Chaz's School Daze

What Happens When A Restart/Transformation School Becomes A Turnaround School?

2012-01-27T19:11:00.007-05:00

As everybody knows, the UFT and DOE failed to reach agreement on the "teacher evaluation system" based upon the appeals process. The UFT wants an independent Arbitrator to hear the "evidence" that the Principal rightly labeled the teacher "ineffective" While the DOE wants the appeals process to be decided by the Chancellor. Good luck to that. Caught in the middle is the 33 Restart/Transformation schools, many of them the large comprehensive high schools that the City has threatened to make "Turnaround Schools". This would allow the City to recoup $58 million dollars from the federal government that has been withheld by the State Education Department (SED). For the teachers in the 33 schools what will happen?

First, the 33 schools will no longer exist as is. Long Island City, Newtown, Bryant, Grover Cleveland, Richmond Hill, John Adams, Flushing, and August Martin High Schools in Queens will no longer exist. Instead all the schools will be renamed to reflect the themes that the Administration wants. Interestingly, unlike other "Turnaround Schools", the City schools will probably retain the old Administration and only get rid of the teachers.

Second, the schools will offer a maximum of 50% of the teachers at each school their jobs back. Yes, a maximum and some schools can offer only a minimum amount of teachers their old positions. The minimum number is as yet undecided by the DOE. You might think that this would open up opportunities for other teachers in the system to apply for the many openings. However, the DOE has decided to offer 40% of the open positions to teachers outside the school system or as you know them as the "newbies". Cheap and clueless in the classroom teachers who are in for a "culture shock" as the real world is very much different from the perception they are expecting. Unlike the new small schools who can limited or even exclude students with disabilities and English Language Learners, these 33 schools will keep the existing population and will not be able to exclude undesirable students as the small schools do.

Third, the teachers not selected will be excessed and become ATRs. It is expected that 1,750 teachers will be excessed and add an equal amount of ATRs as provisional appointments end and more budget cuts (6% for the 2012-2013 school year), it is very likely that there could be almost 4,000 ATRs in the New York City School System at a cost of $300 million dollars! That means for the measly $58 million dollars the State is withholding, it is going to cost $300 million dollars to keep all the teachers in the ATR pool. Unbelievable!

Finally, the DOE will use the ATR crises as a rallying point to try to defang the teachers' union and demand that the ATRs should be given a time limit. "No ATR time limit, no contract" will be the City's motto until the Bloomberg/Walcott Administration is removed from the scene.

Chaz Travels No More This School Year. However, The Real Work Is Just Begining.

2012-01-25T15:27:00.008-05:00

I have been offered a provisional position in a high school for the rest of the school year and approach it with some trepidation. Taking over five Regents classes halfway through the school year is a problem and more so since these classes have been without a regular teacher for two months! When a teacher takes over a class that has been without a teacher for two months, it is going to take some time to get the students into academic shape.

First, and most importantly, I must impress upon my students that I am here to stay for the school year and I will be giving them a grade. If the students fail to grasp that reality, the class is destined to fail. Remember. if the students believe that there are no consequences to their failure to follow orders, you are in for a terrible time. Just ask all the weekly ATRs about their classroom experiences in the many NYC schools. Phillip Nobile described an experience he has had a t a couple of the Brooklyn High Schools. The mere fact that you do not control their grade makes it almost impossible to control a class in the many low income and poverty-ridden community schools in the City.

Second, you must quickly evaluate each and every student in your classes. Some schools allow you access to their school records, many do not. I try to talk to both teachers who had the student previously and the deans about the student's academic and behavioral issues, if any.

Third, you must show your classroom management skills if you are to have any chance of getting the classes to pass the Regents. That means clear and consistent rules that apply to all. This is a real problem for many teachers, especially the "newbies" since classroom management skills are learned over a multi-year period.

Fourth, you need to have a complete understanding of the curriculum and be able to clearly present the topic so that the students understand what they are reading and doing. If the more academically challenged students are still having problems, then slow down and try to simplify the lesson by going back. The rest of the class will also benefit from this "look back" approach.

Fifth, you must connect with the students. They really need to respect you, not fear or disrespect you. Sure, there will always be a student or two who will not like you but if the majority of the class thinks you care about their academics, they will respond in a positive manner.

Finally, don't be afraid to ask for help from other teachers. Remember, you are new to the school and their culture and it is very important to rely on the senior teachers to enlighten you on the policies and procedures associated with the school environment.

The bottom line is that for me to succeed, I must show my classes that I am a "quality teacher" and that means demonstrating to my students that I have good curriculum knowledge, posses effective teaching skills, care about their academic well-being, and have appropriate classroom management. Mayor Bloomberg, Chancellor Walcott, and E4E are you reading this?

My Hero And Villain When It Comes To Teaching In the Classroom And Represting The Teachers.

2012-01-22T13:37:00.021-05:00

I opened up today's New York Daily News and saw that two teachers were expressing their opinions on Mayor Bloomberg's proposal to give bonuses of up to $20,000 for teachers that principals rated "highly effective" for two consecutive years n the proposed "teacher evaluation system". On one side was Bloomberg's "fifth columnist" flunkies, Education 4 Excellence (E4E). The "tools" for the Education Reform leaders. On the other side was a Chapter Leader for one of the largest high schools in the New York City Public School System and as an independent thinker is not a "tool" for anybody.

