Marathon City teacher fired

A Marathon City teacher was fired last week after she allegedly engaged in “corporal punishment” as a means of disciplining a pair of disruptive students during a class on Sept. 9.

Jessica McCarthy, an English teacher at Marathon Venture Academy, publicly disputed the district’s characterization of her actions, saying she was asking the students to take “movement breaks” based on experiences she learned at boot camp as a member of the U.S. Navy.

At McCarthy’s request, an evidentiary hearing was held in open session during a special board meeting on Sept. 24, which was attended by a roomful of parents, fellow teachers and a few students, many of whom were there to support her.

In a scene reminiscent of a courtroom, the school district’s administration and Mc-Carthy each presented their case before the five-member school board, which served as a jury for the proceedings.

Superintendent Angela Woyak presented the results of the district’s investigation into the allegations against McCarthy, which led to Woyak’s recommendation to terminate McCarthy’s contract. Following cross-examination by McCarthy’s attorney, Ben Hitchcock Cross, and questions by members of the board and statements by McCarthy, the board convened into closed session for over an hour to deliberate.

Once the board reconvened into open session, Davis Runde, an attorney representing the school district, announced that a majority of the board had voted to accept Woyak’s recommendation to terminate McCarthy’s contract. When Hitchcock Cross asked if the board could vote in open session, Runde said “no,” and the meeting was adjourned.

The Record-Review has requested the minutes of the closed session to determine how each board member voted. Runde denied the request, saying the minutes “have not been circulated for approval or consideration.”

Besides being fired, McCarthy also faces possible criminal charges as the result of an investigation by the Marathon City Police Department and the potential revocation of her teaching license by the Department of Public Instruction.

The case against McCarthy

In her presentation to the board, Woyak said she started an investigation after receiving a complaint from the Marathon City PD on Sept. 9 alleging that McCarthy had used corporal punishment against two students during an eighth-grade English Language Arts class.

One of the students, referred to as Student A in the district’s investigation, had reportedly created a nuisance object out of a pencil and some staples and was swinging it at other students. Meanwhile, a pupil referred to as Student B was said to be repeatedly making disruptive comments and distracting other students.

Student A was allegedly made to do a “wall sit,” which requires someone to maintain a squatted position with their back against a wall and their legs at a 90-degree angle. Wall sits are often used as exercises to improve leg strength, but they can also be used as endurance tests and as a form of punishment, similar to push-ups.

Student B was allegedly made to stand up and do “sundials,” stretching out his arms and rotating them in small circles – a movement that is also used for exercise or disci- pline.

According to the district’s investigative report – which was based on interviews with the two students, seven of their classmates, and McCarthy – the students were not warned ahead of time and were made to continue doing the exercises for anywhere between 10 and 30 minutes. Some of the students’ statements varied as to the duration of the exercises, and at least one student changed their story, according to Hitchcock Cross.

MVA principal Max Wienke, who is an active member of the U.S. Coast Guard, said the students’ statements about the duration of the exercises were “somewhat inconsistent,” but they all had one thing in common.

“There was no intention to allow this to end until the bell rang,” he said.

Wienke also reported that Student A has no history of disciplinary problems, and Student B has only had minor issues.

Woyak said Student A’s parent reported that her child was “distraught” and in pain during the experience.

“She alleges that Mrs. McCarthy showed no regard and never spoke to him,” she said.

During her interview with McCarthy, Woyak said the teacher acknowledged reading the district’s disciplinary policies but did not believe the exercises constituted corporal punishment.

“Mrs. McCarthy self-reported that she uses military strategies as student discipline that she was subjected to during her military service in boot camp,” she said.

Wisconsin Statute 118.31 includes “prolonged maintenance of physically painful positions, when used as a means of discipline” in its definition of illegal corporal punishment, but it does not apply to “reasonable physical activities associated with athletic training.” The district’s policies largely reflect this definition.

The week before the alleged acts of corporal punishment, McCarthy and her husband, who was also in the Navy, had spoken to the class about their experiences in the military as part of a unit about veterans developed by the district. Part of that lesson had been to demonstrate some of the exercises done during boot camp and allowing students to try them out on a voluntary basis.

When trying to determine the truth of what happened on Sept. 9, Woyak said she looked for all of the statements that remained consistent throughout all of the interviews and compared the description of what happened against state law and the district’s policies.

“This is an unapproved and illegal form of discipline, and with all due respect to Mrs. McCarthy’s military service, our schools are not military boot camps,” Woyak said.

McCarthy’s defense

During Hitchcock Cross’s cross-examination of Woyak, which at times became a little testy, the attorney attempted to exhibit the superintendent’s lack of knowledge about what happened in the classroom and also questioned her methods of investigating his client.

In response to Hitchcock Cross’s questioning, Woyak acknowledged that she did not know how long an average eighth-grader could maintain a wall sit position. McCarthy later testified that, even when she was in her prime, she could only do a wall sit for about two minutes, and doing one for five, 10 or 30 minutes is physically impossible.

Hitchcock Cross and McCarthy also pushed back against the idea that McCarthy had made the students do the exercises as punishments for their behavior. McCarthy said she was simply trying to redirect the students’ behavior and provide them with opportunities to do “movement breaks” so they would stop disrupting the class.

McCarthy also indicated that Student A was taking breaks, sitting on a heater and reading a “Where’s Waldo?” book during the time he was allegedly being forced to maintain the wall sit. She acknowledged that Student B complained about his arms getting sore, so she had him reposition them, but she said the whole exercise lasted no more than 10 minutes. Hitchcock Cross also accused Woyak of ignoring inconsistencies in the students’ stories and pointed out that a parent of one of the students who had been interviewed told local police on Sept. 22 that their son had changed his story and had been trying to protect his friends.

Several of Hitchcock Cross’s questions made it clear that he and his client believed that Woyak had decided to believe the students’ version of events early on in the investigation and had not seriously entertained McCarthy’s explanation of what happened.

Woyak denied that was the case and said she was simply carrying out an investigation as part of her job as superintendent.

“I don’t recall forming an opinion,” she said. “I was interested in finding the facts. At the end, I went through to see what was common among all the interviews.”

Hitchcock Cross also revealed that Woyak had reported the allegations against Mc-Carthy to the DPI, which could result in her losing her teacher’s license, even if the school board had decided not to fire her.

“So, in other words, you didn’t wait for the board to make a decision,” he said to Woyak. “You had already made your decision, true?”

“I am required to report this,” she responded.

When McCarthy was given the chance to speak in her own defense, she talked about “falling in love” with the district and its students as a substitute teacher and deciding to move her family to Marathon City so she could accept the full-time teaching position. Once the allegations were made against her, McCarthy said she no longer felt supported by the district’s administrators.

“I feel like this administration heard the allegation from a student and immediately listened to the words of students and took their word over mine...an adult...and immediately ran with that,” she said. She noted that a lot of her fellow teachers now worry about their own job security.

At the end of his questioning, Hitchcock Cross asked his client why she had requested to have the disciplinary hearing held in public even though she had the right for it to be done in private.

“I wanted the community to see what is happening to one of its teachers,” she said. “I want to set an example for my students to not just back down. I want to share that I’m not who Mrs. Woyak is accusing me of being.”

“You don’t hurt kids, do you?” he asked. “No I do not.” “You’re a teacher, aren’t you?” “I am, and I’m a damn good one.”