A Philly charter illegally expelled a girl after an argument with fellow students, lawyers say

Christina Tull arrived at the Mathematics, Civics and Sciences Charter School on Dec. 15 expecting that her 17-year-old daughter, Aniyah, would be reinstated after a two-day suspension for her role in a heated argument with fellow students.

Instead, after listening to a series of allegations — that her daughter threatened a fellow student, that she called in “carloads” of people to start a fight — Tull was told the school would have 10 days to consider Aniyah’s future at the school.

Five days later, a letter came from the charter’s CEO: Aniyah would not be allowed to return.

The Tulls and the CEO, Veronica Joyner, tell different stories about the incident that led to Aniyah’s removal from the school, which enrolls about 950 students in grades 1 through 12. But regardless of what happened, what unfolded after was almost entirely illegal, according to the Education Law Center.

Public schools must follow a certain process to expel a student, ensuring that families know what consequences they’re facing and have the ability to respond. In Aniyah’s case, among other violations, her family wasn’t informed of the charges being considered grounds for her expulsion, and they weren’t told they could get an attorney, or given the chance to question or present their own witnesses, according to Margie Wakelin, a lawyer with the Education Law Center.

While there are areas in which rules for charter schools — which are publicly funded but independently run — differ from district-run schools, this isn’t one of them, Wakelin said.

“This feels like a charter school that thinks the rules for public schools don’t apply to them,” said Wakelin, who is representing Aniyah and her family in an effort to return her to school.

Proponents of traditional public schools have long accused charters of excluding certain students — a claim charter leaders reject. (The Education Law Center previously sued Mathematics, Civics and Sciences, on North Broad Street, alleging it had denied a student’s enrollment because of her ADHD; Joyner claimed the incident was a misunderstanding.)

Joyner insists she didn’t expel Aniyah — despite sending Tull a letter on Dec. 20 saying that based on the school’s investigation, code of conduct, and the meeting with Aniyah and her mother, Aniyah “will need to [be] transferred to a different school and is no longer allowed to attend MCSCS as a result of her behavior.”

“We wish Aniyah well and we are available to assist in any way we can during this transition,” Joyner said in the letter.

In an interview last week, Joyner said she was “trying to get mom’s attention.”

“I don’t put seniors out, because that impacts me, and it’s a negative on her record,” Joyner said. “If I’m going to be penalized for trying to save a child, and get her into a college with scholarships — that’s what I stand accused of. It would have been easier for me to expel her.”

Joyner appears to be misunderstanding the law, Wakelin said: “They think if they don’t use the word expel, that doesn’t mean expulsion.” But under Pennsylvania’s school code, excluding a child from school for more than 10 days is an expulsion — unless the child is deemed a threat, in which case, schools have up to 15 days.

Whatever the timeframe, schools have to follow a formal hearing process, Wakelin said. She also said that providing an alternative form of education — the charter offered Aniyah a virtual option on Jan. 16, after the Education Law Center contacted the school — doesn’t negate the expulsion.

“Schools shouldn’t be allowed to just make their decision, and not provide the basic due process rights,” Wakelin said.

“Counseling out” from charters happens often as families face pressure to withdraw before formal discipline is recorded, Wakelin said. (School districts also find ways to push out students, she said.)

What’s unusual about Aniyah’s case, she said, is that her family knew they could fight back.

Aniyah is a motivated student — she has a 3.0 GPA and has been accepted to colleges — and, until this year, “never even had so much as a detention,” according to her mother. But the hearing that led to her expulsion wasn’t her first run-in with the charter’s disciplinary process.

On Dec. 1, Aniyah and her family came in for an earlier hearing — this one related to Aniyah’s hair color, which had been “platinum blond, with some ginger in it,” Tull said. That drew complaints from the school, which has a dress code prohibiting “unconventional colored or multi-colored hair.”

Tull said she then dyed Aniyah’s hair brown. But she said Joyner and the charter’s board weren’t satisfied, deeming the hair to still be “unnatural.” (Joyner, in an interview, said, “I never remember her hair being brown” — or a previous complaint from the family about a skirt requirement. Girls have been allowed to wear pants since September, she said.)

Less than two weeks later, Aniyah and two other students got into an argument that would lead to Aniyah’s removal.

According to Joyner, Aniyah threatened to have her brother beat up a fellow student. After school let out, Joyner said, “she had two carloads of people” show up, and a fight nearly broke out.

Tull said that Aniyah was being bullied by the other students and that her older sister and younger brother had gone to pick her up at the end of the day. She said Aniyah had been referring to her older brother during the argument, not her younger brother, and wasn’t threatening violence.

While other students were suspended after the incident, only Aniyah was expelled, according to her family. The experience has taken a toll: Aniyah, who is now participating in virtual lessons, called the experience depressing — “I mean, I don’t get to see my friends anymore” — and her family worries about her future. She’s considering Clark Atlanta University and hopes to go into nursing.

A hearing is scheduled for Thursday in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas on the family’s petition to return her to school while the expulsion challenge is pending.

“We often are concerned these are unfair proceedings, but at least there’s some level of due process,” Wakelin said of expulsions. “In this case, they’re taking away even that level.”