greenblatt, pierce, funt, & flores, llc a. siligrini · tacony academy charter school 1300...

1

Patricia V. Pierce, Esquire (PA ID 23129)

Ronald L. Greenblatt, Esquire (PA ID 50673)

Noah S. Cohen, Esquire (PA ID 313849)

GREENBLATT, PIERCE, FUNT, & FLORES, LLC

123 South Broad Street, 25th Floor

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19109

t. 215-735-1600 f. 215-753-1660 Attorneys for Plaintiff

Jean Wallace

112 Haws Lane

Flourtown, PA 19031

Plaintiff,

vs.

Tacony Academy Charter School

1300 Rhawn Street

Philadelphia, PA 19111

Todd Smith

c/o Tacony Academy Charter School

1300 Rhawn Street


Thomas Scheid


1300 Rhawn Street


American Paradigm Schools

8101 Castor Avenue


Gerald Santilli

c/o American Paradigm Schools

8101 Castor Avenue


Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

TRIAL DIVISION

Term, 2020

Civil Action No. ___________

JURY DEMAND

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Case ID: 200500268

Filed and Attested by theOffice of Judicial Records

05 MAY 2020 04:10 pmA. SILIGRINI

2

AVISO/NOTICE TO DEFENDNOTICE

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 the 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 OR

CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR

TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH

BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU

CAN GET LEGAL HELP.

PHILADELPHIA BAR ASSOCIATION

Lawyer Referral and Information Service

1101 Market Street, 11th Floor


(215) 238-1701

AVISO

Le han demandado a usted en la

corte. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas

demandas expuestas en las páginas

siguientes, usted tiene veinte (20) dias de

plazo al partir de la fecha de la demanda y

la notificación. Hace falta asentar una

comparencia escrita o en persona o con un

abogado y entregar a la corte en forma

escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones a las

demandas en contra de su persona. Sea

avisado que si usted no se defiende, la

corte tomará medidas y puede continuar la

demanda en contra suya sin previo aviso o

notificación. Además, la corte puede

decidir a favor del demandante y requiere

que usted cumpla con todas las provisiones

de esta demanda. Usted puede perder

dinero o sus propiedades u otros derechos

importantes para usted.

LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN

ABOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI

NO TIENE ABOGADO O SI NO TIENE

EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR

TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA

O LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA

OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE

ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA

AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE

CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL.

ASOCIACIÓN DE LICENCIADOS DE

FILADELFIA

Servicio De Referencia E Información

Legal

1101 Market Street, 11th Floor

Filadelfia, Pennsylvania 19107

(215) 238-1701

Case ID: 200500268

3

Patricia V. Pierce, Esquire (PA ID 23129)

Ronald L. Greenblatt, Esquire (PA ID 50673)

Noah S. Cohen, Esquire (PA ID 313849)

GREENBLATT, PIERCE, FUNT, & FLORES, LLC

123 South Broad Street, 25th Floor


t. 215-735-1600 f. 215-753-1660 Attorneys for Plaintiff

Jean Wallace

112 Haws Lane

Flourtown, PA 19031

Plaintiff,

vs.


1330 Rhawn Street


Todd Smith


1330 Rhawn Street


Thomas Scheid


1330 Rhawn Street



8101 Castor Avenue


Gerald Santilli

c/o American Paradigm Schools

8101 Castor Avenue


Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

TRIAL DIVISION

Term, 2020


JURY DEMAND

Case ID: 200500268

4

COMPLAINT – CIVIL ACTION

Introduction

1. This case is brought to redress Defendants’ retaliatory discrimination, and

constructive discharge of Jean Wallace, a dedicated and inspiring educator and administrator. Ms.

Wallace took a job as a Science Curriculum Advisor at American Paradigm Schools (“APS”) in

September 2019 to employ her more than twenty-years of experience in building and

implementing science curricula in Philadelphia schools to help the students in APS’s Charter

Management Organization (“CMO”). When she discovered that the elementary and middle-school

students at Tacony Academy Charter School (“TACS”) were not provided with a standards-

aligned curriculum, as required by Pennsylvania law in Title 22 Chapter 4 of the Pennsylvania

Administrative Code, regulations propounded thereunder,1 federal law as set forth in legislation

known colloquially as the “No Child Left Behind” Act,2 and on information and belief, the TACS

charter. She reported these regulatory deficiencies numerous times, over more than three months,

to the President and CEO of American Paradigm, Gerald Santilli, and its Chief Academic Officer,

Kristine Magargee.

2. Ms. Wallace also reported these violations in an article in the November 2019

online publication STEM Magazine as part of a series of articles about her work at TACS, which

article was specifically vetted and approved by Defendant Santilli prior to its publication.

3. Following publication of the STEM article and in retaliation therefore, TACS,

through Assistant Principal, Todd Smith, assailed Ms. Wallace’s reputation through an

“anonymous” letter to STEM Magazine publisher Wayne Carley calling her an unprofessional liar,

1 22 Pa. Code § 4.21. 2 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et. seq.

Case ID: 200500268

5

and then refusing to continue their work with her. APS did nothing to ensure that TACS adhered

to the law by providing students with a standards-aligned curriculum after it removed Ms. Wallace

from working with TACS; and did nothing to correct the outlandish and continuing attacks on Ms.

Wallace that were launched by Smith, Scheid and others both within TACS and throughout its

CMO including, but not limited to Lindley Academy Charter School where Ms. Wallace attempted

to continue her role, and despite Ms. Wallace’ repeated demand that Santilli defend her reputation

and findings, thus resulting in Ms. Wallace’s constructive discharge.

Parties

4. Plaintiff Jean Wallace (“Ms. Wallace”) was, formerly, the Science Curriculum

Advisor for APS.

