Thursday evening the Asbury Park Board of Education will have its annual reorganization meeting, typically a humdrum affair with selection of officers and lots of housekeeping. Yet Superintendent Rashawn Adams appears to be panicking. Why?

Three school board members– incumbents Anthony Remy, Giuseppe “Joe” Grillo, and newcomer Wendi Glassman— will be sworn in, which means, according to insiders, the majority will shift to board members who will no longer act as Adams’ “rubber-stamp.” Also, last month the Asbury Park Principals and Supervisors Association sent a letter to all school board members berating Adams’ leadership and pleading for relief: We “humbly and fervently” request “intervention to prevent further damage to district schools, professionals, and students,” they write. “We have arrived at a crisis point.” (Full letter below.)

One sign of Adams’ panic: Right before winter break he held an  ill-advised “press conference” assailing teacher union president John Napolitani (whose mother had died days earlier) and various other “internal and external forces that are attempting to adversely affect our district’s ability to create a thriving educational environment.” 

During the press conference Adams, perhaps inadvertently, confirmed a steep drop in student enrollment. While the most recent state data (2021-2022) puts total enrollment at 1,608 students, Adams stated, according to the Asbury Park Press, that current enrollment is down to  1,373 students, a 14.6% decrease. He also appeared to criticize the tenures of the two most former superintendents, Lamont Repollet and Sancha Gray, telling the Press he had to “clean up a lot” in his first two years as head of the district, and “he was done waiting.”

Adams also confirmed the high cost per pupil—”we recognize that we have the highest per-pupil rate of all the surrounding districts in northern Monmouth County at $30,949”–while acknowledging Asbury Park student achievement is at the bottom of the state, 436th out of 436 in language arts and 425th out of 425 in mathematics. Concurrently he applauded student outcomes on the high school diploma-qualifying test called the NJGPA, boasting that more students got passing scores while neglecting to point out that every district had higher passing scores because the state Department of Education lowered standards and expectations.

In the letter from the Asbury Park Principals and Supervisors Association, school leaders describe a December 5th meeting where Adams and HR Director LaShawn Gibson subjected them “to abusive, inappropriate and degrading language and  demeaning communication tactics that included shaming, shouting, bullying, harassing language, and  coercion.” They work, they write, in “a culture of fear and intimidation, seemingly with impunity, [which] has left employees, especially middle  management, afraid of reprisals.”

The letter to the school board ends with a list of  allegations against Adam, including: “arbitrarily” redesigning class schedules resulting in “collapsed classes, excessive use of resources on programs that serve as little as one student, inadequate  staffing for classes and committees, and poor coverage for teacher absences” and “increasingly unsafe conditions for students and staff.”

Over the last two years teachers, administrators, parents, and students have become more vocal in their disapproval of Adams’ leadership. In May the Asbury Park Education Association issued a vote of“no-confidence” in his leadership. Early last year high school students berated Adams, saying, “What’s wrong with you? You have nothing for us. This school has nothing for us..” A newly-appointed state fiscal monitor, Robert Finger, previously of Lakewood, was dismissed last month after overturning a school board vote reportedly on Adams’ instructions.

Asbury Park has had a state-appointed fiscal monitor for two decades.

Here is the letter, sent by the Asbury Park Principals and Supervisors Association:

To: Asbury Park Public School Board Members 

VIA EMAIL 

Dear Esteemed Members, 

On behalf of the Asbury Park Principals and Supervisors Association (APPSA) we bring forth profound  concerns regarding the health and vitality of our district, and the well-being of the professionals therein.  Given the gravity of the concerns we are sharing, we presume that the Board may be unaware of the  challenging working conditions, mistreatment of administration, overall mismanagement, and lack of  essential support under which we strive to provide a strong and successful learning environment for the  students of Asbury Park. Numerous distressing interactions and failures on the part of district leadership,  specifically Dr. Adams, including a tipping point meeting this month (December 5, 2023), have led us to  request your immediate and thorough action to prevent further damage to the faculty and students of  Asbury Park school district.  

On December 5, 2023, APPSA members attended the monthly leadership meeting, led by Dr. Adams.  During this assembly, we were subjected to abusive, inappropriate and degrading language and  demeaning communication tactics that included shaming, shouting, bullying, harassing language, and  coercion. This abusive behavior was led by the Superintendent to compel us to conform to a false  narrative and skewed perspective. We were directed to signal our understanding of documentation using  raised hands, thumbs up, or sideways thumb, with no opportunity to engage in dialogue or halt the  aggression and misinformation – an experience that left many APPSA members distressed, disheartened  and demoralized. 

During the meeting, the Superintendent and the Director of HR, Dr. Gibson, publicly and  unprofessionally singled out district staff, using them as examples to illustrate why “the district is  failing.” Disturbingly, implications were made suggesting that certain staff should not be completely  compensated or retain their positions due to inadequate state assessment scores. The Superintendent  even declared a disregard for performance growth, asserting that only passing scores matter. While we  acknowledge the need for improvement in state assessment proficiency, the public naming of specific  staff as negative examples is unprofessional and detrimentally impacts our working conditions. 

