Diorio to institute serious training immediately because what she is currently doing is self-evidently not working.

I have really been rocked by that "keep quiet and don't tell the authorities" message -- that is how rape and domestic violence happen. It is the precise opposite of what our sons should be saying. It is wrong.

No one seems to want to hold board members accountable for years of hiding their communications with OCR and with each other in their official capacity as these matters have dragged on, yet there is an active campaign, led in part by school district employees, to attack a board member who asked for advice and help when he was not even a board member in his capacity as a private citizen.

The secrecy of district officials, and the attacks on Dauber and the complainants, together with the scary "keep it in the family" message should all give Palo Alto pause. What kind of community is this? What do we value? Do we value protecting our students or protecting our reputation?

Comments

Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton
on Sep 22, 2015 at 9:48 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

The Paly High student newspaper has editorialized that "The Campanile believes that Dauber acted inappropriately by contacting a federal office rather than pushing to first resolve the conflict within the district."

"If a parent catches his or her child performing illicit acts, the typical reaction would never be to dial 911. Instead, the issue would be resolved within the family. The same can be said for concerns expressed by those affiliated with Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) with the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) regarding PAUSD's improper handling of Title IX, which bars discrimination on the basis of sex in federally-funded activities."

- See more at: Web Link

Are Palo Alto schools actually teaching values that espouse such a cover-up mentality?

Why have not the PAUSD Board and Superintendent AND the citizens spoken out against this Editorial and this mentality?


Posted by Angie Baker
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 22, 2015 at 10:40 am

Angie Baker is a registered user.

@Peter, I completely agree. I read the editorial in the Post yesterday. I hope that the Paly principal is thinking about what kind of moral education kids are getting. To me this is like the cheating issue. We don't keep rape "in the family", we don't copy other students work, etc. Sometimes doing the right thing is more important than loyalty to a teacher or a friend.


Posted by PalyDad
a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Sep 22, 2015 at 10:53 am

PalyDad is a registered user.

Thanks Peter and thanks to the OP. This Paly editorial worries me. I saw the Hunting Ground documentary. This "don't tell the police and handle it in the school "family" was a recurring theme in the film. It sickens me that this is being taught at Paly. We should welcome the Feds with open arms. Absolutely we need bystander education because our student leaders are attacking someone who stood up as a bystander. I'm glad my 2 kids are graduated. Paly is not what it used to be. It is no longer a caring community. This is hateful.

I thought Esther Wojcicki was a "feminist." Shame.


Posted by Marmion
a resident of Downtown North
on Sep 22, 2015 at 11:47 am

Marmion is a registered user.

Well, you could consider Goldstein's approach:
Web Link

"Goldstein filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, or OCR, alleging that the school’s handling of sexual harassment and assault cases violated federal law"

Versus Dauber's: Web Link

"Moreover, the two-year delay in disclosing his email communication with OCR contradicts the transparency he advertised throughout his campaign for the PAUSD school board in 2014".

Ken has failed. badly, in one of his primary election goals of providing transparency within the district. He is reaping the consequences of his actions and has no one else to blame.
The fact that he doesn't appear to understand or comprehend why the Campanile would react with such an editorial does not give me much confidence in any improvement in this area.


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton
on Sep 22, 2015 at 11:51 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Marmion - are you really endorsing the Campanile editorial?

This thread is not about Dauber but about the apparent lack of moral compass expressed in Palo Alto vs that expressed in Berkeley.


Posted by PalyDad
a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Sep 22, 2015 at 12:04 pm

PalyDad is a registered user.

Marion that is totally unimportant. I think you are missing the big picture which is the problem of rape. That's the issue not who sent an email to who 3 years ago. Irrelevant.

If you are really so worried about transparency why are you focused on an email sent by a private citizen rather than Skelly and the school board? Dauber never had to share his email. He wasn't on the board. He didn't work for OCR or the district. His 2013 emails are not public and he has no obligation to disclose then. But he did anyway which is to his credit.

Let's discuss rape and the male editors of campanile who say rape should be kept in the family.