5. From 2004 until 2016 Ms. Wallace dramatically improved Green Woods Charter

School (“GWCS”) of Philadelphia, first as its Academic Officer then shortly thereafter and for the

duration thereof, as its CEO.

6. During Ms. Wallace’s tenure, GWCS’ academic reputation improved dramatically,

and its student population grew from two-hundred and twenty-five to six-hundred and seventy-

five students and as of her separation had a waiting list of over 1,000 students. By any measure,

Ms. Wallace performed her duties to the school superbly. Ms. Wallace introduced an integrated

curriculum at GWCS which is based on the “EIC Model”. The EIC curriculum is highly content

driven and was continually revised by the GWCS professional staff.

7. During her time at Green Woods, Ms. Wallace came to know and worked closely

with Defendant Santilli, who was, at that time, Green Woods’ controller.

8. American Paradigm Schools (“APS”) is a nonprofit corporation organized and

doing business under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. APS is a charter school

Case ID: 200500268

6

management organization that provides financial, personnel and academic oversite and services to

four charter schools in North and Northeast Philadelphia: First Philadelphia Preparatory Charter

School; Lindley Academy Charter School; Memphis Street Academy; and Tacony Academy

Charter School.

9. As part of its management agreements with member schools, APS provides all

Human Resource recruitment screening, troubleshooting, and investigation, among other services

to member schools, as none of the member schools have their own Human Resource departments.3

10. Tacony Academy Charter School (“TACS”) is a publicly funded Charter School

serving students in Kindergarten through Eighth grade subject to the laws of the Commonwealth

of Pennsylvania. TACS also operates a High School.

11. Charter schools in Pennsylvania are independently operated public schools funded

with state, local and federal tax dollars, making TACS a “Public Body” as defined by 43 P.S. §

1422(3). These schools are established under the Pennsylvania Charter School Law – Act 22 of

1997, (“CSL”) to operate as non-profit, non-sectarian corporations that are approved by the local

Board of Education (the “authorizer”) or the State Appeal Board. Each Charter school has its own

Board of Trustees and administrative staff and operates as a separate independent local

Intermediate Unit 26 (IU 26).

12. As a Charter School CEO Defendant Thomas Scheid is a “public official” within

the meaning of the CSL.

13. APS is also a “Public Body” as defined by 43 P.S. § 1422(3) as it receives state,

local and federal tax dollars for the services it provides to its member schools.

3 Member school employees are provided APS Employee Handbooks as they do not have their own Human Resource departments.

Case ID: 200500268

7

14. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Todd Smith was TACS’

Assistant Principal and Defendant Thomas Scheid was TACS’ Interim CEO.

15. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Gerald Santilli was the CEO of

Defendant APS and was a “Public Official” within the meaning of the CSL.

Jurisdiction and Venue

16. The Court has jurisdiction because the causes of action arose out of transactions or

occurrences which took place in whole or in part in the City and County of Philadelphia. Venue is

appropriate in this court pursuant to Pa. R C. P. 1006.

Facts Giving Rise to Causes of Action

I. Plaintiff’s Hire By APS

17. Ms. Wallace began her employment through a formal agreement (letter) contract

with American Paradigm Schools on September 2, 2019 with the job title of Science Curriculum

Advisor.

18. Defendant Santilli offered Ms. Wallace the position of Science Curriculum Advisor

at APS based on his more than a decade of first-hand knowledge of her skills, experience and

tireless efforts in putting students’ wellbeing ahead of adults’ agendas.

19. In a reference letter for Ms. Wallace in 2017, Mr. Santilli states:

Jean Wallace served as CEO of Green Woods Charter School in

Philadelphia. While serving on her team as the Chief Financial

Officer we worked together to create a prize-winning and model K-

8 charter school…

She conducted our collective business with the highest ethical and

pleasant manner, with a wide number of professionals and

stakeholders. Ms. Wallace transformed a sleepy school in the woods

with 225 students to a financially sustainable and award-winning

institution with over 675 students constructed on a state-of-the-art

campus…

Case ID: 200500268

8

In my humble opinion, Jean Wallace has the educational expertise,

organizational talent and diversity of experiences to fully contribute

to any organization. Her high standards and love of children make

her the perfect candidate.

20. Together, and prior to August 26, 2019, when she was presented with an offer for

the position of Science Curriculum Advisor, Ms. Wallace and Mr. Santilli drafted her job

description,4 which includes among other job functions:

a. Review current curriculum alignment/scope and sequence and all science

instruction materials and resources currently being used in TACS K-9 Science

curriculum and instruction; begin to define strengths and identify specific needs of

the K-9 Science/STEM Program at TACS.

b. Based on the standards-aligned scope and sequence, begin to identify resources

necessary to assist TACS/APS and teachers’ in delivering effective instruction to

TACS students, grades K-9.

II. Plaintiff Discovers TACS’ Deficient Science Curriculum

21. In August 2019, Gerald Santilli, the President and CEO of APS, set up a meeting

with Ashley Redfern, Executive Director of (APS), Gerald Santilli, Defendant Scheid, and Ryan

Strasko, Principal of TACS High School, in the office at Tacony Academy Charter High School.

Mr. Santilli, Ms. Redfern and Defendant Scheid all expressed concern over declining Pennsylvania

System of School Assessment (“PSSA”) test scores among the 4th and 8th Grade Science students

at TACS. Soon after being hired, defendant Scheid requested a recommendation from Ms. Wallace

for a 4th and 8th Grade test-prep book.

22. The purpose of the meeting was for Plaintiff to hear TACS’ concerns relative to

their science teaching and learning methods, and their desire to improve PSSA science test scores.