First, lets discuss the villain, E4E education reformer "tool" and "fifth columnist", Ms. Margaret Copollo, who represent an organization that consists of the "clueless" and "newbie" teachers who are unable and unwilling to see the big picture that their Mayor is trying to destroy the teaching profession not reform it. E4E is founded and funded by ed deformer groups and gets support by the DOE who conveniently gave this cancerous organization the DOE email addresses of all the teachers in the 33 restart/transformation schools. The E4E then emailed a highly misleading and inaccurate letter about the teacher evaluation system to these school 's teaching staff. Unbelievable, but true. Ms. Copollo didn't even pretend to understand the Bloomberg bonus plan saying that it is a salary increase. Either she is misreading Bloomberg's bonus proposal or she is intentionally misguiding the reader as the E4E letter to the teaching staff at the restart/transformation schools did. In either case, she fails to explain that the $20,000 bonus may come out of the school budget and few principals will be inclined to give even the best teachers two consecutive "highly effective" ratings if it comes out of their increasingly tight budget. Finally, just like all her E4E "fifth columnist" comrades, she blames the teachers' union and not the DOE for the failure to retain the best teachers when almost all teachers will tell you it is the DOE that has made the classroom an increasingly hostile environment, with test prep being more important than good teaching. Further, she gives a free pass to the Mayor who attacks teachers consistently refusing to give them a contract he gave others and then tried to layoff over 4,000 of us last year. Ms. Copollo, shame on you and your cancerous organization E4E.

By contrast, I bring you my hero, a shining example of a "great teacher". Mr. Arther Goldstein, who is an independent Chapter Leader of a great high school and is nobody's "tool". I have had the pleasure of watching him teach and how well the students respond to him. His classroom management skills are emulated by many, including me, and has represented his school with distinction. If anybody deserves a bonus it is Arthur. He has time and again disagreed with his union and Administration and lets then know when their actions are contrary to the members interest. Furthermore, Arthur is an advocate for his teachers and unlike E4E, practices what he preaches by representing all the teachers in his school, regardless of their opinions. I doubt Arthur will ever get a $20,000 bonus since he is a great Chapter Leader and advocate for his staff and the students of the school. Therefore, I do not believe his Principal (who is a good Administrator by the way) will be giving Arthur two "consecutive highly effective" ratings anytime soon since, as a Chapter Leader, he can be a "pain in the ass" to him and take a badly needed $20,000 out of his tight budget.

Hero: Arthur Goldstein, Chapter Leader, student & teacher advocate and great teacher.

Villain: Margaret Copollo Fifth Columnist, ed deformer tool, and teaching skills unknown.

Another Setback For Mayor Bloomberg's Education Policy As More NYC Public School Students Need Remedial Courses In Community Colleges.

2012-01-20T19:14:00.010-05:00

We all know that Mayor Bloomberg's educational achievement is all "smoke and mirrors" and in today's New York Post the paper's education reporter Yoav Gonen exposed that fact . According to the Post article an astounding 78.4% of the 2011 NYC public school graduates who attended community college in the City were required to take remedial courses. This is an increase of 4% from the 2010 numbers 0f 74.4%. So goes any Bloomberg/Walcott claims of improving student academic achievement.

If Mayor Bloomberg and his poodle, Chancellor Dennis Walcott, really want to improve student academic achievement then they should fund wraparound programs that start with the family and community since the social-economic issues are 80% of the problem for many of these students. Their claim that replacing 50% of the teachers in the 33 schools will really make a difference in student academic achievement is simply ridiculous. Changing the teaching staff is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic if the student population and their needs remain the same. Unless students and their family are given the resources and support to improve their academic outcomes, it is unrealistic to believe that bringing in a different teaching staff while ignoring the social-economic problems is the cure. Moreover, if the school fails to enforce student discipline codes (and many schools fail when it comes to student discipline) , no change in the schools will succeed. However, like all Education Reformers, the Mayor and Chancellor ignore the real world outside City Hall and the Tweed building and blame the Teachers' union and the teaching staff for the school ills rather than face up to the truth that their education policy is a complete failure.

Until the Mayor and Chancellor are gone from the scene it is "children last" always.

The Union Must Stay Strong And Resist The Bullying Tactics By Governor Cuomo, Mayor Bloomberg, & Commissioner King.

2012-01-18T16:15:00.016-05:00

There is no doubt that the Governor, Mayor, and the State Education Department's (SED) Commissioner are bullying the teacher unions in accepting a flawed, untested, and objectionable "teacher evaluation system". Even the Principals across the State (except for the Leadership Academy Principals in New York City) have signed a petition asking that the "teacher evaluation system" be delayed until a pilot program is completed and evaluated. Commissioner King's response was to ignore the petition and go full steam ahead with a 40% testing component that almost all educators find objectionable. The result was that NYSUT went to court to block the 40% testing component and won an injunction. Furthermore, the DOE & UFT could not agree on the use of an Independent Arbitrator to determine if the teacher was really "ineffective" or was simply targeted by the Principal. In turn the DOE walked out of the talks and refused to have the disagreement mediated. The result was a major temper tantrum by the State Department of Education who blamed the unions for the impasse and the poor decisions by their own people.

Enter Governor Andrew Cuomo who backed Commissioner King and went on to say that the union influenced State Assembly did a disservice by requiring union approval. Now he is trying to bully the unions by issuing a 30 day ultimatum for NYSUT to drop their lawsuit on the 40% testing requirement and the UFT to submit to the DOE's appeal process with DOE approved hearing officers, similar to the "U" rating appeals. The Governor is trying to unravel the educational mess that he and the State Department of Education caused in the first place. Moreover, the Governor is trying to bribe the unions by adding money to the school districts that have a "teacher evaluation system" and punish them by withholding funds to school districts who cannot come to agreement with their unions.

The combination of the Governor, the Mayor, SED, and the news media onslaught might make the unions buckle but it is important that they stand firm and pressure the State Legislature to resist the bullying tactics and make sure that a fair "teacher evaluation system" is approved and if that means 4% less money for New York State schools in the short term, so be it. Protecting teacher "due process rights" and making sure that our students have a stable and experienced teaching staff is the priority here. Without teacher "due process" look for a constant teacher turnover as "newbie teachers" replaced experienced teachers at the expense of student academic achievement. It is "children first" isn't it Governor?