And while we are it it lets discuss the false predicate for the campanile editorial that Dauber didn't try to keep it in the family before approaching the Feds. He in fact tried many times all of which is already documented. So your problem is you don't like reporting rape and you don't like reporting rape outside the family.

Let's stick to the subject which is how people who report are treated in Palo Alto which according to the OP is bad. I agree and retaliation in paused is not limited to Dauber. Not by a long shot. When my kids were at paly there was a coach who had sex with soccer players. Those who reported were attacked as just wanting more playing time. This isn't new this shoot the messenger and keep the sexual abuse of girls under wraps.

That attitude is exactly why we are in this mess.


Posted by Peggy Duncan
a resident of Community Center
on Sep 22, 2015 at 1:02 pm

Peggy Duncan is a registered user.

As I understand it, in 2013 the Office for Civil Rights had multiple ways of learning about the sexual assault and harassment at Paly: (1) the Verde student magazine's article in April 2013, which was covered extensively in the media; (2) coverage of discussion at the school board in early Mary 2013, when it was pointed out that the district had not begun a Title IX investigation; (3) PAUSD, which asked for OCR's advice in May 2013; and finally (4) Mr. Dauber's request in late May 2013 that OCR offer advice to the district on Title IX. This was at a time when the district was probably having frequent interactions with OCR about the implementation of the 2012 resolution agreements, including the new bullying policy, and maybe other complaints that were filed around then. It seems peculiar at best to conclude that it was Mr. Dauber's contact out of all of this that "triggered" an investigation. Of course had the district actually done the required Title IX investigation none of this would have mattered.

As to transparency the Weekly reported several weeks ago that Mr. Dauber told the newspaper about his contacts with OCR during the election campaign, and then he released this email among others to the public with his request to the FPPC. The reference to a "two-year delay in disclosing his email communication with OCR" is false.

To me, this all smacks of scapegoating and diverting attention from the real issue, which is that our school district did not comply with a federal law meant to protect our students, and drew a federal investigation as a result. Why did that happen? Where were the school board members, the district and school staff, and the teachers? Even the idea that this should have been handled "within the family" is misdirection. It wasn't handled within the family. It wasn't handled at all. Mr. Dauber and others were trying to get it to be handled "within the family" via an internal Title IX investigation. Are the students saying that even the fact that these rapes and harassment were not handled "within the family" supposed to stay "within the family"? That is a recipe for lawlessness and moral bankruptcy. That is not what I want from our local officials, and it is sad to see that is what we have received.


Posted by JLS mom of 2
a resident of JLS Middle School
on Sep 22, 2015 at 1:06 pm

JLS mom of 2 is a registered user.

I would hope that our fellow citizens would weigh in and make it clear that they don't support the Campanile and the Post's argument that a serious violation like rape or bullying or sexual harassment should be "resolved within the family." Palo Alto is in serious need of evidence based primary prevention just as the Berkeley moms have argued in the excerpt above.

It's too bad that education will probably not be instituted until OCR requires it.


Posted by Nadine Gordimer
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 22, 2015 at 2:04 pm

Nadine Gordimer is a registered user.

I like many others in this community was shocked and dismayed by the Campanile editorial saying that “PAUSD’s improper handling of Title IX” should have been “resolved within the family”. The Verde story in 2013 was a cry for help by our students and “the family” did not answer the call. The Verde describes a hostile environment where in the words of the journalist interviewed on KQED Forum, “Nobody wants to talk about this……..You are told to be quiet. That’s [the] ugly truth” Web Link What a reversal when student journalists now heap retribution on those who dared to question the family in their response to this cry for help.
Like Berkeley our district has been in a check the box mode. Sexual harassment training for students? Check, we have that covered in Living Skills. But how effective is that training if students are taking it late in their high school years? How many freshman students take Living Skills? None. How many students wait until senior year when they have more room on their schedules to take Living Skills? Plenty. We need comprehensive annual training of students and staff. It was clear in watching board meetings and reading news coverage after the Verde story broke that our district staff was ignorant of their legal obligation to protect our students and that our students needed educating on sexual harassment and consent.


WHAT WAS THE DISTRICT’S OBLIGATION WHEN STUDENTS REPORTED THEY WERE BEING SEXUALLY HARASSED ON CAMPUS?

