The pro charter, anti public school teacher New York Post published an article of what happened to the 98 teachers that either did not decide to reapply for their jobs or were not selected for the "time out" renewal schools. According to the New York Post, all these 98 teachers were "ineffective teachers". How they came to that conclusion is beyond me since they show no proof of the teacher ratings that would allow the Post to show such a claim as being true. In fact, many of the best teachers at these "time out" renewal schools opted to not reapply for their positions, due to the more demanding workload, increased stress, and a "high needs" student body that will remain unchanged going forward. What bothered me more than the New York Post calling all 98 teachers who left or were not selected to their "time out" schools "ineffective". was how the article ignored the real issues concerning these renewal schools.
First, the renewal schools have one thing in common. a significant amount of the student body are "high needs" students. Many of them all level 1 students and have significant academic issues, require Special Education services, or are English Language Learners. All three categories are heavily represented in the renewal schools.
Second, no parent of academically achieving students will allow their child to attend, much less apply, to these renewal schools. How the DOE will attract higher performing students to their renewal schools is unknown and not presently happening. Without an academically proficient student body, the renewal schools will continue to struggle academically and that's a fact!
Third, few veteran teachers apply to teach at renewal schools due to the factors I mentioned previously. In fact, when the original "time out" school, Automotive High School, was given a list of :"highly effective teachers" not one wanted a position at the school. The result was the school ended up with a "newbie" teaching staff, with no classroom experience.
Fourth, lets not forget the mediocre school administration that seems to accompany the renewal schools. Few principals or assistant principals who or shinning stars in the system will accept positions in the renewal schools. Many are from the failed Leadership Academy and they believe in the top-down model and with little or no staff collaboration. To make maters worse is the entire renewal school program is run by the Superintendent from hell, Amiee Horowitz, who is known to discontinue many untenured teachers.
Finally, the DOE's "fair student funding" formula penalizes schools who want to hire veteran teachers and schools that hire teachers are likely to hire the "cheapest and not the best teachers" for their school and that's especially true for the renewal schools who need to hire as many teachers as they can, due to the high teacher turnover, and since it cannot attract veteran teachers, they end up hiring the "newbies" because of their budget limitations and failure to attract "quality teachers". In other words, the New York Post article is more a myth and lacks facts when it comes to their opinion on "ineffective teachers".
Please read nyc educator as he blasts the New York Post for publishing an article that makes an erroneous conclusion without showing the data to back it up.