My Response To Alexander Nazaryan 's Opinion Column In Which He Bashes The Union And Supports Bloomberg's Teacher Evaluation System.

2012-01-15T20:26:00.025-05:00

In today's New York Daily News a four year teacher (I think, is he even tenured?) named Alexander Nazaryan blasted the union's position on the "teacher evaluation system" and supported Mayor Bloomberg's position in his opinion piece. Worse, he went on to praise his school Brooklyn Latin and the Principal while he insulted his previous school. He went on to compare his school with the schools in the South Bronx and actually blamed the union and the teachers for their poor results. After reading his disgusting and self-serving article about how great he is and how his Principal is god, I almost puked!. I also deplored the way he demonizes a Caribbean Assistant Principal and women in general in his old school in which me lasted a mere year in. Therefore, I decided to compare his school, Brooklyn Latin with a South Bronx High School Samuel Gompers and found these not so startling differences.

--------------Brooklyn Latin------------- Samuel Gompers

Admissions:---------Exam------------------------- None

Free Lunch---------- 62.3%----------------------- 85.3%

Special Ed------------ 1.2%------------------------ 25.7%

ELL------------------ 0.3%------------------------ 16.1%

School Uniform-------- Yes-------------------------- No

Ethnicity--------- 50% White & Asian--------- 2% White & Asian

-------------------50% Black & Hispanic----- 98% Black & Hispanic

Attendance----------- 95.1%----------------------- 72.4%

College Readiness------94.1%------------------------4.4%

Yes, he is this smug teacher and aspiring novelist who works in a specialized high school with highly motivated students, where peer pressure is to succeed and go to the best colleges (college readiness is 94.1%) and he dares to compare himself to the teachers in the South Bronx who must deal with a quarter of the student population with special needs and a number of English Language Learners. How arrogant can one be? I'm sure that discipline problems in his school are few and far between and if a student acts up, you can bet that the student will be expelled from the school. By contrast, Samuel Gompers gets their students from the rough and poverty stricken neighborhood surrounding the school. Over 85% of the students are eligible for free lunch and peer pressure is reflected in the poor attendance rates of the school. I guess if Alexander Nararyan was at Samuel Gompers, those absentee students would show up and he would solve the school's discipline problems.

I would not be surprised to find out that Alexander Nararyan is a member of that fifth column, Educators4Excellence since he, like the group blame the teachers union and teachers for the problems in the schools. No where in his article did he blame the social-economic problems affecting the student academic outcomes or admit that his school is part of the 1% of City schools that require a specialized entrance exam. His article is disingenuous and self-serving and he should be ashamed of himself to be used as a stooge for those education reformers who just want to destroy the other 99% of the schools.

Alexander Nararyan reminds me of Sargent Schultz since he sees nothing, knows nothing, and says nothing of importance when it comes to the New York City Public Schools.

Update: According to Gotham Schools Alexander Nararyan is now a former teacher. If true, I guess he couldn't even last five years. What a phoney.

Mayor Bloomberg Is Truly Clueless About What Goes On In The Classroom. His Proposal Is To Hire "Newbie Teachers" But Keep The Same Students.

2012-01-14T08:16:00.017-05:00

Mayor4Life, Michael Bloomberg, shocked the education world with his State of the City Speech in which he laid out his highly distorted vision of how he will change the New York Public schools, starting in the 2012-13 school year. Behind his proposals were two themes: Keeping the $58 million dollar RTTT funds that the State is withholding and destroying the teachers' union. For the Mayor4Life this is his last chance to be taken seriously since next year will be his last year in office and "lame duck" Mayors have little power and influence as the Mayoral candidates ignore any controversial measures that can "piss off" the voters. Therefore, it is important for the Mayor4Life to show his failed legacy as the "Education Mayor". Up to now his education legacy has been all "smoke and mirrors" with flat student academic achievement, a large income/racial academic achievement gap, warehousing problem students in schools that he targets for closure only to see the small schools he championed eventually fail, and alienate school staff & parents with his "top down approach" of education reform that does not work. I could include the wasteful technology and consultant services that cost the City billions of dollars (Citytime) but you get the message.

The Mayor4Life has come out with an unworkable and poorly thought out education plan that includes the following items:

Change the 33 transformation/restart schools to the turnaround model which requires that 50% of the teachers be removed from the school and end up as ATRs. This is estimated to be 1,750 teachers and an additional $60 million dollars that the City would have to pay for teachers in the ATR pool. This will make the total cost of maintaining the ATR pool $100 million dollars or more. According to the union this cannot be done without their approval.

Give teachers who are rated "highly effective" for two years a $20,000 bonus. Notice, it's not a pay increase but a bonus so that it is temporary and does not affect the salary schedule. Moreover, who will pay the teacher the extra $20,000? The City, the DOE? or more likely will it come out of the school budget? If it is the latter, what Principal would give a teacher "highly effective" for two consecutive years if the money comes out of their budget? By the way doesn't Bloomberg know that all the studies ever done show that merit pay does not work?

Give the top 25% of college graduates $25,000 for student loan reimbursements if they last 5 years in the New York City Public Schools. Good luck to that. By the way who pays for that as well? Further, with 3,000+ ATRs roaming the schools, how can the City waste all that experienced talent while bringing in untested "newbie teachers". Wouldn't' you want your child to have an experienced teacher rather than a "newbie" who has a steep learning curve ahead of him or her? I certainly would not want my child to be the guinea pig with a "newbie teacher" who may never master the teaching profession.

The cost for all the Bloomberg proposals would be $100 million for the ATRs, $250 million for the "highly effective teachers" and another $100 million for student loan reimbursement for the "newbies". That means that the Mayor4Life is proposing to spend $450 million dollars to get the $58 million dollars from the State and he considers himself a financial genius?

