A documented account of safeguarding failures at Tien Shan International School (TSIS) — an English-medium school in Almaty, Kazakhstan — focused on transparency, accountability, and the protection of students.
April 2026
If you've found your way here, you probably have some connection to Tien Shan International School. You may be a parent, a student, an alumnus, or a teacher. Whoever you are, you are welcome here.
We are Joe and Sharon Byerly. We served at Tien Shan International School, most recently from 2023–2025. We worked directly with students in teaching, chaplaincy, and support roles. We left in January 2025.
We did not leave quietly, and we did not leave without reason.
We left after raising concerns about the handling of reported misconduct, the treatment of students, and the response of leadership to documented issues. Over time, it became clear that those concerns would not be addressed transparently within the system.
This publication exists for one reason: transparency.
This is a structured account of:
Posts every 1–2 days.
New posts appear in the section below.
Note: Throughout this account, an asterisk (*) indicates documented events supported by records, communications, or corroborating testimony.
A chronological account of what was reported, and what happened next.
Sharon Byerly · April 14, 2026 · 7 min full read
In April 2026, Sharon Byerly wrote a letter to the Tien Shan International School community describing what she and Joe experienced during the 2024–2025 school year, and why they left.
The series — updated every 1–2 days as new posts are published.
We kept speaking. We kept advocating. But trauma kept us from telling this story…until now.
We left Tien Shan International School in January 2025 after a teacher engaged in grooming behaviors, staff reports were suppressed, and the administration altered documented findings. This is why we left.
Continue reading Part One →Fear, trauma, and the system that enforces silence.
Speaking up inside Tien Shan is costly — immediately. What happens to those who raise concerns, and why staff who witness harm stay quiet.
Continue reading Part Two →Not students. Not staff. It protects itself.
TSIS operates like many institutions: its primary priority is its own survival. The pattern of dismissed prevention, missing safeguards, and closing ranks when leadership is challenged.
Continue reading Part Three →A chronological timeline of what happened and when — Part 1 of the timeline series.
Early warnings, self-identification during safeguarding training, corroborating reports, and the child-safety team's 11-page formal documentation. August to September 2024.
Continue reading Part Four →Modification of findings, denial, leadership response, and escalation.
The administration altered the 11-page findings report. Cecily denied the concerns. Hans Fung resisted escalation. The situation escalated to a coordinated plan. October to December 2024.
Continue reading →Suspension, board escalation, external review, NDA, and divergence in findings.
Suspension recommended then negotiated. Board members opposed without reading documentation. CRU thought it was resolved. External review confirmed concerns. Board diverged from findings. December 2024 to January 2025.
Continue reading →CST paused, board findings, an apology to students, a sabbatical with continued access, and a parent meeting that re-framed the findings.
Staff were restricted from discussing the situation and the Child Safety Team was paused. The board found a Code of Conduct breach but no abuse, and set conditions for return. An apology was read to students, a sabbatical was granted with continued campus access, and a parent meeting re-framed the findings around intent. January to April 2025.
Continue reading →From pattern to particulars — how a response can feel like engagement while quietly changing the question.
After concerns are raised publicly, the conversation can move — quickly and subtly — into specifics: clarifications, definitions, individual points of dispute. At first glance it can feel like progress. But it also does something important. It changes the frame.
Continue reading Part Five →A behavior-based comparison — the school's own chart, placed next to the school's own documented reports.
Along with Christine's email to TSIS staff and families, a chart was shared distinguishing mentoring behaviors from grooming behaviors. So a natural question follows: what happens when that same framework is applied to the documented reports already collected by the school?
Continue reading Part Six →A child, sitting alone on the pavement, looked up at the school building and said quietly: “This school is not a safe place.”
I heard screaming and sobbing on the basketball court. A young student — no older than seven — was curled into himself. I sat with him. After a few minutes, he whispered what stayed with me long after the meeting that followed: this school is not a safe place.
Continue reading Part Seven →Not a moment. Not a misunderstanding. Not a difference in interpretation. A pattern.
Documents shared, timelines established, statements compared. None of that changes what this has always been about. At this point, the question is no longer what happened — the documentation exists, the timeline is clear. The question is what will be done in response.
Continue reading Part Eight →You are not alone. If you have experienced or witnessed harm connected to Tien Shan International School, you can share your story confidentially.
Submit a Report Use Google Form InsteadThe Google Form is hosted by Google and is not anonymous — Google logs your IP and can associate the submission with your account if you're signed in. The form on this site does not have those issues.
We understand the weight of speaking about these things.
We also understand the cost of silence.
This space exists because transparency and accountability matter —
especially when the well-being of students is involved.