In 2011 all public schools were put on notice in the form of a Dear Colleague letter from the Department of Education outlining Title IX responsibilities. Web Link . Public schools were explicitly advised to up their game in regards to sexual harassment and sexual violence. The letter precisely outlines what happened to the students profiled in the Verde article. When district staff were first made aware of the students' sexual harassment on campus they should have opened a Title IX investigation as well as taken measures to stop and mitigate the effects of the harassment. Instead when asked at a public school board meeting if a Title IX investigation had taken place as required by law Dr. Skelly said he did not understand the nexus between the Paly situation and the schools. The District Compliance Coordinator for Title IX Regulations, Charles Young, sat in silence. See : Web Link at 1 hr 30 min

For those of you who do not care to do the research here is a short excerpt from the April 2011 Dear Colleague letter:
“If a school knows or reasonably should know about student-on-student harassment that creates a hostile environment, Title IX requires the school to take immediate action to eliminate the harassment, prevent its recurrence, and address its effects.12 Schools also are required to publish a notice of nondiscrimination and to adopt and publish grievance procedures. Because of these requirements, which are discussed in greater detail in the following section, schools need to ensure that their employees are trained so that they know to report harassment to appropriate school officials, and so that employees with the authority to address harassment know how to respond properly. Training for employees should include practical information about how to identify and report sexual harassment and violence. OCR recommends that this training be provided to any employees likely to witness or receive reports of sexual harassment and violence, including teachers, school law enforcement unit employees, school administrators, school counselors, general counsels, health personnel, and resident advisors.
Schools may have an obligation to respond to student-on-student sexual harassment that initially occurred off school grounds, outside a school’s education program or activity. If a student files a complaint with the school, regardless of where the conduct occurred, the school must process the complaint in accordance with its established procedures. Because students often experience the continuing effects of off-campus sexual harassment in the educational setting, schools should consider the effects of the off-campus conduct when evaluating whether there is a hostile environment on campus. For example, if a student alleges that he or she was sexually assaulted by another student off school grounds, and that upon returning to school he or she was taunted and harassed by other students who are the alleged perpetrator’s friends, the school should take the earlier sexual assault into account in determining whether there is a sexually hostile environment. The school also should take steps to protect a student who was assaulted off campus from further sexual harassment or retaliation from the perpetrator and his or her associates.
Regardless of whether a harassed student, his or her parent, or a third party files a complaint under the school’s grievance procedures or otherwise requests action on the student’s behalf, a school that knows, or reasonably should know, about possible harassment must promptly investigate to determine what occurred and then take appropriate steps to resolve the situation. As discussed later in this letter, the school’s Title IX investigation is different from any law enforcement investigation, and a law enforcement investigation does not relieve the school of its independent Title IX obligation to investigate the conduct.”

While the schools may not be able to control what happens off campus they have a legal and moral obligation to teach our children about consent, sexual harassment and sexual violence and to mitigate the effects when they have knowledge regardless of whether a complaint. This is the law.I am glad that we have one board member who understands and agrees.






Posted by Angie Baker
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 22, 2015 at 3:21 pm

Angie Baker is a registered user.

Even in Berkeley the school board is on the side of covering up. Don't expect any of them to do the right thing here either. Politicians. We need parents to do a better job of teaching students right from wrong. You can't trust the school to do it.


Posted by EndsandMeans
a resident of Barron Park
on Sep 22, 2015 at 4:03 pm

EndsandMeans is a registered user.

@JLS Mom of 2

Things could and should be resolved within the family if there are ways to do that, but there aren't. For one thing, I think all the evidence is that families did try to resolve things all the way up the chain. You can't resolve things "in the family" if the family isn't interested in resolving things or while pulling knives out of your back.

@ Peter Carpenter,
Thank you for your posts.


Posted by EndsandMeans
a resident of Barron Park
on Sep 22, 2015 at 4:08 pm

EndsandMeans is a registered user.