Add 50 more Charter schools and increase the network for them. Who pays the cost? The City will and that is more money that will siphoned off from the Public schools to the 1% who runs these Charter school networks.

Back to the 33 restart/transformation schools. Will bringing in new teachers change the student academic outcomes in those schools? The answer is no. You cannot just rearrange the deck chairs and expect things to change for the better. The answer lies with the students. If you have the same type of students coming into the schools and the system continues to fail to provide wraparound services to these students such as family and community support, one to one tutoring, and adequate support services, how can you expect improvement? Moreover, not imposing a "zero tolerance policy" on student discipline is a recipe for failure. Changing the teaching staff in a school and doing nothing more as the Mayor4Life is demanding is the same thing as putting a bandage on an internal ulcer. it may look from the outside that you are treating it but in reality it does not cure the ulcer.

Most telling are the responses by UFT President Michael Mulgrew and Principals President Ernest Logan to Gotham Schools about the Mayor's education proposals.

From Mulgrew:

The Mayor seems to be lost in his own fantasy world of education, the one where reality doesn’t apply. It doesn’t do the kids and the schools any good for him to propose the kind of teacher merit pay system that has failed in school districts around the country. As far as the ‘turnaround’ model goes, the Mayor knows perfectly well that under state law these kinds of initiatives have to be negotiated with the union. If he’s really interested in improving the schools his administration has mishandled, he will send his negotiators back to the table to reach an agreement on a new teacher evaluation process.

And Logan:

At first glance, in the public eye, the Mayor’s remarks about schools may seem reasonable, but when you dig down, you realize how many of his proposals do little to help struggling schools. These schools are likely to continue struggling, not because 50% of the educators are supposedly incompetent, but because of the DOE’s student enrollment policies that place students who are over-age, under-credited, in temporary housing or dealing with involved special education needs in schools that are said to be low-performing. We must stop this kind of warehousing and give these children what they need to succeed.

Hopefully, when the city presents this plan to us and explains it fully, we will have fewer concerns.

In summary, changing a school's staff will not significantly change student outcomes and if it the same type of students go to the school, the academic achievement will, at best, remain unchanged and probably get worse. To my union. "stay firm and don't let the Mayor4Life lie and bully you in giving up teacher "due process rights".

The Mayor4Life and His Pet PoodleThe Chancellor Demands That Only The Principal Can Evaluate Teachers. Why This Is A Very Bad Idea.

2012-01-10T16:22:00.019-05:00

Over the last couple of days both the Mayor4Lfe, Micheal Bloomberg, and his pet poodle, Chancellor Dennis Walcott, have made statements that supports even the worst principal actions as unworthy of their removal. For example, take the case of Principal John Chase Jr. who has been found guilty of "sexual harassment" by the DOE's Office Of Equal Opportunity under Chancellor's Regulation A-830. With two more separate investigations still ongoing. The real question is why wasn't SCI investigating this?

The Principal, John Chase Jr, who sources claim mainly hired young and pretty "newbie" female teachers for a tough, urban high school, (seven of the eight teachers he hired were young and female) has been accused time .and again by the female staff of inappropriate sexual comments and uninvited behaviors. Incredibly, the DOE did not fire the Principal. The only punishment given to this perv Principal was "sensitivity training". The article can be found here. In fact there is a protest today that includes the local politicians, political leaders, staff, and parent groups. More importantly, the National Organization of Women (N.O.W.) is also joining the protest. Yet, what does the Mayor's Poodle say about the Principal?

“I’m not going to remove him, but he knows he cannot have any similar type of comments. He is on a very strict line as far as his behavior,” .

Moreover, the Mayor4Life on a radio show said principals like John Chase Jr. should have full control of teacher evaluation nobody how sleazy they are. He said the following:

The principals’ job is to decide who’s good, who’s bad. It’s their judgement, that’s their job.” The Mayor further argued that occasionally subjective actions is simply the way that things work with bosses.

According to the Mayor4Life Principal John Chase Jr. can sexually harass his female staff and if they refuse his advances, he can just rate them "ineffective" and terminate them.

Principal Chase is another poor example of a "Leadership Academy Principal" and the Mayor4Life and his pet poodle, the Chancellor, should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this outrageous case of a double standard.

The Once Traveling ATR Signs A Provisional Appointment At His New School.

2012-01-08T16:25:00.006-05:00

The traveling ATR here, I have discontinued my blog for the rest of the school year and will post on my good friend Chaz's blog as a guest blogger. I have been in my new school a couple of weeks and I was called down to the office to sign my "Provisional appointment agreement" that leaves me in the school until the end of the school year. What does the "provisional appointment agreement" say? You can read it here. The "provisional agreement" allows either the Principal or the teacher to terminate the agreement in writing by June 15 or anytime before the date.

The teachers in the department are friendly and helpful and the Administration has left me alone, so far. The students are starting to realize that I am their teacher for the year and control their grade. Therefore, some of the students that misbehaved my first week are calming down. The students are almost two months behind the other classes because of a lack of a teacher and I have to get them on task and into a rhythm quickly if I am to prepare them for the Regents. in June.

The problems I have in taking over classes this far into the school year are many. I need to get to know 150 new names and try to evaluate their abilities. No easy task when you are trying to get the class into a learning mode. Further, I must get to understand the school's culture and teacher responsibilities. For example I was just told on Friday that I have been assigned to a working group during my professional period and have no clue what this working group has been doing and how do I fit in? Finally, this is a "restart school" and so I am supposed to be familiar with the teacher evaluation framework for teacher observations. Of course, I am totally clueless and am wondering how I will be evaluated?

