WRITING

The News

Jan. 24, 2019

RIVERSIDE
Abby Sojka wanted to be heard.
 

She saw things in the Highland Community School District she did not think were right. She felt her autistic daughter, Sophie, was not receiving the education she is guaranteed under federal law. The plan for providing her daughter’s education was not being followed.
 

On top of that, she learned a teacher was taking an opioid at school.
 

Sojka went to the district administration. When she thought her concerns were not being addressed, she went to the school board.
 

She was told because her issues involved negative comments about school employees, she could not speak to the school board. The decision to not let her speak to the school board led to a lawsuit alleging Sojka’s First Amendment rights were violated.
 

In October 2018, the school board settled the lawsuit with a $150,000 payment and an apology to Sojka. In the settlement, the district did not admit guilt.
 

“The Highland Community school board acknowledges that it likely violated Abigail Sojka’s First Amendment rights through board policies,” board President Nate Robinson read at the Nov. 12 meeting. “This occurred by the board’s refusal to allow comments about personnel matters during board meetings over the last four years.”
 

As a result of the lawsuit, school districts statewide, including Highland, revised policies on public participation in school board meetings. The changes were recommended just after the settlement by the Iowa School Board Association incorporating lessons learned from Sojka’s lawsuit, according to Tammy Votava, communications director for the Iowa Association of School Board.
 

“We are encouraging boards to balance the rights of staff and employees with citizen’s First Amendment rights,” she said. 
 

The sample policy for public participation states that boards cannot regulate the viewpoints of people talking during time periods set aside for public comments. It urges board members not to respond to comments. 
   
FOUR YEARS OF BATTLES
The settlement capped four years of battles with the school district that included endless meetings with school administrators, complaints filed with the state Department of Education and other state and federal agencies and several lawsuits, lawsuits that were eventually dropped before going to trial.
 

The years-long battle became increasingly heated and personal. There are hurt feelings on both sides that continue to this day. Sojka has continued her battle since the settlement with comments at school board meetings and more emails to district officials though her children no longer attend Highland schools.
 

One administrator in an email called Sojka “erratic and irrational.” Sojka worries that her reputation in the community has been harmed.
 

“I feel like this community is continually ripping me down, saying that I am trying to ruin their district,” Sojka said, a 34-year-old mother of two. “It hurts when I go to town and everyone thinks I am some monster.”
 

Sojka wishes more people understand that she filed the lawsuit because she wanted teachers and school administrators who she believes failed her daughter to be held accountable.
 

Sojka’s actions are not unusual. Parents of special education students often file lawsuits to get school districts to provide the education guaranteed under state and federal laws.
 

At the same time as Sojka was pursuing her actions against the Highland school district, a parent in Colorado filed a lawsuit that went to the U.S. Supreme Court, which issued a unanimous decision in favor of the autistic student stating that laws are in place because of the perception that handicapped students in the United States “were either totally excluded from schools or [were] sitting idly in regular classrooms awaiting the time when they were old enough to drop out.”
 

The ruling requires that school officials look to the child’s unique needs to develop an individual education programs which is “pursuing academic and functional advancement.”
 

Sojka said when she read about the Supreme Court case, “I felt like I was looking in the mirror.”
   
'OUTSPOKEN, BOISTEROUS'
Sojka admits she is “a very outspoken, boisterous person” who is “persistent and passionate,” especially when it comes to ensuring her daughter receives a basic education.
 

“If they had just let me talk to the board, if they had just let me talk and say what I needed to say and address the issues, none of this would have happened,” Sojka said.
 

She added that money was not her motivation. The $150,000 settlement – sent directly to her lawyer – helped cover legal fees, which had been paid out of personal savings. Before depositions started in the First Amendment case, she had more than $130,000 in bills from the lawyers working on her cases. The depositions added to that total.
 

If the case had gone to trial, Sojka believes she could have been paid much more.
 

“That scared me,” Sojka said. “I know this district is financially strapped, and it has never been my goal or my intent to see this district close or ruin this district.”
 

While Abby Sojka has been the face and voice in the battle with the school district, her husband, Grant, has been providing support. He, too, is angry with the school district.
 

“I think the facts speak for themselves,” Grant Sojka said. “Our goal is to have (Sophie) be an independent, successful adult. We don’t want her dependent on taxpayers.”
   
GUARDED COMMENTS
School district officials – both current and past – are guarded in what they say about the case and the escalating accusations that led to the First Amendment lawsuit.
 

Former Highland Superintendent Chris Armstrong held many meetings and exchanged hundreds of emails with Abby Sojka.
 

“During my time as superintendent of Highland, Ms. Sojka initiated a number of complaints and allegations against the district and district officials,” said Armstrong, who is now superintendent in the WACO school district. “District legal counsel provided the board with periodic updates on the complaints pursued by Ms. Sojka.”
 

Armstrong added: “I was no longer employed by Highland when the First Amendment lawsuit was settled and would defer to the current administration regarding further comment on the matter.” 
 