And, can we stop using pejorative names like "The Feds". The OCR is not the FBI. We are talking about the Department of Education. When a school district is as dysfunctional as ours when it comes to solving problems, there is no other recourse. If the problem involves discrimination, it is under the purview of the office in the Department of Education charged with helping districts comply with the law (For the benefit of students). Sometimes, when students need help, administrators are going to be caught lacking. Who is going to tell them to straighten up, the parents? Excuse me, who is going to get them to straighten up after the parents try over and over and over?

What people are ignoring here is that in some of these cases, even ones the OCR didn't take, families COULD HAVE sued for damages, costs, etc, and did not. I know of several families who COULD HAVE made really good cases for retaliation by employees. Our district is reacting in a way that completely ignored the good of the students and those who needed help. It doesn't sound like Berkely was much better, except that the community was so much better.


Posted by Angie Baker
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 22, 2015 at 4:21 pm

Angie Baker is a registered user.

This is why parents need to be involved in teaching kids right from wrong. If teachers at school are OK with keeping breaking federal law "in the family" and maybe even putting kids up to it, kids need to know themselves how to act.


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton
on Sep 22, 2015 at 4:32 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

In my obviously old fashioned world values were taught at home and then reinforced by the schools, scouting and the churches.

Just exactly where are we failing to teach these values now?


Posted by Angie Baker
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 22, 2015 at 4:48 pm

Angie Baker is a registered user.

@Peter I expect this to happen at school too but if it's not then parents need to do it. My question about that is how did this editorial from a student paper on Friday end up in the Daily Post on Monday? Did the kids call up the Post and ask it to be printed? Or did a teacher at the school maybe one of the journalism teachers call up the Post? Is this a political vendetta that kids are getting used for? The Post has had like 4 or 5 stories about this. That's what I would want to know from the principal. Something about this doesn't add up.


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton
on Sep 22, 2015 at 5:07 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

I was originally alerted to the student editorial by a posting on this Forum on Sunday which was quickly taken down.
Then it was easy for me to go to the student paper's web site.


Posted by Angie Baker
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 22, 2015 at 5:17 pm

Angie Baker is a registered user.

@Peter yes I know that the editorial is online at the school district website but it was also printed yesterday by the Daily Post in their newspaper. I am curious about how that happened and if a teacher was involved in that? I have never seen an editorial from the school newspaper be an editorial in the Post before. Some transparency seems like a good idea :)


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton
on Sep 22, 2015 at 5:23 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

I still wonder - where is the outrage at the values expressed in this editorial??


Posted by PalyDad
a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Sep 22, 2015 at 7:19 pm

PalyDad is a registered user.

Peter, I agree, which is why I posted my outrage this morning. I have talked to a number of women friends and co-workers and they all found the article to exemplify rape culture. One who was a survivor of domestic violence and has a child at Jordan said she was going to be looking at private school options she was so offended.

Will anyone stand up and be counted? Probably not, given the culture of retaliation that is exemplified in the editorial itself. Rape Culture includes a culture of silence and retaliation.

I am outraged also over the misstatement of facts in the Campanile editorial. I followed Nadine's link -- VERY INTERESTING AND I ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO LOOK AT THE VIDEO, and ALSO OTHER VIDEOS ON THAT SITE.

THANK YOU NADINE. HERE'S A BOMBSHELL.

The editorial is predicated on the COMPLETELY FALSE idea that Dauber didn't handle it "within the family" (I wince every time I think about that phrase, TBH).

The truth is that the many efforts that the Daubers (Ken Dauber and his wife, Professor Michele Dauber) made to get the district to address the Title IX issues were not only extensive, they were covered in the press including in the Palo Alto Weekly AND THE CAMPANILE itself.

April 9, 2013, the Verde publishes the "Rape Culture" story

April 12, 2013, Ken Dauber speaks to PAUSD School Board meeting which includes current board members Caswell, Emberling, and Townsend, as well as Kevin Skelly and then-Title IX Compliance Officer Charles Young. Here is what he said:

Video link: Web Link (at 2:02)

"Recently the Paly Verde described a somewhat similar [to the case at Terman] case actually of a girl at Paly who was harassed on the basis of sex following her disclosure of an incident of sexual abuse, there's no evidence as far as I know that that incident was handled according to the UCP even though that's clearly another case of of sex-based harassment."