Overall, I must admit I really enjoy teaching again and my being in one school teaching a meaningful subject is preferable to traveling all over Queens and be treated as a "tool" by the school's Administration and disrespected by the students. I hope the union dos not agree to the ATR weekly assignments next year. ATRs should be placed in one school and have a classroom position before the schools should be allowed to hire other teachers. No other proposal is acceptable.

Why The Union Refused To Agree With The DOE's Conditions On The Teacher Evaluation System - No Teacher "Due Prtocess Rights"!

2012-01-07T08:35:00.008-05:00

The framework of the teacher evaluation system that the DOE & UFT agreed to for the 33 restart/transformation schools is now little more than an exercise in futility as the two parties could not agree on what the final product would be. Despite the uproar in the daily tabloids, education reform organizations, and those fifth columnists at E4E, the major reason was the DOE's insistence in eliminating teacher "due process rights".

The problem with DOE's proposal is that if the teacher received two consecutive"ineffective" ratings from an Administrator the teacher would be immediately terminated, with only an appeal to a DOE hearing officer allowed while no longer receiving a paycheck. Based upon Leo Casey's analysis in the "U" rating appeal hearings, the teacher would have a 0.2% chance of success. Or one out of 433 cases overturned! That means that once a Principal targeted a teacher, that teacher was as good as terminated without any reasonable chance of appealing the decision in two years. By contrast, under the existing procedures, the Principal would need to give the targeted teacher three consecutive annual "U" ratings and the teacher would still have the right to have his or her case heard by an independent Arbitrator under the 3020-a State regulations, while still on the payroll to determine if the DOE can terminate the teacher.

Under the DOE's proposal, the Principal's decision is final because, according to the DOE, the Principal's decision "comes from god" and no Principal would give an unfair rating to a teacher that would jeopardize a teacher's career. It matters little to Tweed that many of these Principals have been exposed as petty, vindictive, incompetent, and worse. To Tweed, the Principal can do no wrong and even when they do, they are simply given a slap on the wrist and maintain their control of the school. Many of the more recent cases can be found here, here, here, here, her e, and here. Yet the DOE wants these principals, many with little or no classroom experience to determine whether a teacher is "effective" or "ineffective". This is especially true of "Leadership Academy Principals" who make up 19% of the Principals in New York City. Had the union agreed to the DOE's proposal, it would be open season on veteran teachers.

The union did the right thing by opposing the DOE's attempt to eliminate teacher "due process rights" and need to hold firm against the media onslaught by the education reformers whose real agenda is to destroy the teacher unions and the public school system.

The Fifth Column, "Educators4Excellence" Shows Their True Colors By Signing A Letter That Destroys Teacher "Due Process Rights".

2012-01-04T16:22:00.011-05:00

The Educators4Excellence (E4E) cult, lead by Evan Stone & Sydney Morris, two failed teachers who couldn't last in the classroom over three years, have finally tipped their hand by signing on to the education reformer letter to Governor Cuomo asking that the Governor require a "default plan" teacher evaluation system be developed by the New York State Education Department and to be imposed on the School Districts. This "default plan" would bypass the "union's collective bargaining rights" and all but eliminate teacher "due process rights".

My question to those phonies at E4E is how can you claim to support the rights of the teachers you represent when you put your organization (cult) against the union's "collective bargaining rights" and eliminate teacher "due process rights"? How are teachers who are unfairly targeted by vindictive principals protected by this "default plan"? My guess is you really don't care about screwing the teachers you claim to represent. The union did the right thing by opposing the elimination of teacher "due process rights" by requiring that principals prove to an independent Arbitrator that the targeted teacher is truly "ineffective". Even the principals throughout New York State have been signing a petition opposing the teacher evaluation system as hastily developed, unproven, and too reliant on questionable testing protocols. Furthermore, over 1,130 principals and counting have signed the online petition and yet E4E, who claims to represent teachers , falls lockstep into the teacher bashing education reform agenda.

For those teachers who have been lured by the false promises of E4E, please open your eyes and see that this cult is not out to protect your rights" or put "children first". E4E's real agenda is to destroy public education and make teaching a temporary job where tenure and teacher "due process rights" are no longer allowed in their new "hire and fire" world. Remember, who do you think funds them? Right! education reformers not educators. Is it any wonder that E4E does the bidding of those education reform organizations and not what is best for the teachers. Shame on E4E in putting the interests of their education reform masters ahead of the teachers they claim to represent.

Why It's A Good Thing That The DOE and The UFT Failed To Agree To A Flawed And Destructive Teacher Evaluation System.

2012-01-02T11:09:00.017-05:00

Back in 2009 the Obama Administration bribed the States into education reform by allocating up to $700 million under their Race To The Top (RTTT) program. The RTTT program really does not lead to any classroom improvement and the money cannot be used to hire teachers, reduce class sizes, and to purchase supplies or textbooks to the classroom. Instead, the money is to be used for consultants, testing, innovative & achievement coaches, and other office specialists. In other words a new layer of unaccountable Bureaucracy that are not even school based. In addition, the RTTT funds are also used for useless professional development. However, the most controversial aspect of the RTTT program was the "teacher evaluation system". Yes, this is the same system that the State of Tennessee implemented only to realize that it does not work. And yes, this is the same program that 1,130 principals and counting have already signed a petition asking for the "teacher evaluation system" to be delayed and start a pilot program instead to identify the strengths or weaknesses of it. Even the "2010 outstanding educator" as voted on by the School Administrators Association of New York State, Carol Corbett Burns, has written an article against it's use. However, the State has so far turned a blind eye to the principals petition and are threatening the nine school districts who have been given federal funds to transform or restart schools.

