LR5 board member asked to visit a critic’s classroom, but a teachers’ group intervened

A Midlands school board member often visited the classrooms of teachers who spoke out on controversial issues at school board meetings, to the point that a teachers’ association asked him to cancel one planned visit.

But the board member, Ken Loveless of the Lexington-Richland 5 district, defended his visits, saying they were an attempt to reach out and listen to teachers who have concerns.

Last school year, Loveless — the board vice chair — visited the classrooms of at least three teachers after they made public comments during school board meetings, The State has confirmed. Each made comments critical of district operations during a period of heightened tensions in the Chapin-Irmo school district.

But when Loveless asked school officials to visit Laura Carson’s classroom for several hours, she reached out to the S.C. Education Association for help. That visit never happened after the teachers’ group intervened.

“I am concerned that the request to observe Ms. Carson ‘for several hours’ ... appears to be in response to her comments to the Board during public session regarding the Fifty Dollar Friday project,” SCEA attorney Al Nickles wrote to then-school district attorney Andrea White on Nov. 30.

Carson, now teaching outside of Lexington-Richland 5, recently reached out to The State to share the email and her story because she felt Loveless’ request was retaliation for her speaking out about school district issues.

“I speak out at a board meeting, did not invite anybody to see me teach, and then one week later, I get a notification that he would like to observe me for several hours and which day would work?” Carson recalled.

“Luckily the SCEA has a lawyer on retainer, and he shut that down,” she said.

Loveless sees it differently, saying he was impressed with Carson’s comments to the board.

In an email to The State, he recalls Carson “made a passionate statement that resonated with me and I wanted to know more about her concerns so I could do my job more effectively.” So he reached out through the district office to come to her classroom and learn more, “as she was obviously intelligent and had valuable input that we, as a Board, value.”

Then a history teacher at Irmo High School, Carson had spoken at a school board meeting about plans to give teachers a $50 bonus for completing a full school week without an absence at a time of staffing shortages. Some teachers opposed the plan as too meager a response to a teacher shortage and the stresses of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

After the meeting, a district office employee contacted then-Irmo High School principal Robin Hardy on Nov. 22 requesting Loveless visit Carson’s classroom for “several hours.”

In an email shared with The State, Nickles pointed out that “Ms. Carson’s statements clearly addressed matters of public concern protected by the state and federal constitutions.”

“Absent an articulable concern unrelated to Ms. Carson’s protected conduct, I request that planned visit(s) be withdrawn,” Nickles wrote.

Loveless said he then withdrew his request, saying that, “I personally regret her refusal to let me meet with her to hear more of her concerns and find a solution to address them.”

“Regrettably, the SCEA’s letter prevented a healthy dialogue between a valued member of the faculty and the Board,” he said. “Had I been permitted to meet with this teacher, I am confident her input would have been well received by the Board, as her public comments were well-received by me.”

The showdown came during a tense time in Lexington-Richland 5, roiled by the surprise resignation of former Superintendent Christina Melton amid conflict with the board over removing COVID-19 safety precautions. Less than a year earlier, Irmo High School had to close for a day along with Chapin and Dutch Fork highs when too many teachers called out in response to plans to move forward with more full-time instruction.

At least three other teachers who spoke to The State confirmed they also received classroom visits from Loveless around the same time. He visited after they spoke out at school board meetings about the challenges and classroom conditions they were facing.

Michael Sugar, then also teaching history at Irmo High School, said he hoped a visit from the school board vice chair would be “mutually constructive” after he had spoken about the need to prioritize teachers in receiving COVID-19 vaccinations.

“Like any observer, he has some great interactions with the kids,” said Sugar, who now lives in Oregon. “Then he asked me what did I need? What concerns did I have about student literacy and after-school programs... It was all kind of routine.”

But while Sugar’s interactions may have been positive, he said he shares concerns about “how it made my other colleagues feel.”

He knows of at least two other teachers Loveless visited around the same time. Following his visit to Sugar’s classroom, Loveless had a conversation with Sugar and another teacher that included an unusual moment.

“He asked us if we felt he should run for re-election,” Sugar said. “I said ‘If you think your ideas are important, then you need to run,’ trying to be diplomatic. Asking staff that question may raise some eyebrows.”

Two other teachers who asked not to be identified said they felt intimidated by the visits. While school board members have the right to visit district schools, the teachers felt the request to visit them specifically were tied to their comments before the board, a feeling that was enhanced by the knowledge other teachers who spoke out received similar visits.

They spoke in support of Melton after she was seen as being pushed out by the board, and of the challenges raised by staffing shortages in the district.

In the past, Loveless has said he sees visiting schools as a key part of his responsibilities as a board member and displays photos of school visits on his Facebook page. He said his classroom visits were “always positively received,” and points out that state law requires school board trustees to “Visit the public schools within its district from time to time and at least once in every school term.”

“I have been welcomed into other classrooms that I visited after having arranged to visit and have been enriched by the input from both teachers and students,” Loveless said.

Carson now lives in Charlotte and teaches in Lancaster County. She thinks the classroom visits had a chilling effect on teachers’ willingness to speak out on issues affecting the school district.

“We would have conversations, a lot of people who would be vocal, but who wouldn’t speak at a school board meeting,” Carson said. “Now I don’t blame (them) ... As angry as I was, I was afraid to speak out again.”

But Loveless denies that there was any attempt at intimidation behind the visits.

“Unfortunately, articles such as yours promote a sense of paranoia among some elements of the faculty and public,” Loveless told The State. “I do not see any possibility of intimidation if a teacher values her job and her students.”