4 A true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Job Description is attached as Exhibit 1.

Case ID: 200500268

9

In a 2018-2019 evaluation, TACS’ did not meet the Pennsylvania standard for Academic Growth

in either it’s 4th or 8th grade PSSA Science exam outcomes.5

23. Specifically, Ms. Wallace was asked to do an inventory of needs to identify the

gaps in science content knowledge at TACS; the reasons for those gaps; to design a plan to

effectively address the gaps, and to identify resources to assist TACS in structuring science

teaching and learning across grades Kindergarten through Eighth grade.

24. Mr. Santilli asked her to conduct this inventory because of her stellar reputation

and integrity, decades of experience in education, and expertise in standards-aligned science

curriculum development and implementation as well as her years of award-winning work in school

leadership, teacher professional development, standards-based programming, and resource

development.

25. Prior to holding a meeting with TACS teachers, Ms. Wallace decided to confirm

her understanding of then current Pennsylvania Department of Education approved assessment

criteria.

26. On September 21, 2019, Plaintiff contacted David Bauman at the Pennsylvania

Department of Education:

Hi Dave,

I’m revisiting alignment and currently working with a K-8 team to

create a structured science scope and sequence that aligns with

tested eligible content and assessment anchors.

I realize that there is a push for NGSS and STEM; all good for the

future. For now, am I correct that the most recent PSSA Grade 4 and

Grade 8 assessments are still aligned to the early 2000s Science and

Technology and Environment and Ecology standards, and the 2007

anchor documents?

5 A true and correct copy of the TACS’ 2018-19 School Progress Report attached as Exhibit 2 at pg. 4.

Case ID: 200500268

10

There is still confusion out here and I want to be sure I am

communicating the correct information to this team as it is today,

with the goal to create a structure that will allow for flexibility in the

future, but also be aligned to the present.

Thank you so much for your help.

Jean Wallace

27. Mr. Bauman responded:

HI Jean .... here you go!

The 4th grade and 8th grade PSSA is based on the 2007 Assessment

Anchors and Eligible Content.

The AA/EC is based on the 2002 Academic Standards.

The PA Framework is aligned to the AA/EC. It is also aligned to

NGSS.

Does that help?

Dave

28. After confirming that K-8 science instruction in Pennsylvania was still aligned with

specific standards previously established by the Commonwealth, Plaintiff proceeded to meet with

both APS and TACS personnel; interviewed TACS teachers; reviewed data; created a strategy to

address the identified issues and documented and then communicated her findings through bi-

weekly, detailed summaries submitted directly to Gerald Santilli.

29. In her summary for October 7th through 18th, she states, “I also mentioned my

ongoing challenge to get any type of documents from TACS that speak to what is currently (or

was ever) taught in science.”

30. She goes on to state,

I met with the TACS middle school team on Friday.

…

There is no curriculum map, no scope and sequence, no textbooks,

resource books, they totally wing it. Other than doing a specific

Case ID: 200500268

11

activity on Fridays, they are not, in their words, close to being a

STEM School. The Insectarium is the only community partner in

science and most teachers don’t teach about insects. I look forward

to talking strategies with Jerry on how to begin to fix so much of

this. Without a curriculum map, time, instructional leadership

support, and the resources they need to teach, these teachers will

continue to wing it.

31. After the October 18, 2019 meeting with the TACS middle-school science teachers,

Plaintiff and Defendant Santilli, who had also attended the meeting, had this text exchange:

Ms. Wallace - The meeting confirmed all of my suspicions and concerns. I’m happy you

heard some of it. So much going on there. I need to talk strategies with you. I can fix it but it

will take time.

Mr. Santilli – They have no science program!!!

32. In her summary for October 21st through November 1st, Plaintiff states,

After last Friday’s meeting with the TACS Middle School team, I

wanted to find something that might help them begin to see how a

school curriculum framework could be structured. On Monday, after

doing some research, I shared examples from a PA School District’s

curriculum framework for 5-8 grade science and 5th and 6th grade

social studies with the TACS team, Tom (Defendant Scheid) and

Todd (Defendant Smith) and cc’d Kristine (CAO Magargee). What

I sent is aligned to PA Standards and allows TACS to see how to

begin to think in terms of standards alignment.

33. In her summary for November 4th through 16th, Plaintiff states,

I met with Kristine (CAO Magargee) on Tuesday, November 12th.

Debbie Smith joined us in our meeting. We talked about the

challenges at TACS and strategies for addressing them. Kristine

confirmed that Science was not a focus for APS in the past and that

there is no curriculum or alignment in place for science at TACS

or APS schools. We also spoke about the challenges we face at APS

when it comes to addressing identified needs, and the importance of

building capacity in our schools. For example, I shared my concern

for using Study Island at this time for science benchmarking. We

all agreed on the purpose for benchmarking and for all assessments

and how they need to be aligned to actual instruction – rather than

in a vacuum. We agreed that the 4th grade teacher and 8th grade

teacher at TACS cannot be responsible for making up deficits in

Case ID: 200500268

12

science content, and that PSSA prep books are not the way to make

up for these deficits.

III. Plaintiff’s STEM Articles

34. As Ms. Wallace began her inventory of TACS’ science curriculum in September

2019, Wayne Carley, the publisher of STEM Magazine asked her if she had any articles for

publication for the October 2019 publication. STEM Magazine is a monthly electronic

subscription publication available to educators, students, parents, schools and school districts.

35. She suggested doing a series of articles chronicling her work with TACS and APS.

36. At a full APS staff meeting Mr. Santilli gave her permission to prepare the articles,

deeming it good publicity for APS.

37. The first in the series of articles, outlining the purpose for her work, was published

in the October 2019 STEM Magazine. The article received high praise from APS and TACS and

was highlighted by APS in a post on LinkedIn and copies of the article were copied and shared

with the APS Board.