The DOE desperately wants the "teacher evaluation system", not only because they receive money but it is a way to eliminate highly-paid veteran teachers without an independent hearing process. Furthermore, it allows principals to terminate veteran teachers who they do not like or want after two years. The DOE wants to terminate teachers who get two "ineffective ratings" and any appeal will stay within the DOE's kangaroo court. In other words there would be no teacher "due process". While the union wants the "due process" to continue, where an independent Arbitrator would decide if the teacher's "ineffective ratings" were based upon his or her teaching ability or a Principal's dislike of the teacher.

The DOE already has an appeal process in place, it is called the "U" rating appeal and Leo Casey of the UFT did an analysis of the "U" rating appeals process and found these troubling statistics. Yes of 1,300 cases Leo Casey looked at, only 3 "U" rating appeals were successful! The same would happen if the DOE got its way on the "teacher evaluation system". Furthermore, to rely on principals to evaluate teachers without questioning their motives is unacceptable. Remember these cases? Here, here, and here and there are may more cases that go unreported in the media. By the way, why is it that State exempted Charter schools from having to follow the "teacher evaluation system"?

Better to lose $60 million dollars on unnecessary and wasteful RTTT programs that don't help the classroom then to watch veteran teachers lose their "due process" rights and being terminated by vindictive principals who don't like them.

The Different Standards On Teacher Behavior Between The Suburbs And The City. - Which Is Appropriate?

2011-12-31T10:35:00.011-05:00

Yesterday, the Daily News reported on a teacher that may or may not have made some inappropriate frivolous comments to a couple of female students and was also accused by a less than credible student of showing her his cellphone with a cartoon picture of a couple doing the "old one, two" which the teacher denied. The 53 year old teacher with a 30 year unblemished record was presented with 3020-a charges by the DOE and hit with a token $1,500 fine for inappropriate comments by the independent Arbitrator who found the students testimony less than credible and now the teacher is an ATR. Can you imagine that the DOE wasted all that time and money on such frivolous charges? Worse, why would those wonderful and biased investigators from SCI substantiate the obviously frivolous charges of less than credible students over the 30 year unblemished record of the teacher? Do you believe the Principal might have something to do with it since he is the one who probably called SCI in the first place and was in the room when SCI questioned the frightened students?

By contrast, in Newsday today we have a middle school teacher who actually brags about his dancing with middle school girls, go ice skating with them and attend their personal parties an yet nothing is wrong with what he does. Living in the suburbs, I always see teachers being overly friendly with students, especially coaches with players. That included kissing and hugging that is usually reserved for family and best friends and thought little of it except that such behavior in the New York City Public Schools is not only frowned on but if the Principal so chooses can get a teacher terminated. In the New York City Schools if you touch a student on the hand or shoulder, it could lead to disciplinary action. While hugging and kissing in the suburbs are tolerated as part of teacher/student interaction.

The question is why are there different rules for the school districts? Should all school districts follow New York City DOE in a "zero tolerance" policy that treat touching a shoulder or hand the same as touching a student's "you know what". Even joking with students are frowned upon and can be taken out of context and be charged with verbal abuse of a serious nature. On the other side of the spectrum, is it appropriate for teachers to have close physical contact with students, even if it is innocent and affectionate and not sexual? Is a kiss on the check the same as a kiss on the lips? Does a coach who pats his players on the backside for making a good play an appropriate action? How about going to a student's party? Do these actions cross the line? The problem here is there are no uniform standards to regulate teacher/student relationships. Of course sexual misconduct is always unacceptable and should be prosecuted but in New York City, the teacher listed above was probably charged with "sexual misconduct" by the DOE which any reasonable person knows is not. Therefore, the term "sexual misconduct" is defined differently for different school districts.

On one hand school districts want teachers to connect with their students but as soon as the teacher makes that connection he or she puts himself or herself in danger of crossing the ever moving line between appropriate and inappropriate behavior. In New York City, the result is that teachers have been warned to "do not touch the students" and "stay out of their lives". The result is that teachers cannot or will not connect with their students for fear of violating the Chancellor's regulations and be brought up on 3020-a charges and terminated. Is it any wonder why NYC teachers have trouble connecting with their students ? By contrast, how far can teachers interact with students? Is a reassuring hug or a squeeze of the shoulder appropriate? A kiss on the check? Dancing with a student? I don't know what the answer is but when I was a teenage student if a teacher or coach put his or her arm around my shoulder, I felt reassured and knew the they cared about what I thought and who I am. Being a NYC schoolteacher I cannot imagine doing the same thing to a student for fear of being brought up on charges of inappropriate touching or physical contact and that is too bad because it makes my job much more difficult to connect with the very students who can use a reassuring hug or hand around the shoulder.

I do not know what the answer is but I do know the NYCDOE's policy is wrong and needs to be relaxed if they really expect teachers to connect with their students and if an occasional interaction results in a student being uncomfortable, it should not result in 3020-a charges but in a more reasonable meeting with school administrators to resolve the issue. Maybe one day there will be a uniform code of conduct for teacher/student interaction but until that day occurs it is up to individual teachers to decide how far to reach out to students without threatening their jobs and that is a real pity, especially for those students who need an adult role model in their lives.

By the way how hypocritical was the DOE about their no touching policy. Besides the picture in the article, the ex-Chancellor always seemed to be putting his hands on students. I guess that the now ex-Chancellor Joel Klein was exempt from the DOE policy. Remember these pictures?

Why Cathie Black Was Really Good For The New York City Public Schools.

