Sunridge Anatolia

I am extremely disappointed with my child's experience at this school. Unfortunately, the administration especially the principal, Mr. Hawk has failed to provide a safe and supportive environment for students. After many years in his position, it is clear that he is not up to date with modern anti-bullying practices and does not take these issues seriously.My child was repeatedly subjected to bullying, including being called offensive names and experiencing clear discrimination. Despite bringing these concerns forward, the situation was minimized rather than properly addressed. There was a clear lack of incident reporting and accountability, and no meaningful effort was made to protect my child. In fact, the school refused to move the student responsible for the bullying out of her class, forcing me to make the difficult decision to transfer my child to a private school.Additionally, my child's photo was excluded from the yearbook, which only added to the feeling of exclusion and discrimination. The school environment overall feels overcrowded, and the quality of education does not feel advanced or enriching. There are very few after-school activities, and mental health services are not proactive or supportive when students need them most.To be honest, these issues reflect broader problems within the school district as a whole. There appears to be a lack of oversight, accountability, and commitment to student safety and well-being at the district level as well.This school has serious issues with how bullying is handled across the board, and leadership does not seem willing to acknowledge or address these problems. I cannot recommend this school to any parent who values their child's safety, well-being, and educational growth.

This school demonstrated a notable division among staff that affected culture. While some educators worked collaboratively with leadership, a vocal contingent frequently opposed administrative direction and district policies. This group often emphasized that “we opened this school,” reflecting a sense of ownership tied to the school’s founding that resisted expectations and initiatives. Concerns were raised regarding professionalism and staff dynamics. Staff twisted facts to support their narratives, and gossip, hearsay, and commentary undermining administrators contributed to a climate that felt distrustful and hostile. Staff were resistant to feedback or change and focused considerable energy on criticizing/attacking administrative decisions. Leadership dynamics enabled staff to leverage administrative relationships in ways that undermined the credibility of previous leaders. Behavior management practices lacked coherence. Staff preferred punitive approaches, creating inconsistency and confusion. There was also an over reliance on administrative intervention for student discipline involving minor incidents that could have been addressed by teachers. That contributed to inconsistent expectations and frustration among families. Additionally, some staff appeared to misunderstand or misuse MTSS, viewing it primarily as a pathway to special education placement rather than a tiered support system. The principal’s approach was perceived as inconsistent and lacking transparency, with directives shifting in response to staff push back rather than remaining grounded in district-aligned procedures. This contributed to confusion and frustration among staff. The principal was also perceived by some as overly strategic or guarded, which came across as inauthentic and eroded trust. She was often slow to respond or follow through on issues and appeared to lack consistent supervision and effective handling of significant student incidents along with a campus supervisor who frequently used technology for personal use during high-need incidents. Additionally, there was a lack of coherence within the leadership team, resulting in mixed messaging and uneven implementation of expectations. The current administrative team has a combined seven years of teaching experience, and the school could benefit from additional instructional and cultural leadership experience. State assessment results were 56% proficient in mathematics and 67% proficient in English language arts.