Torrington, Wyo. woman Marie Flanagan levied a handful of criticisms against Goshen County School District 1 after District Superintendent Ryan Kramer and district principals talked about attendance hearings. Those criticisms included that the district board did not follow law and policy Flanagan’s child’s absences due to her illness.

Flanagan, who has dealt with an ill child who cannot go to their school building of Torrington High School, said that state statute makes it so the board must take certain actions, but it didn’t and they were instead taken by Torrington High School Principal Chase Christensen.

Flanagan also said that she did not get letters after her child’s third, fifth and seventh absences, as district policy requires, but “later.” Also, that her student being “home bound” “was not an option immediately.” “Home bound” is a term in the district for when a student must work from home per a court order or doctor referral.

The Goshen County School District #1 board did not follow law nor policy, parent Marie Flanagan said. (Casper-Star Tribune)

Flanagan also said that the district did not hold any attendance hearing, also per district policy, but only got the letters. Flanagan would have liked an attendance hearing, she said.

“I was never given that option,” Flanagan said.

Christensen, saying he could talk only about process, talked about letters, which are automated, being sent after the third, fifth and seventh absences. However, district policy does say “The building principal may waive the attendance hearing for documented medical absences and if the student is meeting proficiency in all his/her classes.”

Flanagan’s child “was an honor roll student,” Flanagain said. “Her grades were over 95 percent, all of them.”

Kramer said he would call back Friday with an answer to a question of whether the letters are automated but didn’t.

One or more other instances like this have happened, Flanagan said.

“I know of at least one other instance for complete fact,” Flanagan told me.

Flanagan knows that because another parent came to Flanagan with information.

“It was like a precursor of what I was about to go through,” Flanagan said.

Having researched, Flanagan found out that other schools in the district, Lingle-Ft. Laramie and Southeast schools, do not have such problems.

She thought that Kramer had “seasoned principals” in L-FL Schools Principal Cory Gilchriest and Southeast Schools Principal Randy Epler in their meeting with me with “the unseasoned one” in Christensen.

“I understand why Kramer had them there; I just think that sometimes the one who is unexperienced speaks out of turn and may need to listen and educate themselves,” Flanagan said. “Sometimes, people insert their feet into their mouths and then learn later.”

Administrators’ statements & Flanagan’s responses

In response to Kramer saying “Once you are home bound, it’s equivalent … really, you are no longer a Goshen County student,” Flanagan brought up specific laws in Wyoming statutes 21–4–107, 21–4–106, 21–4–105, 21–4–103 and 21–4–102, saying that together, they say that the board didn’t provide a certain list nor notification, nor determine her daughter as a habitual truant as they should have.

Flanagan’s problem with that revolves around her child.

“My issue is the board didn’t have any idea what was happening to my child,” Flanagan said.

Statute 21–4–107 says that the board must notify the district attorney that a child is a habitual truant. Flanagan takes issue that it was not the board that reportedly did that.

“At that point, that is when the board decides when the district attorney needs to be involved. The board only,” Flanagan said. “We didn’t have (law) followed when (notice to the district attorney of truancy) happened to mine (Flanagan’s child).”

Statute 21–4–106 says the board must furnish a list of children of school age. Flanagan takes issue that it was not the board that reportedly furnished that list.

“If the have a list of children of unexcused absences, those need to be furnished to the board because that is who needs to deal with that.”

Also, 21–4–106 says that “the person in charge of each school within the district shall notify each district attendance officer … of all cases of unexcused absence.” Flanagan said that the district doesn’t have an attendance officer.

Statute 21–4–105 lays out penalties for parents who do not comply with “compulsory attendance” mandates in the article wherein the statutes in this story are found.

Flanagan talked about the importance of raising such laws to people’s attention, like the requirements of the school board, to make sure that all parties are following the law.

It’s the same when it comes to laws over parents, Flanagan said.

“It’s a great thing to have because we need to make sure that parents understand that we need to comply with state statute, which I fully support,” Flanagan said.

Statute 21–4–103, Flanagan believes, says the board must appoint an attendance officer.

“It’s pretty cut and dry,” Flanagan said. “That’s per state statute. So that’s an obvious. There’s a reason we have that … to protect the district from whatever the case might be, but that we also protect the kids.”

The statute could mean the school district. The language says “upon the board of trustees of the school district, which shall appoint an attendance officer or officers …”

Statute 21–4–102 has exemptions to when school attendance is required and allows school districts to make those exemptions.

“Yes, we have these rules and these are set up for a purpose — to make sure that our kids get the proper education, but there are exemptions to each district to choose what those exemptions could be,” Flanagan said. “That goes to our district and how (the statute) and our district goes hand in hand.”

Flanagan said she wanted to let the board know about the violation of statutes Flanagan alleged. Also, Flanagan noted that the board is seeking to improve and is proud of it for that.

“The board is really working on it,” Flanagan said. “They are taking this issue and trying to fix any problems.”

Flanagan also complimented Kramer.

“I’m very encouraged by his diligence to see where the breakdown was,” Flanagan said.

Flanagan said it’s difficult because “you don’t want to assume somebody doesn’t know something,” but “comparing what district policy is alongside state statutes” begs that question of ignorance.

“The admin, the central admin, so the superintendent and the board, has been very open to looking at what may need to change or at least looking at it,” Flanagan said. “So I’m very encouraged by their leadership and taking this on … I have been very happy with the way the district has responded; the central admin.”