So what the hell is the Campanile and Esther Wojcicki talking about when they say he didn't "handle it in the family." That was seven weeks before his email to OCR. Skelly and the board had seven weeks to open an investigation. And please remember that the investigation is supposed to be completed within 60 days by law.

Who knows what Winston told them, who knows what their godawful lawyers told them. But Ken Dauber was down there at that microphone, three days after the article was published telling all the senior staff and board about the need to open a Title IX investigation.

Nothing happened.

He probably tried to follow up -- as we all know, this district does not listen.

Then, Professor Dauber, an expert on this subject, followed up I guess because she thought maybe they might listen to an expert, at the May 7, 2013 board meeting (video here: Web Link beginning at 34:35.

She explained Title IX in relation to the Verde article about Rape Culture, and seems to explain very patiently what Title IX is, what it requires, what kind of internal investigation was required, and stated plainly that she was concerned Dr. Young, who was then the Title IX compliance officer, lacked appropriate training and was not well-informed on the law. She stated that she had met with Dr. Young and tried to explain this to him and that although she liked him personally, she did not think he grasped his legal requirements.

Then at the end of the board meeting, Melissa Caswell asked Dr. Skelly to respond, and he responded that he essentially had no clue what Professor Dauber was talking about (this was a month after Ken Dauber had already spoken at the board about it, remember) and didn't think the school had any responsibility to act.

As a result, Professor Dauber followed up her presentation at the board meeting with a detailed letter to the board, that was reported in this story in the Palo Alto Weekly on May 16, 2013, Web Link

In that story, Skelly said he was considering opening an investigation.

However he never did that. Instead, he claimed publicly a year later (though the records of this have never been released anywhere) that he contacted OCR for technical advice and was told he had already done everything they wanted, a claim that we may reasonably question since if it is was true, it seems unlikely that OCR would have opened an investigation two weeks later. The district never opened an independent investigation. Ever. They still haven't to this day so far as the public knows. See: Web Link

The entire predicate of this editorial is that Dauber should have not "called the cops" or "called 911" but should have kept the family secret in the family. To quote the Campanile, the boys who wrote it say that Dauber "wasted the district’s time and resources, when an internal solution should have been examined more closely first, before “calling the cops.” Web Link

No. You know who wasted time and resources? Esther Wojcicki, [portion removed], and the boys who wrote that awful editorial and who didn't even bother to check sources, ensure that their facts were correct, or to look into matters and do basic fact checking. This is a hack job.

Had you even bothered to check into matters [portion removed] you would know that Ken Dauber went to the Palo Alto school board and senior staff, as did his wife, multiple times, beginning 3 days after the Verde story was published. They were ignored, like all the other parents who bring any bad news to the attention of the board. They got nowhere. They went to the school board twice, they wrote letters and emails, they got stories published in the Weekly -- all to no avail. Nothing was done.

[Portion removed.]

So now the mystery is: how did this hatchet job get published? Who decided to publish this pile of lies and why?


Posted by Angie Baker
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 22, 2015 at 8:00 pm

Angie Baker is a registered user.

@Paly Dad, I think you mean hatchet job not hack job.
Good questions for the teachers. Think we'll be hearing from them with an apology or from the principal? Or how this mess got reprinted in the Post? Not holding my breath. They will be keeping that in the family. Sorry women at Paly. Help is not on the way.


Posted by PalyDad
a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Sep 22, 2015 at 8:19 pm

PalyDad is a registered user.

Correction: Dauber actually spoke to the Board on APRIL 9, 2013, NOT APRIL 12. He was down there literally on the day the Rape Culture article was published. Yes, that's right. On the day it was published. THE VERY DAY THAT THE RAPE CULTURE STORY CAME OUT APRIL 9, 2013, KEN DAUBER took himself down to the board room at 25 Churchill Street, and said "You need to do a Title IX investigation."

Needless to say, the board sat there like potted plants and said nothing.

Let's imagine that this happened today, now that Dauber is on the board. You, or perhaps someone you know, goes to the board meeting and says "girls are being raped at Paly and bullied and harassed and you need to do an investigation that you are not doing by law." Do you think Ken Dauber would hear that and sit there like a bump? Of course not. Because no person with any amount of human decency would.

