Share This Page

Franklin Regional wants firing of music instructor Wonderling to be upheld

| Wednesday, July 9, 2014, 10:57 p.m.

A Franklin Regional elementary music teacher fired amid allegations that he threatened to spank students with a “slapstick” percussion instrument could return to the classroom in the fall.

A state-appointed arbitrator ruled last month that the district should not have fired Philip Wonderling, a music teacher at three elementary schools, and awarded Wonderling back pay and reimbursement of medical costs. A dollar amount of the award was not available.

Although Murrysville police did not charge Wonderling with a crime, and a Westmoreland County Children and Youth Services investigation found the allegations were unfounded, district solicitor Jack Cambest has asked a Common Pleas Court judge to uphold the firing.

“Wonderling's conduct amounts to sexual harassment,” Cambest wrote in a July 1 petition to reverse the arbitration ruling.

Wonderling did not respond to messages left at his home. He was fired in November from his position, which paid $69,000 in 2011-12. The district suspended him with pay to begin investigating in March 2013 and continued the suspension without pay two months later.

The district interviewed seven girls, who claimed “inappropriate contact” occurred in Wonderling's classes, Cambest wrote in the appeal.

During arbitration hearings, Cambest wrote, Wonderling “admits to poking (students) in the ribs, poking them in the arm, tapping their heads with a clipboard, performing a snakebite on them, and striking them on the head with a flute. Wonderling admitted that he told students in class that they were going to be spanked with a slapstick, a percussion instrument … that mimics the cracks of a whip.”

Randall Rodkey, a Johnstown attorney representing the Franklin Regional teachers union, said he is confident that arbitrator Bernard Fabian made the right call.

“He did not engage in any inappropriate touching,” Rodkey said. “Witnesses on behalf of Mr. Wonderling in the teaching profession said, while it's not encouraged that teachers touch students, there are appropriate ways to keep them on task, so to speak.”

Cambest said Wonderling violated district policy by touching female students on the knee and thigh.

The arbitrator noted that Wonderling said he touches students as a result of training to help refocus his son, who has autism, on tasks.

“Although I do not encourage the touching Wonderling admits to, I do not feel it is inappropriate,” Fabian wrote in his ruling. “I would advise him to discontinue the ‘snakebite' and slapstick references.”

According to court documents, Wonderling told the arbitrator that he would touch students to make them “feel more at ease and at home.” He said he now knows that poking students in the ribs and arms was in poor judgment.

Elizabeth Gershoff, associate professor of human development and family sciences at the University of Texas at Austin, said the allegations of touching appear to be “very inappropriate.” Corporal punishment is illegal in 31 states, including Pennsylvania.

“Teachers are allowed to touch students in some ways — a pat on the back or a touch on an arm,” Gershoff said. “Like with any human interactions, some touches are appropriate, and some are not.”

Kim Anderson's two daughters took band classes from Wonderling at Sloan Elementary School. “Based on our experience, he never conducted himself in any way we thought was inappropriate,” she said, adding she called the district to express her support of Wonderling.

Daveen Rae Kurutz is a Trib Total Media staff writer.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.