38. On Thursday, October 17, 2019, Defendant Scheid emailed Ms. Wallace directly

telling her that her first article was “wonderful” and that TACS’ middle-school science teachers

were looking forward to meeting with her on Friday.

39. The second article in the series, published in the November 2019 edition of STEM

Magazine, identified some of the more specific needs at TACS: Including the gaps in content, the

resources that could be utilized, such as collaborations with: Acorn Naturalists, an organization

working with Ms. Wallace to develop grade-level, science content-specific literacy kits, and Dr.

Macalalag, Associate Professor of STEM Education at Arcadia University in training STEM

Teacher Leaders throughout the APS network, and the very specific need to create a standards-

Case ID: 200500268

13

aligned, K-8 curriculum for science. The draft article was e-mailed to Gerald Santilli. He requested

one specific change – that Plaintiff remove any reference to “declining test scores.”

40. Ms. Wallace complied with Mr. Santilli’s request and removed that reference

41. The article, published November 12, 2019, titled Shifting the Paradigm,6 contained

the following statements:

a. I requested all TACS teachers, K-8, fill in a simple Year-at-a-Glance template

showing the months of the year and a brief description of the content taught

each month. I was concerned when I didn’t receive any responses, and after

meeting with the TACS teachers, it became clear as to why.

b. [T]hey have not had time to plan together and map out exactly what content is

being taught in each grade. Instead of planning as a team to teach the span of 5-

8 content and, together, prepare students for the 8th grade state assessment, they

are planning in isolation.

c. They also understood the benefits of a curriculum map, but were unfamiliar

with the process of developing one. They could see the need for structure across

K-8 science, and acknowledged that this structure doesn’t currently exist.

d. [I]t became clear that what TACS needs most is a cohesive alignment across

the K-8 science program.

IV. Defendant Smith’s “Anonymous” Letter

42. On November 14, 2019, after the second STEM Magazine article was released,

Wayne Carley sent Ms. Wallace an e-mail asking if she knew someone named Todd Smith. When

she confirmed that she did, she was forwarded the following e-mail from Wayne Carley:

Subject: Article Concern

Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2019 15:37:06 +0000 From: Todd Smith

[email protected]> To:[email protected]

Hello Kind Sir,

I am writing with grave concerns regarding a recent article in your magazine by Jean

Wallace, “Shifting the Paradigm.” It is unfortunate that I have to express that many of her

statements were not accurate. I work in the same APS network as Mrs. Wallace and her lack of

6 Article attached as Exhibit 3.

Case ID: 200500268

14

professionalism is astonishing. The management agency is supposed to support the school, but

her points were detrimental.

She wrote negative statements about Tacony Academy Charter School without taking the

time to understand their entire curriculum. She based her arguments on one meeting, with four

teachers. Tacony has 19 teachers that teach math! She didn’t take any time to explore their very

comprehensive STEAM program. She didn’t include our specialist teacher that teaches a

Problem-Solving class to grades K-8. There is no mention of the many scientific partnerships

like the Tesla Science Foundation, and Philadelphia Insectarium. Mrs. Wallace based some very

specific and injurious conclusions that are being regarded as defamation.

I hope you can see why I respectfully ask you to have this article removed from your

magazine.

Respectfully, Anonymous

V. APS’ Refusal to Remedy Plaintiff’s Reputation

43. Upon receiving this e-mail, Plaintiff immediately texted Mr. Santilli:

I’m going to forward an email to you. If Todd Smith wants to

threaten me with defamation, he’d better understand the meaning of

the term, the serious nature of such a threat, and the ridiculousness

of his claim. I’m glad you sat in on the meeting with the TACS

teachers to hear their struggles from their own mouths.

He needs to retract his email and apologize to me in writing.

44. Through text and e-mail, Plaintiff requested a meeting with Mr. Santilli to address

the need for Defendant Smith to retract his e-mail to STEM Magazine and to apologize to her in

writing.

45. On November 20, 2019, Mr. Santilli met Plaintiff at the Country Club Diner on

Cottman Avenue in Philadelphia and told Plaintiff that her work with TACS was officially over.

46. He said he met with Defendant Scheid, and that Defendant Scheid refused to

address Plaintiff’s request for a retraction and an apology, and that he did not want her help at

TACS to continue in the future.

Case ID: 200500268

15

47. Plaintiff expressed concern about her professional reputation and ability to be

effective in her work at APS going forward. Specifically, she asked Mr. Santilli to send a memo

from him, to all APS personnel stating that Plaintiff’s article was not only truthful, but that he was

aware of the needs at TACS and agreed with her findings and approach as outlined in the article.

He stated he could not do that. When he said he would not do that, Plaintiff specifically requested

they meet with Scott Kramer, APS’ Chief Talent Officer, to find a solution, but Santilli was

emphatic in his refusal to participate himself or to allow her to contact Kramer on her own.

48. In her summary for November 16th through 22nd, Plaintiff states,

Recall that at our August 20th meeting I was asked to conduct an

inventory at TACS and find the gaps in learning that are affecting

PSSA scores, to make recommendations on how to close the

identified gaps, and to build bridges to partnerships (university and

community) to help support those recommendations. Where some

may protest that the job of APS is not to reveal problems, but only

to be a support to its schools, it is impossible to solve an underlying

problem without uncovering it. APS has a responsibility to kids to

intervene, where necessary, and especially when it comes to their

learning. Teaching to PA Academic Standards isn’t a suggestion;

it is the law. For a CMO, stepping in to ensure schools are aligned

to standards is the most responsible kind of support possible to both

students and teachers. There is empirical evidence for the need to

structure the K-8 science program at TACS to standards and to

support teachers in teaching to standards. This need is confirmed by

direct contact, student assessments, and data analyses by the APS

Data Team.