2011-12-28T16:36:00.010-05:00

At the end of the 2010, Mayor4Life Michael Bloomberg decided that Chancellor Joel Klein was a liability to him after New York State re-cut the state test scores which showed that improving student academic achievement was all "smoke and mirrors". Moreover, the academic achievement gap based upon income and race was wider than ever. Even the newspapers were now skeptical of Joel Klein's boasts of academic improvement and questioned the improved graduation rates which appeared to be strongly influenced by bogus "credit recovery programs". The Mayor4Life, Michael Bloomberg, was also very aware of the unpopular Chancellor's low approval ratings and his antagonistic approach to the State legislature. For the Mayor4Life, he needed to have a more subservient Chancellor. A Chancellor that would follow his every order without questioning them. One night at a cocktail party with his closest friends and other elites, he spotted Cathie Black and asked her would she like the job as Chancellor of the New York City schools? Cathie Black was flattered but told the Mayor4Life she had no experience in education. She explained that she went to an elite private school and her children were sent to boarding school, what did she know of the public schools? The Mayor4Life said I need somebody like you who socializes with the elites and that your staff will take care of the day to day issues dealing with the schools. Cathie Black accepted the Chancellor position and this is how the story begins on why Cathie Black was good for the New York City Schools.

First, Cathie Black's selection as Chancellor showed even his media supporters how Mayor4Life Michael Bloomberg didn't really care who was Chancellor as long as he controlled the schools. The result was the general public actually started to disapprove of the Mayor's education policy.

Second, Cathie Black becoming Chancellor resulted in almost 50% of the leadership at Tweed to leave. Since these were all non-educators with anti-teacher policies. This has to be looked as a positive development for the public schools.

Third, Cathie Black's popularity hit an all-time low at 17% just before she was fired. Her nasty attitude to parents and her elitist ways alienated many parents. In that same survey only 28% of parents with children in the NYC Public Schools thought the Mayor4Life was doing a good job. The result was the State Assembly and Governor were dismissive of the Mayor's LIFO bill without any political fallout due to the unpopularity of both the Mayor and Chancellor.

Finally, the Chancellor's attempt to take money from the principals was not only ill-advised but when she followed that up by failing to disclose where the returned money will be spent on was the last straw for the principals. The result was an almost universal disdain of Cathie Black by parents, principals, and teachers who closed ranks to protest to the State about the New York City Schools and received a sympathetic ear. It was obvious to all that Cathie Black was not only incompetent but the Mayor's puppet and her appearance at the State legislative hearings were not taken seriously by the politicians.

Yes, Cathie Black was incompetent and unpopular. However, she single-highhandedly allowed diverse groups to work together to stop her destructive policies and made the Mayor4Life so unpopular that his LIFO bill was not even addressed by the State Assembly or Governor's Office and the usually obedient City Council refused to agree with teacher layoffs. In other words, Cathie Black was so bad that she was good for the New York City Public Schools.

How Santa Claus Survived The DOE Termination Process Only To Became An ATR In The New York City School System.

2011-12-26T18:00:00.018-05:00

In my rounds of going from school to school as a weekly ATR, the one common theme was that all the ATRs I meet were 40 years old or older. However, the oldest ATR I encountered was none other than old Saint Nick himself. Yes, Santa Claus is an ATR. After surviving a biased Special Commissioner of Investigation report requesting his termination and an Arbitrator who believed every word the DOE lawyer said, a State Appeals judge reversed the termination and reinstated him to the schools. However, because his school was closing , Santa Claus found himself as an ATR. Santa Claus thought no problem, I am a "quality teacher" and with a world of experience with children and beloved by all (except by the non-educators at the DOE and SCI). Therefore, it should be no problem to obtain another classroom teaching position. Alas, how wrong he was. Poor Santa went to four "job fairs" and applied to fifteen vacancies on the Open Market Transfer System and did not receive one interview, not one! One sympathetic Administrator at a job fair whispered in his ear that maybe he should shave off his beard dye his hair brown and loss some weight to look younger.

Poor Santa, he could not understand why he wasn't getting interviews. Was it his age as many of the ATRs claim? How about the budget? Was it the red suit and cap he likes to wear or was it that the principals were discriminating against him for being "reassigned"? Don't the principals want to hire the "best teachers"? What was the union doing for him? He spoke to his District Representative, "the non-swimmer in deep water" and he was of course, no help. He then spoke to the union's Special Representative known as the "General" because if he really was a General during the Revolutionary War , we would still be British subjects. No help there either. He even tried to contact Cleo Lacy but he was called a "punk" on the phone by Cleo who hung up on poor Santa. Finally, Santa tried to talk to the union leadership but nobody will talk to him since he is an ATR and the ATRs are treated as second class citizens by both the DOE and UFT.

For Santa, traveling weekly to schools is a piece of cake since he is used to traveling the globe and making 3.6 billion house calls. What upsets him the most is that he is treated as an unwanted appendage to the schools he is assigned to. Instead of milk and cookies, what awaits Santa is bathroom duty, cafeteria patrol, and manning the SAVE room. He also has been shocked that the students treat him as a substitute teacher and refuse to do their assigned work or behave. Even when he tells them that they will get coal in their Christmas stockings instead of presents. Some schools don't even give him a bathroom key and the Chapter Leaders never introduced themselves!

For Santa Claus, this Christmas is not the ho, ho, ho, it should be but a "bah humbug"as being a weekly ATR is not what Santa Claus expected to be in the New York City Public Schools. It is a sad time for Santa Claus and the children who cannot benefit from his presence in the classroom.

The DOE Is Really Acting The Part Of The Grinch As They Are Moving Reassigned Teachers Out of Their Borough.

2011-12-25T16:00:00.013-05:00

Yes, it is true, the day of the "rubber room" is gone. No longer are there 800+ teachers reassigned to various TRCs throughout the City. However, for some teachers accused of serious misconduct or criminal issues The DOE Grinch is back as these two dozen or so reassigned teachers that were removed from the schools are being reassigned out of their Borough and in one outrageous case a Queens teacher was sent to Staten Island! Yes, Staten Island until his 3020-a hearing is completed.

It appears that the DOE does not care to follow the contract when it comes to these reassigned teachers, knowing full well that by the time the union files a successful grievance, the teacher will either be sent back to the school or terminated. Previously, only those teachers under Chancellor's discretion were sent out of the Borough. Now it seems that the DOE is trying to make it as difficult as possible for the reassigned teachers who are sent out of their schools.