In another troubling turn, the HR Director displayed a teacher’s objective on the board, along with their  grade level, and criticized the staff member’s abilities. She also insinuated that teacher scores were  excessively high and hinted at scrutinizing administrators’ evaluations. During the meeting, Dr. Gibson  stated that administrators needed “cojones” to work at APSD. This term was not only inappropriate but made administrators uncomfortable enough to complain to union leadership. Another central office  administrator repeatedly stated that people who worked 90% of the time shouldn’t receive 100% of their 

salary, which we inferred as a threat to our compensation. This has left APPSA members fearful that not  assigning low scores may result in repercussions. The State of New Jersey has an evaluation model that  incorporates state assessment results in the overall performance rating for teachers in grades 4 and up.  This kind of blanket statement displays a complete lack of understanding of instructional practice and  evaluation and is particularly alarming coming from the evaluator of record of the principals and  supervisors under his purview. To summarily dismiss student growth and progress as well as the  teacher’s efficacy engenders no confidence in the competency of district leadership. 

Throughout the meeting, the Superintendent raised his voice, made threats, and even encouraged  employees to seek employment elsewhere. This is particularly distressing as we have already witnessed  six supervisors quitting or retiring prematurely, leading to a substantial loss of continuity in middle  management. The district must prioritize the cultivation and well-being of its leaders. 

Of additional concern is Dr. Adams’ publicly-expressed stance on silencing administrators. He reiterated  his refusal to entertain “explanations, perspectives, reasons,” emphasizing that any attempt to do so  would be deemed insubordination, carrying severe consequences for principals and supervisors.  Shockingly, he dug in further and declared his intention to “not go back and forth in emails” and to  “ignore” them, effectively silencing administrators from sharing perspectives, experiences, and  concerns. 

This culture of fear and intimidation, seemingly with impunity, has left employees, especially middle  management, afraid of reprisals. We are constantly being demeaned and disrespected; in one particularly  troubling incident, after Dr. Adams conducted a walkthrough, he referred to a female teacher as a heifer.  The constant fear of a misstep that runs afoul of district leadership’s unreasonable demands has  paralyzed us, rendering us unsure of how to handle even the most basic processes and events as well as  egregious behavior like the example cited above. Official policies, training and protocols hold little  meaning when we are subjected to the ever-changing whims of district leadership. The specter of  intimidation and bullying looms large, preventing open dialogue and fostering a growing dread and  climate of instability. 

Following below, you will find detailed perspectives on the conditions and experiences faced by APPSA  members. It is our fervent hope that these revelations will bring clarity and generate swift and decisive  action. As middle management in the district, principals and supervisors often operate without  acknowledgment or appreciation. This, however, is entirely different. We are under constant threat and  attack from those charged with the success and well-being of the district. Over the last two years, this  has taken a significant toll on our morale, efficiency, and overall outlook, as well as impacting how  effectively we can serve the Asbury Park community. 

We have arrived at a crisis point and are compelled to share a sampling of our experiences, which have  contributed to the erosion of school environments, employment conditions, morale, and mental and  emotional well-being.  

With this communication, we humbly and fervently request your intervention to prevent further damage  to district schools, professionals, and students. 

Respectfully, 

Asbury Park Principals and Supervisors Association

APASA 

1. Arbitrary, poorly conceived and inadequately-communicated or supported school and staff  changes 

School reassignment 

The administration of MLK was informed May 23rd of the 2022-2023 school year that the building  would be converted into a middle school for the 2023-2024 school year. This forced school leadership to  pivot planning for the coming school year while closing out the current one. Additionally, leadership  could not access the building for the summer, further minimizing the time in which these changes could  be affected. Despite this, school leadership built a comprehensive schedule, formed committees and  developed a strong plan of action to open the middle school successfully. 

Schedule shifts 

In October 2023, following a meeting Dr. Gibson had with MLKMS school administration in which she  stated that the new middle school schedule must have teachers in classrooms 80% of the time.  Acknowledging that there is no rule requiring teachers to teach 80% of the time, Dr. Gibson stated that  this was her own recommendation for teacher workload allotment. Before then Dr. Gibson had  repeatedly failed to raise concerns, redirect or guide school scheduling, despite: 

● having received the proposed schedule multiple times during the planning stage  ● knowing that planning time for the school conversion was already severely limited 

The proposed schedule adhered to CBA guidelines covering teacher workloads, limiting teaching time to  30 periods per week (or 6 periods per day) and building opportunities for teachers to fulfill duty periods,  cover as subs, mentor and participate in committee meetings.  