So let's all turn our attention to those who didn't do anything instead of those who did. Let's ask what the following individuals did about the extensive sexual harassment situation at Paly who were all told multiple times by Dauber and Mrs. Dauber that they needed to address it:

Paul Kandell. Did he ask for a Title IX investigation? He was clearly the first person to know about the issues. Did he ask whether the district was following the law?
Phil Winston. According to Kandell, he told Winston about the story as he was reporting it. [Portion removed.] Did he report to Charles Young and request a Title IX investigation? Under district policy he was supposed to.
Esther Wojcicki, Head of journalism program that reported on the Verde Story. Did she ask whether the district was following the law?
Charles Young. He was supposed to know his job and open a Title IX investigation. Did he? No.
Kevin Skelly: He thought Title IX was about sports and did not know it was even related to sexual harassment. The blank look on the video says it all.
Melissa Caswell, current board president. Heard from Dauber and Mrs. Dauber multiple times during April and May 2013. Did she call for a Title IX investigation?
The rest of the board. What did they do?

Why is the Campanile focusing its ire on the one person in this whole sordid mess who with his wife actually did ask the district to act internally and open an invesigation, not once, not twice, not three times but at least 10 times during April and May 2013. What a biased, unobjective, fictional hit piece this is.

Perhaps when the Campanile says that the matter should have been handled internally they are more interested in the "internally" than the "handled."


Posted by PalyDad
a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Sep 23, 2015 at 11:51 am

PalyDad is a registered user.

Thanks for reopening this thread. I am hoping that we may hear from the Campanile editors/advisors about why they failed to fact check Dauber's prior documented efforts to gain the internal cooperation of the district. Campanile: did you even ask Dauber what his "internal" efforts were before you slammed him?


Posted by Patsy Mink
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Sep 23, 2015 at 2:17 pm

Patsy Mink is a registered user.

Contrast the Campanile editorial last week with its chilling message to be silent versus this story written by a male Paly student as part of the Verde Rape Culture story in April 2013:

"Breaking the silence: We need to change the way we think about rape"

Web Link



He talks about how some in the mainstream media wrote sympathetically about the two Steubenville, Ohio high school football players convicted of rape
and that "[s]uch statements create an incredibly negative environment for rape survivors, which makes it next to impossible to recover from the traumatic event."

"Victims are too afraid to tell anyone, and most people consider rape a taboo subject. To face the problem of rape, we need to remove the taboo and open the floodgates for growth and progression in the prevention of rape. There are an amazing few who reach out to rape survivors to help them, but the majority of our country does not take a stand on the subject."

"If we just tell ourselves "Oh well, what can you do," we are saying that rape is inevitable. We are accepting it as a fact of life. We need to do the exact opposite."

I suspect that the majority in our community side with the upstander Ken Dauber one of "the amazing few who reach out to rape survivors to help them" as evidenced by the last election that weighed in heavily on OCR issues. It is unfortunate that adults in our community including trusted teachers are using our students as political fodder in such a dangerous and malicious game.




Posted by PalyDad
a resident of Palo Alto High School
on Sep 23, 2015 at 3:45 pm

PalyDad is a registered user.

Thank you for that link Patsy. I still am waiting to hear from the Campanile about whether they asked Dauber what his internal efforts were to get the district to address Title IX. I found links online showing that he did so repeatedly, so I am waiting to hear from them whether they asked him about it before deciding to publish (and republish in the Post, to make sure their misinformation go the widest possible distribution). Maybe they asked him and he said that he hadn't. Let's hear from them.

I am forming my own opinion which is that we have a rogue teacher who is using her class inappropriately to wage her own fight with a school board member. [Portion removed.]


Posted by Angie Baker
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Sep 23, 2015 at 4:50 pm

Angie Baker is a registered user.

I want to hear from the district about what really happened here. Is this editorial the result of youth who aren't very good at being journalists? That's OK, at least they are still in school and can learn. Or is it teachers with their own political beef with Dauber using kids? I still want to know how come an editorial in the school newspaper on Friday showed up in the Daily Post Monday morning. Did the teacher make that happen? Weekly why don't you follow this up?