Where APS has a commitment to support its schools, the certified

educators within the APS network are required by law and APS

policy to adhere to the professional standards of educators. Not

uncovering the student learning gaps at TACS enables the gaps in

content to widen. TACS’ leadership accusing me of lying, of being

unprofessional, and even threatening me for revealing these gaps,

must be immediately addressed by APS. As an APS Academic

Team we often discuss the need to build instructional capacity in our

Case ID: 200500268

16

schools. There is a vast difference between the perception of student

achievement through self- reporting, and the sustainable and

structured student learning that is our responsibility, as certified

educators, to deliver through a standards-aligned curriculum and

scope and sequence. In 2016, in my position as the CAO of APS, I

requested these same curriculum documents from TACS and I was

told they did not exist then and, through my inventory, have learned

that they do not exist now. How deeply have the gaps widened in

more than three years? Stop-gap measured to fill the void in content

using PSSA prep books and interventions does not solve the

underlying concerns and, most importantly, does not result in

meaningful learning for students. TACS’ leadership should move

from protest to progress and take the time necessary to create this

critical foundation for learning science, and then provide the

instructional training and resources to teachers needed to support

them in the implementation of a standards-aligned science

curriculum. Doing so will not only align TACS with state

requirements and the law, but will showcase what is possible,

empower teachers, support students, celebrate the sustainable

success in science learning that can be achieved, and even realize its

own mission to master Pennsylvania standards.

49. After Defendant Scheid refused to permit Ms. Wallace to work with TACS, she

realized she would not be able to do her job as the law requires.

50. In her December 2nd through December 6th summary, Ms. Wallace states,

While everyone certainly understands the need to structure science

teaching and learning, the realization of fitting a multi-year strategy

for science into an already packed schedule in our schools has been

challenging. The most important and sustainable approach, to

align curriculum to standards, was rejected and even challenged

as untruthful. A revised strategy was developed and approved that

would have begun to teach science content, to both teachers and

students through literacy. It was the best approach, for now, to reach

the most teachers and students. Unfortunately, this too, will not go

forward.

51. A week later, in her December 9th through December 13th summary, Ms. Wallace

states,

Case ID: 200500268

17

Kristine suggested that my work, now, should focus on me drafting

a scope and sequence for Lindley [Academy Charter School]. I have

concerns for this process since doing the alignment – as a team – is

where learning happens for teachers…

I reminded Kristine that I was told at an August meeting at TACS

HS that TACS is (or would like to be) aligned to NGSS [Next

Generation Science Standards]. From my inventory, TACS isn’t

aligned to either set of standards at this point in time.7 Whether

NGSS or PA Science Standards, Schools need to align what they

are teaching to one set of standards or the other; preferably to a

set that is enacted by law and assessed by PDE.

52. In her December 30, 2019 through January 10, 2020 summary Ms. Wallace states,

On Monday the 6th I worked remotely. Jerry [Santilli] and I

scheduled time to meet on Friday to discuss my role now and in the

future. After 5 months of being sent in various directions, I have

spent a good amount of time, as well as network capital, planning

strategies that couldn’t be realized.

53. A week later, on January 13, 2020, Ms. Wallace received an email from Margery

Covello, the CEO of Lindley Academy Charter School, declaring that Ms. Wallace would not

publicize anything about Lindley without prior approval.

54. Ms. Wallace spoke to Scott Kramer the same day, who told her that APS’ failure to

denounce Todd Smith’s email amounted to tacit approval and support of its content.

55. Ms. Wallace realized that she would not be able to continue as APS’ Science

Curriculum Advisor absent APS condemning Defendant Smith’s email. As a consequence, Ms.

Wallace was forced to tender her resignation.

7 See Exhibit 2.

Case ID: 200500268

18

COUNT I

Jean Wallace v. All Defendants

Pennsylvania Whistleblower Law

43 PA. CONS. STAT. § 1421, et. seq.

56. Ms. Wallace incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this complaint

as if set forth fully and at length.

57. Ms. Wallace is a protected employee as defined by 43 P.S. § 1422.

58. APS and TACS are covered employers as defined by 43 P.S. § 1422.

59. APS and TACS acted in concert to punish her for exposing TACS’ violations of

standards.

60. Ms. Wallace made a good faith report of “wrongdoing or waste” as defined by 43

P.S. § 1422. Ms. Wallace reported to Defendant Santilli that TACS, and by extension, APS, are

not adhering to the law because TACS is not providing a standards-aligned science curriculum to

TACS students. Specifically, Ms. Wallace complained to Santilli that

a. APS has a responsibility to kids to intervene, where necessary, and

especially when it comes to their learning. Teaching to PA

Academic Standards isn’t a suggestion; it is the law.8

b. Whether NGSS or PA Science Standards, Schools need to align

what they are teaching to one set of standards or the other; preferably

to a set that is enacted by law and assessed by PDE.9

61. Ms. Wallace was discriminated and retaliated against for her good faith report of

wrongdoing or waste as defined by 43 P.S. § 1423.

8 Plaintiff’s November 22, 2019 report to Defendant Santilli. 9 Plaintiff’s December 13, 2019 report to Defendant Santilli.

Case ID: 200500268

19

62. Monies provided by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania have in the past and are

currently being wasted by TACS’ and APS’ wrongdoing in failing to ensure an appropriate

education and standards-based curriculum.