Kramer requested that he and the principals talk with me about attendance hearings after my report of Flanagan expressing concerns in the district board’s Oct. 8 meeting.

When asked about punitive measures that the district takes for students who meet the minimum threshold of absences that policy defines as requiring action, Kramer pointed out that credit can be removed and that the district attorney can be involved regarding truancy. Christensen said “there are disciplinary measures for a truant” student. That was before he questioned the usage of the word “punitive” for fallout for a chronically absent student. It was also before he said that a recommendation to the district attorney to move forward with a truancy case is a “tool to help that student” and “not a disciplinary measure or punitive.” (Lingle-Ft. Laramie High School Principal Cory Gilchriest used the term “corrective” and district policy uses the word “punitive.”)

Flanagan didn’t agree that involving the district attorney is a “help.”

“That’s a scare tactic,” she said. “I do trust the school board, but their wording is very concerning because I mean, my kid is not a problem student, so there is nothing to correct. She has a long illness.”

The sickness is infectious mononucleosis, commonly called mono.

Gilchriest said “the wording of the policy sounds ominous” and that while “there is a scare factor there” regarding terms like “attendance board” and “attendance hearing,” “that is not the intent.”

“I’ve had conversations with parents with concerns (about) the intent of the hearings, and (what) probably needs to be stated very clearly in the article is it is not intended to be punitive, but a problem-solving meeting,” Gilchriest said. “And it is not part of the court system, or the legal system.” Efforts at solutions regarding the meetings “can range from the student has got everything in order” to needing after school remediation and “establishing meetings with an individual teacher,” Christensen said. Southeast Schools Principal Randy Epler said the district could remove elective classes.

“If they find themselves in an attendance bind sometimes, we will alter schedules,” Epler added.

“Especially for seniors,” Christensen then said.

“It’s really about finding more time between the student and between the teacher,” Epler said.

“(To) find out what (it takes) for (a) student to be successful,” Christensen said.

Nine times out of 10, the attendance and home-bound policies are mutually exclusive, Gilchriest said.

“Generally, a home-bound solution is prearranged,” Gilchriest said, speaking generally.

On home-bound students, “we’re assisting to help with services off-campus,” Kramer said of the district. “That is completely separate from regular education.”

When asked what corrective measure is used for home-bound students, Christensen said that “home bound is a corrective measure.”

“Home bound is not corrective,” Flanagan said. “Home bound is an assistive program and it’s authorized by the state of Wyoming. … it’s an assistance for those who literally, like you would say for the elderly, who are home bound (and) cannot get out.”

“(A) corrective measure means that there was a problem to correct,” Flanagan said. “I think that is improper grammar on their part because they are trying to make it sound like it’s that it’s not … home bound is for those who are unable to go to school, but are able to stay in school.”

When asked if every seven absences means that a student and their support system could meet with district officials every week-and-a-half, Christensen said the seventh absence triggers an attendance hearing, with the 10th triggering something else regarding attendance Also, that with principals establishing a plan after the seventh absence, the 10th has different implication than it might have. Also, “after the seventh (absence), homebound is decided what would happen.”

Flanagan said that it taking seven absences for home bound to be set up “seems like a long time.”

“Wouldn’t you want to get home bound set up immediately?” Flanagan asked.

Epler said that less than 10 percent of students would be “put on home bound.”

Flanagan said that the principles were “not qualified” to talk about that.

“That is the dean of instruction (who) makes the decision (on home bound),” Flanagan said. “From what I understand, the counselor is the one who fills out the application (and) gets a sign off from the principal, (who) sends it to the dean of instruction, who is Donna Fields.”’

Gilchriest noted in the meeting that a student being home bound is approved by Fields.

“They interjected a ton of what they wanted to say when it’s actually just on Donna,” Flanagan said. “Interesting.”

Fields approved Flanagan’s child to be home bound on Oct. 8, Flanagan said. (That led to a cancellation of Flangan’s child’s attendance hearing, Flanagan said.)

When asked if principals will continue to meet with a student and their support system, Christesen said that will happen “in order to educate the student.”

“We are going to keep meeting with them,” Christensen said.

But Flanagan hasn’t been in any meeting of the sort, she said

“My child does something different than another on home bound,” Flanagan said, noting “you only do so much as you can.”

“We push for as long as we can, but her body says differently,” Flanagan said.

When asked if attendance meeting policies come from the Wyoming Department of Education or district, Kramer said that Wyoming code determines attendance pieces and then the district has policies. Gilchriest said that truancy is state legislated. Epler said that the home bound pillar “may have a federal component.”

“It could,” Kramer said. “I don’t know for sure.”

WDE Policy Officer Kari Eakins said that “the attendance stuff is really at the district level.”

“What’s in statute is the only guidance that we give on it, I believe,” Eakins said.

Flanagan deferred to Eakins and Fields when asked for response on Kramer and principals’ responses to the question of if attendance meeting policies come from the WDE or district.

The superintendent and principals started the meeting they requested with me with Kramer talking about attendance hearings. I asked him if that is to say there was a hearing with Flanagan’s child. Kramer said he talked with Flanagan.

“He said that he did not have a response to any questions pertaining to my child, specifically,” Flanagan said.

As soon as Flanagan got the district-attorney letter, Flanagan went to Kramer’s office.

“I had a very good outcome with him,” Flanagan said.