Mike Jorgensen, who followed Armstrong as an interim superintendent, said the district and board never wavered from legal advice offered by the district’s attorney and attorneys for the insurance company.
 

Ultimately, it was the advice of the insurance company to settle the First Amendment lawsuit without going to trial, a recommendation that was approved by the school board.
 

Jorgensen said that he attempted to satisfy Sojka’s demands but was unable to do so.
 

“I asked our legal attorney, this is what she wants is there any way we can do that, and we were repeatedly told no,” he said, about allowing Sojka to talk with the board in closed session.
 

He added that Sojka emailed the board directly with her concerns.
 

“The district committed a lot of time and resources to trying to address her needs,” Jorgensen said. “It seemed like the more time we committed, the more we were being asked by this individual.”
 

Current Superintendent Ken Crawford echoed Jorgensen that the district followed legal advice, and the prior policy on public comments that led to the First Amendment lawsuit was recommended by the state school board association.
 

 “We have redone our policy on public comment time,” he said, referring to changes after the settlement. “People get five minutes to say whatever they want.”
 

Crawford said he wants the district to move forward and “move past those issues and get to a spot where we can flourish.”
 

“To me the issue is settled; the district needs to move on,” Jorgensen said.
 

While school district officials are limited in what they will say publicly, Abby Sojka is outspoken.
   
FIRST YEARS WENT WELL
In an hours-long interview, Sojka spelled out her story in great detail, her voice often rising, alternately filled with anger and enthusiasm. She has a plastic bin filled with legal documents, emails and binders of notes. Throughout the interview, she pulls documents to back her assertions.
 

The root of the issues revolves around Sophie, Sojka’s now 11-year-old daughter who was diagnosed with autism when she was 2 years old. 
 

The diagnosis initially shocked Sojka, and there was a period of grieving, of trying to come to terms with the diagnosis. Then she got to work ensuring her daughter had a normal childhood and received a quality education.
 

Sophie began therapy with University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics psychologists and therapists and then she was enrolled in preschool at Highland Elementary School at age 3.
 

The first few years at Highland went well, but as class sizes grew, Sophie received less attention and the aide assigned to her was used to help other students, a violation of Sophie’s individualized education program.
 

At a parent conference when Sophie was in first grade, the teacher told her and other parents there were challenges because of the class size and having multiple special education students and students who had English language challenges.
 

Sojka convinced the district to add an aide to the class to help. The experience taught her she could improve conditions for her daughter – and other students – by speaking up and demanding better. Working to get the aide was the first time she met with Armstrong, the Highland superintendent. It would not be the last.
   
DRUG USE
While Sojka was working to get the aide, she met with a teacher who told her that she was taking Percocet, an opioid, for pain during the school day. The News is not using the teacher’s name because the drug was prescribed and the district did not take disciplinary action against her.
 

The revelation, later verified in sworn depositions, shocked Sojka. She said the drug use, during school hours, was a risk to Sophie and other students. Sojka said the drug use violated the district’s drug-free policy. She took her concerns first to Principal Eric Ewald and then to Armstrong.
 

In a lawsuit deposition in August 2017, Armstrong said the drug use was not an issue that warranted disciplinary action. 
 

“I found that nobody at any time had ever thought of (the teacher) as being under the influence, acting in a strange or odd way, anything of that nature,” Armstrong testified. “She was taking the medication to manage her pain after the procedure, and it was medication that was prescribed to her.”
 

That drug accusation was followed by complaints that Sophie did not have lesson plans that were required under her individualized education program known as an IEP, a requirement for all special education students.
 

Armstrong confirmed in the August 2017 deposition that there were violations of Sophie’s education program.
 

“They were not meeting, under the requirement of the IEP, to have collaboration between the gen ed teacher and the special education teacher,” Armstrong said.
 

The accusations escalated from there. Sojka said Sophie’s report card did not accurately reflect her progress; she had not shown the progress that was indicated on the report card.
 

“It was saying Sophie could do things that I knew for a fact she could not do,” she said. “The child was barely communicating, and you are telling me she can read?”
 

“I was ticked; I was really mad then,” Sojka said. She wanted disciplinary action to be taken about the opioids, about the missing lesson plans and about the report card.
 

Sojka continued to try to get disciplinary action and kept escalating her efforts to find out what happened. Because it was a personnel issue, the district would not tell her what was done, if anything.
   
COMPLAINT WITH STATE
After a series of meetings with teachers and administrators at the school, Sojka talked with a lawyer and filed a complaint with the Iowa Board of Educational Examiners, which oversees teacher credentialing.
 

It was after filing that complaint Sojka attended her first school board meeting in February 2015. She did not get up to talk, but after the meeting, she told Armstrong that she wanted to talk with the board. He told her she could not because her concerns involved personnel issues, according to Sojka.
 

This was followed by mediation to settle a due process suit Sojka had filed. The mediation results are confidential, but Sojka said that the district paid her legal fees.
 

“I thought things were going to get better after that; I thought we were moving on,” Sojka said, yet she still wanted to talk with the board.
 

“After mediation, I still had great concern about the board not knowing what had happened,” she said.
 