63. Curriculum is defined as “a series of planned instruction aligned with the academic

standards in each subject that is coordinated and articulated and implemented in a manner designed

to result in the achievement at the proficient level by all students. 22 Pa. Code § 4.3.10

64. Ms. Wallace was retaliated against and discharged in violation of the Pennsylvania

Whistleblower Law for reporting detailed violations of legislative and regulatory academic

standards to her Employer, APS, of TACS’ violations of:

a. 22 Pa. Code § 4.21(b): “Curriculum and instruction in the primary program must

be standards-based and focus on introducing young children to formal education,

developing an awareness of the self in relation to others and the environment, and

developing skills of communication, thinking and learning…”

b. 22 Pa. Code § 4.21(f): “Planned instruction in the following areas shall be provided

to every student every year in the intermediate level program. Planned instruction

may be provided as a separate course or as an instructional unit within another

course or other interdisciplinary instructional activity:

…

(3) Science and technology, including instruction about agriculture and agricultural

science.; And,

10 See Allen v. Dumaresq, 2015 WL 5446488 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2015) (overruling defendant’s objections in holding that the elimination of physical education and reduction of foreign language courses directly implicate deficiencies in curriculum as defined by 22 Pa. Code § 4.3.).

Case ID: 200500268

20

c. 22 Pa. Code § 4.22(b): “Curriculum and instruction in the middle level program

must be standards-based and focus on mastery of academic subjects, the

development of critical and creative thinking, information literacy, good health and

encourage active participation in the school and community.”

65. Ms. Wallace repeatedly reported APS’ and TACS’ violations of 22 Pa. Code § 4.21

and § 4.22 including but not limited to making the following written complaints:

a. There is no curriculum map, no scope and sequence, no textbooks, resource books,

they totally wing it. Other than doing a specific activity on Fridays, they are not, in

their words, close to being a STEM School.11

b. They also understood the benefits of a curriculum map, but were unfamiliar with

the process of developing one. They could see the need for structure across K-8

science, and acknowledged that this structure doesn’t currently exist.12

c. Kristine confirmed that Science was not a focus for APS in the past and that there

is no curriculum or alignment in place for science at TACS or APS schools.13

d. TACS isn’t aligned to either set of standards at this point in time.14

WHEREFORE, Ms. Wallace prays for the following relief:

(a) An award of damages to compensate her for her economic loss;

(b) An award of compensatory damages to compensate her for her non-economic

losses;

(c) An award of punitive damages;

(d) An award of costs, including reasonable attorney fees and witness fees; and

(e) Such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.

COUNT II

11 Plaintiff’s October 18, 2019 report to Defendant Santilli. 12 See Exhibit 3. 13 Plaintiff’s November 16, 2019 report to Defendant Santilli. 14 Plaintiff’s December 13, 2019 report to Defendant Santilli.

Case ID: 200500268

21

Jean Wallace v. Todd Smith, Scheid & TACS

Defamation/Slander



67. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff Wallace has been a private figure who has

not thrust herself into any public controversy as defined by law.

68. At all relevant times Defendant Smith was acting within the scope of his

employment and in furtherance of TACS’ interests.

69. Plaintiff was esteemed and accepted among others to whom Plaintiff was known

to be a person of good name and reputation, prior to commission of the acts by Defendants.

70. The Defendants willfully and maliciously published scandalous and defamatory

statements to others, including but not limited to Defendant Smith’s email to Wayne Carley

stating that many of Plaintiff’s statements in her November 2019 article were not accurate, “her

lack of professionalism was astonishing”, and that many people were regarding her article as

defamation.

71. Defendant Smith’s attack upon Plaintiff’s professionalism constitutes a per se

defamatory statement, which statement was ratified and approved by Defendants Scheid and

TACS.

72. Upon information and belief, Defendants Smith and TACS further publicized the

defamatory statements in Smith’s “anonymous” email to Wayne Carley throughout the APS

network.

73. The statements made by the Defendant were false, defamatory, unprivileged and

injurious to Plaintiff Jean Wallace’s good name, and continue to expose her to injury.

Case ID: 200500268

22

74. The Defendants did not have a privilege to make the defamatory statements about

Plaintiff; alternatively, the Defendants abused any privilege that did exist.

75. The Defendants published false and defamatory statements as set forth herein and

the suggestions and implications arising there from, with knowledge of their falsity and/or with

reckless disregard as to their truth or falsity and with malicious, intentional, and/or reckless

disregard for the injury to the good name and reputation of Plaintiff Wallace.

76. The Defendants’ aforementioned false and defamatory statements and suggestions

have severely tarnished Plaintiff’s excellent reputation, exposed her to public ridicule and

stigmatized her within her profession as an educator.

77. Plaintiff Wallace has sustained damages as a result of the Defendants’ defamatory

communications and is entitled to recover all such damages and expenses resulting from the

Defendants’ false and defamatory words.


a. An award of damages to compensate her for her economic loss;

b. An award of compensatory damages to compensate her for her non-economic

losses;

c. An award of punitive damages; and

d. Such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.

Case ID: 200500268

23

COUNT III

Jean Wallace v. Thomas Scheid & TACS

Tortious Interference with Contractual Relations



79. At all relevant times Defendant Scheid was acting within the scope of his

employment and in further of TACS’ interests.

80. Plaintiff and APS had a contractual relationship.

81. Defendant Scheid intended to harm Plaintiff by interfering with that contractual

relationship by ratifying and spreading false rumors that Plaintiff is unprofessional and included

false information in her published article. Scheid refused to apologize and refused to order Todd

Smith to apologize and retract the e-mail to STEM Magazine.

82. Defendant Scheid interfered with Plaintiff’s contractual relationship with APS to

punish her for exposing deficiencies in TACS’ science curriculum.

83. Plaintiff has been damaged as a result of Defendant Scheid’s interference with her

contractual relationship with APS.

84. Defendant Scheid was acting within the scope of his employment for TACS at all

times relevant to these allegations.

85. Defendant TACS is vicariously liable for all acts and omissions of its employees

and agents, including, but not limited to Defendants Scheid and Smith.


e. An award of damages to compensate her for her economic loss;

f. An award of compensatory damages to compensate her for her non-economic

losses;

Case ID: 200500268

24

g. An award of punitive damages; and

h. Such other relief as the Court deems appropriate.