The revised MLK schedule, built by the Genesis Systems Manager completely without consultation by  school administrator, disrupted the new middle school’s environment, forcing an October schedule  reboot and resulting in the following challenges: 

● Has some teachers teaching as little as 25% of time 

● Removed daily ELA and math for students 

● Condensed lunch to one period for all students, despite the school not being designed to handle  that level of traffic and congestion, thereby creating greater safety and altercation risks 

● reduced opportunity for participation in electives 

● Reduced teacher lunch and prep allotments to the point where we may be in danger of violating  CBA requirements 

● Inadequate planning and staffing to implement and support the middle school’s Bridge program 

Similarly, schedules at MLK and other schools have been arbitrarily revised to include such vagaries as  collapsed classes, excessive use of resources on programs that serve as little as one student, inadequate  staffing for classes and committees, and poor coverage for teacher absences. 

Staffing decisions 

Staffing decisions are regularly being made unilaterally with no prior consultation with school  leadership. These moves greatly impact scheduling and teacher workload, creating profoundly stressful  and compromising staffing constraints, which have an outsized effect on school, teacher and student

APASA 

performance. Yet, no attempt is made to engage the school administrator’s thought partnership or to  account for existing staffing shortages. 

2. Student discipline and retention; administrator support 

Student Discipline 

Student discipline resource and strategy withholding has been a repeated tactic, with requests such as a  Dean and ISS to support middle school safety and well-being ignored or perpetually delayed. This has  major consequences for the school faculty and students.  

● For example, in September of 2023, Dr. Adams inexplicably removed ISS as a resource for the  middle school administration to use as a consequence for behavioral infractions. This despite the  fact that the board-approved code of conduct for MLKMS clearly states ISS as a major  consequence for a myriad of infractions.  

● As previously noted, forced universal lunch is exacerbating risk of student altercations even as  approved discipline methods are being reduced. As a consequence, teachers and administrators  are often forced to send students who repeatedly threaten the safety of their peers back to their  classes.  

● Processes to remove unruly or threatening students have become excessively complicated and  impractical within daily operations and in schools with staffing shortages. 

Retention 

Administrators’ agency to guide and work with staff to handle retention practices is being stifled. In the  2022-2023 school year: 

● 24 students, 14 of them 8th graders, were retained, with the documented reason misleadingly  stated as attendance 

● A closer look at student records reveals that virtually all of the retained displayed behavioral  issues 

● Many of those students had in fact been qualified as promoted by their teachers, including some  who had been placed on extended home instruction and some special education students 

Throughout these processes, Dr. Gibson excessively questions and scrutinizes administrators’ response  to retentions, effectively curtailing their ability to manage their schools based on evolving needs and  data assessment, in conjunction with established pedagogical best practices. 

Support 

School administrator requests for support are consistently denied or neglected, and existing support is  often rescinded without consultation, warning or explanation.  

● Administrator attempts to engage in dialogue, share perspectives or concerns are dismissed or  met with resistance and even outright silencing 

● Administrators are experiencing increasing arbitrarily implemented changes while being  deprived of basic supports

APASA 

3. Arbitrary changes and hostile environment: 

In addition to arbitrary school schedule changes without consultation, protocols and expectations are  regularly changed without discussion or adequate time, training or support to meet them. This has led to  the proliferation of a toxic district culture that includes: 

● A generally hostile approach to communication with school administrators 

● The excessive issuance of memos and letters regarding “early departure” for time discrepancies  of as little as 1-minute 

● Inequitable application of expectations and punishments by central office for administrators who  offer constructive feedback or ask for more guidance or support during fast-moving changes 

● Additional changes that further delay or destabilize operational processes 

● Hostile interactions at leadership meetings, using bully tactics, such as public shaming, silencing  differing perspectives and threatening high-level disciplinary actions  

● Inappropriate language that borders on harassment and has made staff highly uncomfortable 

4. Evaluation inconsistencies, disruption of reporting lines, and punitive administrative actions These include: 

● AIP Letters for clocking out 1 minute early 

● Inconsistency in evaluators, expectations for evaluation, and clarity of directives ● Edits to Supervisor AGOs and PDPs by Dr. Gibson, who is not their supervisor 

● Targeted shaming and bullying during leadership meetings, often accompanied by public sharing  of personnel information 

● Changes to supervisors’ time without notice 

5. General leadership and building management impediments created or exacerbated by district  leadership 

These include: 

● Uneven supports at buildings and changes in elementary bell schedules 

● Abrupt assignment changes 

● Requiring principals to secure their own building coverage despite the directive the directive to  use Frontline as their call out system 

● Reduction in security at elementary schools 

● Schedule changes impacting staff enacted without timely or proper communication ● Requirement of attendance at board meetings without compensatory time  

● Prohibitions against and penalties for administrators expressing concerns or divergent  perspectives 

● Collapsing of classrooms in November without proper notice to or consultation with principals  responsible for communicating these to staff and parents 

● Audits occurring without proper notice and uneven walkthroughs executed inequitably across  schools