School staff members fired over abuse case
What in the world has been happening in Pennsylvania's Central Bucks School District?
According to multiple reports from independent organizations and news media, the school board of the Central Bucks School District in Pennsylvania has begun proceedings to fire the superintendent and four other staff members. The personnel actions are the consequence of alleged abuse in a classroom serving young children with disabilities and the staff members’ responses to an investigation of the allegations.
Disability Rights Pennsylvania, one of the US federally authorized advocacy organizations, reported a teacher and an assistant in a classroom serving young students used inappropriate practices. The teacher and the assistant subjected children in kindergarten, first, or second grades—one or more of whom had autism or developmental disabilities—to physically and emotionally callous treatment. The teacher and aide improperly restrained them, punished them, withheld water from them, and more. When advised of the inappropriate practices, building-level administrators did not intervene and, when the problems percolated up to the superintendent, he did not report them properly.
The problems were first reported by a third member of the classroom team in the fall of 2024. The member of the team, identified as a “personal care assistant” who worked in the classroom with the teacher and assistant teacher,1 reported concerns to the school principal and to a human resources official and the employees’ representatives (i.e., union). The problems erupted into public view in January 2025 when a speaker at a school board meeting described them to the board.
Investigation
Disability Rights PA investigated the allegations of abuse and published a report of its findings in April 2025. Based on extensive interviews and fact finding activities, the investigators found that the accusations of abuse were founded. Children “experienced abuse, neglect, illegal restraints, aversive techniques, and disability discrimination by the teacher and educational assistant in the classroom.”
The report itself is longer than 70 pages and is detailed. It provides a timeline of events as well as explicit descriptions of the problems. One can download a PDF of the report. (Please be forewarned that some readers may find parts of the report unsettling.)
Some of the events described in the report are clearly problems. For example, Special educators should, in our view, avoid physical punishment, as the term “punishment” is used in the common parlance. Some events, however, might reflect the interpretation of the events more than an objective description of what transpired (e.g., was a child denied access to water “because the Teacher did not want to deal with the student urinating in the classroom.” What counts as “denied access to water?” How often did this occur? How do we know whether the given reason was the teacher’s actual reason? How do we know what the teacher was thinking?
Despite such concerns about the facts, the report details sufficient evidence of frequent enough problems that it is clear there were inappropriate practices employed in this classroom. What is more, appropriate behavior management practices are not the only problem revealed in this situation. Professional responsibilities are an important aspect of it, too.
It appeared that administrators, including Superintendent Steven Yanni,2 failed to take appropriate actions when they were advised of the problems. Instead of reporting the events, they apparently discounted them and did not follow documented policies and procedures for reporting them. The Disability Rights PA report indicated the superintendent and assistant superintendent misled police and others about the problems. They filed reports regarding less severe and less frequent abuse—”speaking inappropriately to student and pushing/grabbing student”—in the fall of 2024. In addition, the superintendent told investigating police officers that he did not suspect abuse and he saw the issue as a “personality conflict.”
According to its minutes for 20 March 2025, the Central Bucks school board “met in Executive Session with counsel on February 23, 2025, February 26, 2025, March 1, 2025, and March 18, 2025 regarding personnel matters related to the allegations of abuse at Jamison Elementary School.” On 24 April 2025, the board placed the superintendent on administrative leave. On 15 May 2025, the board passed a motion to approve a Substitute Superintendent Employment Contract with a different individual.
Media
Questions about the allegations broke into the news in January 2025 when, during the public comment period at a school board meeting, a citizen asked rhetorical questions about abusive actions. As it turned out, a parent of one of the children subjected to the abuse was also a member of the school board.
Media coverage, as one might imagine, has been extensive. For those who want to explore that coverage, here are some links.
Jess Rohan, Bucks County Courier Times (Phillburbs.com), has reported repeatedly on the story; here are links to a few of her stories:
21 March 2025: Mom of boy allegedly abused at Jamison Elementary says school board has failed to act
24 April 2025: Central Bucks superintendent on leave amid allegations he misled police in abuse probe
25 April 2025: Central Bucks claims of abuse in autism classroom spark outrage, calls for resignations
Annie McCormick of of 6abc Action News (Philadelphia), 25 April 2025: Report details alleged abuse inside special needs classroom in the Central Bucks School District
Caroline Goggin of 6abc Action News (Philadelphia), 18 June 2025: 5 Central Bucks staff members fired following investigation into alleged abuse
Commentary
The important messages of these events for special education are obvious to us. We special educators should know better. We and our colleagues should be prepared to employ methods, procedures, and practices that address problem behaviors without resorting to hurtful, aversive, harmful actions. Administrators and consultants should have learned about ways of managing problem behaviors (e.g., functional behavior assessments; functional analysis) and how to employ them rather than leaving classroom personnel to fend for themselves.
The onus is on us—as teachers, teacher educators, administrators, consultants, etc.—to provide appropriate services for educators who work with students with disabilities. It is our responsibility to monitor what’s happening in classrooms and clinics where children with disabilities (and, really, any children) are being served. And it’s out duty to identify and report inappropriate practices.
Steps to Take
If members of a faculty or staff become aware of mistreatment of students with disabilities, they must act immediately and unequivocally.
They should document the incident(s) in as much detail as possible, including dates, times, involved individuals, and specific actions.
They must report the concerns directly to their building administrator and central office staff, while also notifying any designated compliance officer (e.g., Title IX or Section 504 Coordinator).
They should follow up in writing to confirm a report was made and preserve a record of their communication.
We are responsible for protecting our students. That responsibility includes not only acting when we witness abuse but also ensuring that families are informed of incidents involving their children. Parents cannot advocate for their children if they are kept in the dark.
This case illustrates the critical role of independent disability rights organizations in uncovering and documenting systemic failures. The findings of Disability Rights Pennsylvania did what internal reporting failed to do: bring the truth to light. Cutting funding or limiting the authority of such watchdog groups undermines accountability and puts vulnerable students at greater risk.
Finally, if internal channels fail or if the student is in immediate danger, staff must escalate the concern to outside authorities, including Child Protective Services or state education oversight bodies. Silence or delay is complicity—professional ethics and legal mandates demand prompt and protective action.
We are responsible for protecting our students.
Links
Central Bucks School District Web site
Footnotes
According to Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network (PATTAN) “Teachers' Desk Reference: Special Education Paraprofessionals and Teachers Working as a Team,” personal care assistants “provide one-to-one support to individual students.” This is in contrast to “instructional paraprofessionals” who are LEA employees “who work under the direction of certified staff members to support and assist in providing instructional programs an dserbices to childne with disabilities or eligible young children.”
Superintendent Yanni’s first name is spelled “Stephen” in the Disability Rights PA report, but as “Steven” in some media reports. The Central Bucks LEA spelled it “Steven.”