GREENBLATT PIERCE FUNT &

FLORES, LLC

Dated: May 5, 2020 s/ Patricia V. Pierce_______

Patricia V. Pierce

Ronald L. Greenblatt

Noah Cohen

Greenblatt, Pierce, Funt, & Flores, LLC

Attorneys for Jean Wallace

Case ID: 200500268

EXHIBIT 1 Case ID: 200500268

Science Curriculum Consultant – Part Time Position

PHASE I Inventory of Strengths and Needs

➢ Review current curriculum alignment/scope and sequence and all science instruction materials

and resources currently being used in TACS K-9 Science curriculum and instruction; begin to define strengths and identify specific needs of the K-9 Science/STEM Program at TACS.

➢ Review PSSA scores and data for TACS 4th and 8th grade Science to determine strengths and gaps

in content.

➢ Hold round table discussions with TACS K-9 teachers and TACS/APS administrators to gain input into what they see as the strengths of the current program, as well as the gaps in curriculum content, materials, and resources.

➢ Based on a review of the K-9 Science curriculum and instruction, materials resources, data, and roundtable session/s, together with APS and TACS teachers and administrators, develop a plan, as well as a timeline, to prioritize and address the identified gaps in TACS/APS K-9 Science curriculum and instruction, materials, and professional development.

PHASE II Curriculum Development/Standards Alignment

➢ Organize a series of curriculum development/standards alignment professional development

workshop sessions with TACS/APS teachers including an overview of PA Academic Standards relating to Science; defining how students learn best, and resulting in a fully-developed, teacher-created, standards-aligned, K-9 scope and sequence.

➢ Based on the standards-aligned scope and sequence, begin to identify resources necessary to assist TACS/APS and teachers’ in delivering effective instruction to TACS students, grades K-9.

➢ Collaborate with Technology, Engineering, and Math teachers to identify areas of Science integration and support from STEM content teachers and administrators.

PHASE III Review and Identify Resources

➢ In collaboration with TACS/APS, review and recommend for purchase those materials and resources that directly align with and support the teacher-created, standards-aligned scope and sequence.

➢ Identify and develop community partnerships (field studies, professional development, etc.) that directly align with the scope and sequence with the goal to enhance student learning as it relates to the standards-aligned scope and sequence.

Case ID: 200500268

➢ The Science Curriculum Consultant will act as an ongoing resource to assist TACS/APS with the implementation of the standards-aligned scope and sequence.

➢ Repeat Phases I, II and III and revise and edit as needed. Curriculum and Instruction is never stagnant, but always in a stage of review and revision.

Case ID: 200500268

2018-2019 School Progress Report


Turnaround Model

Admissions Category

Enrollment

Grades in Report

Report Type

Website

Phone/Fax

Address

Sector

School Code X04

Charter

1330 Rhawn St., 19111

215-742-5100 / 215-742-5200

www.ap-schools.org/Tacony-Academy-Charter

K8

K-8

714

Citywide With Criteria

N/A

Performance Tiers Legend

40.0%

MODEL (75-100%) REINFORCE (50-74%) WATCH (25-49%) INTERVENE (0-24%)

OVERALL:

3-YEAR AVG

57.3%A school's overall score represents its combinedperformance on the Achievement, Progress, Climate,and College & Career (for high schools only) domains.

The Achievement domain measures performance onstandardized assessments, including PSSA, KeystoneExams, ACCESS for ELLs, and reading assessments.

Achievement:

Progress:

The Progress domain measures growth onstandardized assessments and progress towardsgraduation (for high schools only).

58.7%

Climate:

72.7%The Climate domain measures school climate as wellas student and parent/guardian engagement.

2018-20192016-2017 2017-2018

(76%)MODEL

(24%)INTERVENE

(37%)WATCH

(44%)WATCH

Case ID: 200500268

2018-2019 School Progress Report Tacony Academy Charter School

out of

out of

AchievementMETRIC METRIC SCORE

PSSA: English Language Arts

% Advanced

% Proficient or Advanced

ACCESS for ELLs:% 4.5 or Above

Grade 5 -% Proficient or Advanced

POINTS EARNED TIER

INSUFFICIENT SAMPLE

57% 4.22 9.00 WATCH

(47%)(461 students)

45%(78 students)




66%(80 students)

59%(78 students)

63%(67 students)

13% 1.04 2.00 REINFORCE(52%)(461 students)

Achievement section continues on next page.

% Reading at Grade Level-Grades K-2


out of


47%(79 students)


66%(79 students)

Case ID: 200500268


PSSA: Science


% Advancedout of

out of

out of

Achievement Total:% of Points Earned

WATCH37%

POINTS EARNED TIER


METRIC SCOREMETRIC

out of

Achievement


% Advanced

PSSA: Mathematics

out of




(Continued)

31% 1.23 9.00 INTERVENE

(459 students) (14%)

19%(77 students)

15%(80 students)

34%(77 students)

25%(67 students)

9% 0.71 2.00 WATCH(36%)(459 students)

54% 1.29 3.00 WATCH

(43%)(145 students)


37%(67 students)


28.5010.68


47%(79 students)


44%(79 students)


69%(78 students)

Case ID: 200500268


METRIC

Progress

PSSA Science (Grade 8):Average Growth Index (AGI)

PSSA Mathematics:AGI for Lowest-Performing 33% ofStudents

ACCESS for ELLs:% of Students Meeting Growth Target

PSSA Mathematics:Average Growth Index (AGI)

PSSA English Language Arts:Average Growth Index (AGI)

Progress, On Equity

METRIC SCORE POINTS EARNED TIER

out of

out of

out of

out of

out of

PSSA English Language Arts:AGI for Lowest-Performing 33% ofStudents

Progress Total:% of Points Earned

DATA NOT AVAILABLE

24% 8.80 37.00 INTERVENEout of

-3.65 0.00 12.00 INTERVENE(0%)