There were more accusations:
 

• A teacher had sent students’ test scores to the teacher’s husband to compile into an Excel spreadsheet file, a violation of a federal law limiting who may access student information.
• A teacher had segregated Sophie from other students on a field trip. “Sophie realized she was not with the other kids and sobbed the entire field trip,” Sojka said.
• Sophie was bullied on the playground. Her second-grade classmates taunted her to kiss a boy, according to Sojka, who said the incident led Sophie to “(withdraw) herself from going outside at times for fear of being embarrassed or scared.”
• Tests required by individual education programs were not given.
 

Some of these complaints and accusations were posted on Sojka’s Facebook page. There were more trips to the school board and another complaint filed with the Iowa Board of Educational Examiners.
 

In his August 2017 deposition, Armstrong testified that Sojka was not the only parent of a special education teacher he has dealt with over the years. He described a previous “challenging parent situation.”
 

“Another parent of a special needs student did not feel like their child’s needs were being met,” he said. “It took several times and several meetings, but in the end we were able to resolve that.”
 

He added: “But there was … there was quite a bit of turmoil in between and on the way to that resolution.”
 

Armstrong testified that Sojka went beyond any parent he has encountered in trying to resolve a child’s education needs.
 

“I’ve never had a parent that has gone about addressing the school board on multiple occasions, that has filed multiple complaints with state and federal agencies and brought legal action against the school,” Armstrong said. “That has never occurred in my 34 years of education.”
   
FAR FROM IDEAL
In testimony a month earlier, Ewald, the former Highland principal to whom Sojka originally took her concerns, said that there had not been any problems between Sojka and Sophie’s teachers in preschool and kindergarten.
 

Ewald said that the district could have done a better job addressing Sojka’s complaints.
 

“Since none of the concerns ever really went away, we probably could have done a better job addressing them,” he said.
 

Ewald apologized to Sojka at one point.
 

“It was a far from ideal school experience for … for her, and, you know, I was sorry for that and sorry for the fact that, you know, there wasn’t – whatever it was that we were doing – it wasn’t changing the way that she was feeling,” Ewald said in his testimony.
 

In a letter to Sojka’s lawyer, her mother-in-law supported Sojka’s efforts.
 

“I am so grateful that I have a daughter-in-law who passionately wants the best for her daughter and has challenged every roadblock given by this school,” Colleen Sojka, a former Highland school board member, wrote in the February 2017 letter. “I reflect on our school system and wonder what illness, what cancer has paralyzed this system from doing their jobs of showing and and doing the best you can to help a little girl read.”
 

Abby Sojka sees positives that have come out of “this horrific mess” with the Highland district.
 

“I think there is something positive that comes out of every bad situation,” she said. “I want to have a lasting impact.”
 

The district now has research-based curriculum for special education students; before that, Sojka said, “They were just flying by the seat of their pants.”
 

“I was very proud of it. I was not just helping Sophie by doing that; I was helping a lot of kids by doing that,” Sojka said of getting the district to adopt the curriculum, although district officials say the change was made on a state Department of Education recommendation that was coincidental with the timing of Sojka’s complaints.
 

Sojka has put her research and knowledge of state and federal education laws to use as an advocate for parents of other students in the special education program. These parents came to her, she said.
 

She said one parent told her: “You’re the only person they’ll listen to; you are the only person they are afraid of. That breaks my heart.” 
   
MOVE TO MID-PRAIRIE
With all of this going on, why didn’t Sojka simply open-enroll Sophie and her sister, Libby, in another school district?
 

With an autistic child, a decision to make a major change is more difficult because autistic children often do not respond well to change. One of Sophie’s doctors at the University of Iowa recommended against changing schools, saying that it could set her back socially as well as academically.
 

Sojka said that one of Sophie’s “biggest challenges is being social with other kids.”
 

Yet after Sophie’s second-grade year at Highland, Sojka decided the change was worth the risk. Sophie, according to test scores, was performing academically at a preschool or kindergarten level.
 

In August 2016, Sojka open-enrolled Sophie and her sister in the Mid-Prairie school district, a move Sojka said “has probably been the most life-changing event besides Sophie being diagnosed with autism that our family has experienced.”
 

The worries about the social disruption did not come to pass.
 

“Surprisingly, Sophie did transition very, very well,” Sojka said. “It was a lot of work.”
 

There were many visits to the school and talks with teachers prior to Sophie beginning the school year.
 

Sophie is happy at Mid-Prairie and is thriving as a student. 
 

Mid-Prairie Superintendent Mark Schneider doubled the amount of time that Sophie spent in language therapy to 160 minutes per week.
 

The extra time has paid off. With better language skills, Sophie is improving her academic performance in other areas.
 

At the end of the third-grade year, Sophie’s teacher handed Sojka her daughter’s Iowa Assessment Test scores. The scores showed Sophie was nearly at grade level in all areas – reading, writing and math – after starting the year 2½ years below grade level.
 

The teacher had tears in her eyes as Sojka read the report.
 

“This is unbelievable,” Sojka said.