0.30 5.20 12.00 WATCH(43%)

-0.79 0.18 2.50 INTERVENE(7%)

-1.90 0.00 4.00 INTERVENE(0%)

1.57 3.43 4.00 MODEL(86%)

PSSA Science (Grade 4):Average Growth Index (AGI)

-4.03 0.00 2.50 INTERVENE(0%)

out of

Case ID: 200500268


out of

Climate

% Attending 85-90% of Days


TIERMETRIC

out of

Annual Retention Rate

% Attending Less Than 80% of Days


% of Students with Zero Out-Of-SchoolSuspensions

METRIC SCORE POINTS EARNED

out of

% of Students with Zero In-SchoolSuspensions

Student Survey: School Climate Rating(% of most positive responses)

Climate Total:

Parent Survey: School Climate Rating(% of most positive responses)

% of Points Earned

out of

out of

27%

9%(726 students)

(726 students)

4%(726 students)

3%(726 students)

99% 10.00 10.00 MODEL(100%)(670 students)

100% 0.93 out of 1.00 MODEL(93%)(726 students)


63% 0.63 1.00 REINFORCE(63%)

87% 0.87 1.00 MODEL(87%)

out ofParent/Guardian Survey:Participation Rate

33% 0.57 1.00 REINFORCE(57%)

76% 22.90 MODEL30.00

% of Students Attending 95% or Moreof Instructional Days

(726 students)

REINFORCE12.00(59%)

7.1057% out of

Case ID: 200500268


Educator EffectivenessTeacher effectiveness measures are displayed in the School Progress Report, but not included in the SPR rating, to share data we havegathered to monitor and support teacher practice. This information is also used to develop responsive and customized professionallearning for teachers to ensure that all students have access to great instruction.

In addition to other metrics, the SPR includes teachers' overall Multiple Measure Summary (MMS) effectiveness ratings. These ratingsare comprised of teachers' Formal Observation, Student Learning Objectives, Teacher-Specific PVAAS, and the building-level score fromthe state of Pennsylvania's School Performance Profile (SPP, also known as Act 82).

Here are some important details that contextualize the teacher effectiveness data reported in the SPR.

Teachers in a formal observation year who fail to receive a required observation receive a default observation score of 2(Proficient) for any missing observation data, which may inflate the overall scores.

Until District-wide inter-rater reliability norming is held for all principals, observation scores may vary significantly acrossschools and observers. As a result, comparisons of scores between schools may not be meaningful.

The District's observation tool evaluates 10 components of the Danielson Framework for Teaching. Therefore, comparing SDP'sobservation scores to scores evaluated against all 22 components of the Danielson Framework may not be meaningful.

EDUCATOR EFFECTIVENESS INDICATORS

% of Teachers Receiving an MMS Rating of Distinguished

% of Teachers Receiving an MMS Rating of Proficient

FOR MORE INFORMATION

More information about the School Progress Reports, including the User Guide, Public Business Rules, and FAQ, is available atphilasd.org/spr.

NOTES ABOUT ROUNDING

All calculated values in the SPR (metric scores, percent of points earned, and points earned) are calculated using unrounded values;however, displayed values may differ slightly due to rounding for publication purposes.

UNDERSTANDING DUAL REPORTS

Schools that serve multiple grade spans receive separate SPRs for each grade span (for example, a school serving grades 6-12 receives aMiddle School Report and a High School Report). The grades included in a particular report are displayed on the top right of the coverpage.

% of Teachers Attending 95% or More of Days

Student Survey: Student Perception of Quality of Teacher Practice(% of most positive responses)

DATA NOT AVAILABLE

DATA NOT AVAILABLE

DATA NOT AVAILABLE

63%

Case ID: 200500268

Case ID: 200500268

VERIFICATION

I, JEAN WALLACE, hereby state that I am the Plaintiff in this action, and that the

statements made in the foregoing Civil Action Complaint are true and correct to the best of my

knowledge, information, and belief. I understand that the statements therein are made subject to

the penalties in 18 Pa. C.S. § 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.

s/ Jean Wallace JEAN WALLACE

Date: May 5, 2020

Case ID: 200500268

Patricia V. Pierce, Esquire (PA ID 23129) Ronald L. Greenblatt, Esquire (PA ID 50673) Noah S. Cohen, Esquire (PA ID 313849) GREENBLATT, PIERCE, FUNT, & FLORES, LLC 123 South Broad Street, 25th Floor Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19109 t. 215-735-1600 f. 215-753-1660 Attorneys for Plaintiff

Jean Wallace

Plaintiff, vs.


Todd Smith c/o Tacony Academy Charter School

Thomas Scheid c/o Tacony Academy Charter School


Gerald Santilli c/o American Paradigm Schools

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

PHILADELPHIA COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS TRIAL DIVISION

Term, 2020


JURY DEMAND

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on this date a true and correct copy of the foregoing Complaint has been served

to the following counsel via electronic mail:

Andrew La Fiura, Esquire Jackson Lewis P.C. 1601 Cherry Street

Suite 1350 Philadelphia, PA 19102

Frank J. Lavery, Jr., Esquire Lavery Law

225 Market Street, Suite 304 Harrisburg, PA 17101

DATED: May 5, 2020 s/ Patricia V. Pierce Patricia V. Pierce, Esquire GREENBLATT, PIERCE, FUNT & FLORES, LLC 123 South Broad Street - Suite 2500 Philadelphia, PA 19109

:

:

:

:

:

Case ID: 200500268

greenblatt, pierce, funt, & flores, llc a. siligrini · tacony academy charter school 1300...

Documents