For those reassigned teachers during this Christmas the DOE is certainly acting the part of the Grinch by punishing them with long commutes and disrespect to their personal situations..

The Doublespeak Administrators Use When They Tell Teachers To Use "Differentiated Instruction" Methods. In The Classroom.

2011-12-23T18:45:00.008-05:00

One of my closest friends was observed the other day by an Administrator and was informally told that while his lesson and presentation in the classroom was satisfactory, he needed to work in "differential instruction" into his classroom lesions. Dumbfounded, my friend spoke to some of the other teachers in his department about how they handled "differential instruction". To his surprise none of the other teachers knew how to work "differential instruction" into their classroom routine.

Some of the teachers think that "differential instruction" was giving easy questions to academically weaker students and more difficult questions to the higher achieving students. Others though that you should have different lessons for each group of learners and a few thought that you put them in groups of four (cooperative learning) with a mixed academic group. Therefore, I looked at some Administrators who have informed teachers on how to use "differentiated instruction" in the classroom. The first example is Here. Another example can be found Here. Finally, I was able to find a good one Here.

What is "differentiated instruction"? Simple, "differentiated instruction" is as described right Here! Furthermore, why should you use "differentiated instruction"? Here is why!

Confusing and the "doublespeak" is quite funny. Unfortunately, the use of "differentiated instruction" is the new slogan for education reformers who believe quality teachers are the only thing that affects student learning. Therefore, if an Administrator asked me to include "differentiated instruction" into my lesson I would ask him to please model an actual lesson in my classroom that includes "differentiated instruction". Of course, I will not hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

My Idea To Improve Student Academic Achievement In The New York City Public High Schools.

2011-12-20T16:09:00.005-05:00

I have gone to many schools this year and watched the different ideas on how to improve student academic achievement. These ideas range from pretesting students with a test before giving them the same test two days later (I call this cheating) to fudging scholarship grades of students who don't even come close to passing the dumbed down entry level Regents and endanger not only the next group of teachers who now have to explain to the Administration why these students who were given undeserved grades in the 70's and 80's aren't passing the harder course the next year but also allows students to believe that they don't need to work hard to graduate high school. Moreover, too many schools use technology as a crutch and not an aid to student learning. Just look at the explosion of "credit recovery programs" that artificially increase the school's graduation rate while having an abysmal "career and college readiness" percentage.

One of the most overriding issues is the lack of student discipline in many of the schools and that must be blamed on the school's Administration. I have seen first-hand when the Administration takes charge how the school tone changes and the academic improvement that results from it. Too many schools allow cellphones, ipods, and thuggish clothes (hip-hop pants with the underwear showing) and students who fail to go to class as an acceptable or tolerated practice. The result is that the school academics eventually fail. However, if you look at the better schools, student discipline is not an issue. Strict enforcement of student discipline is part of the answer to improving student academic achievement.

Just as important in improving student academic achievement is putting teachers and students together in groups, when possible. For example all 136 students have the same core course teachers (English, Math, Science, Social Studies) who meet in their professional period to discuss their students. How is the student progressing? Is the student only acting up in one class or all four? Is the student having personal issues that one teacher knows about and can alert the others? This four teacher group can better work with the student and the parents to bring out the academic potential. In some cases, after freshman year it can be a logistical nightmare. However, if done properly, the student will have a knowledgeable corps of teachers who can readily design a program to improve the student's academic achievement.

For those students that are having academic or behavioral issues that are beyond the capability of the core teachers, they will receive specific counseling services from Guidance, the Social Worker, and other professionals who work with problem students. While my approach is not a solution to an increasingly vexing problem in the New York City High Schools, it is certainly worth a try in my version of "children first".

The 3020-a Process Revisited Since The "Rubber Room Agreement".

2011-12-17T12:21:00.009-05:00

Since the April 15th 2010 "rubber room agreement" little has been written about reassigned teachers. In fact only two articles have referred to the reassigned teachers. Here and Here. The reason that little has been written about the plight of the reassigned teacher is that the rules have changed. True there are no more "rubber rooms" but there is a temporary teacher reassignment center at 49-51 Chambers Street for teachers accused of potentially serious or criminal charges. What have the changes been?

First, principals can no longer dump teachers out of their school and get them off their payroll in sixty days as before. Previously principals could remove a teacher based upon an unfounded accusation or frivolous actions. This is especially true of principals targeting higher paid senior teachers and the "rubber room" reflected this. Now the teacher stays at the school and may even continue teaching during the 3020-a process. This is a disincentive for principals to remove teachers since not only they no longer get budget relief but would have to hire a replacement to cover the classroom. The result is that fewer teachers are being charged under 3020-a. However, any "serious misconduct" as defined by the contract will result in the teacher being removed from the school.

Second, the 3020-a process is definitely moving faster. Most cases are done within 180 days, start to finish and the Arbitrators are seriously trying to meet the more stringent time limits.

Third, with no "rubber rooms", the free exchange of information has slowed to a trickle as both the DOE and UFT/NYSUT maintain absolute secrecy of the goings on in the 3020-a process. Therefore, the charged teacher is totally at the mercy of the NYSUT lawyer and is not informed enough to ask hard questions or take this advice.

Finally, with less frivolous cases concerning misconduct going to 3020-a hearings, anecdotal evidence suggests that Arbitrators are more inclined to terminate teachers. Remember, unlike the State, the DOE and UFT select a panel of Arbitrators who depend on pleasing the two parties if they want their position on the board renewed yearly. Since the DOE is more aggressive in exercising that right, you can guess that the Arbitrator decisions will lean heavily toward the DOE position. As for teacher incompetence? Nothing has really changed there with teachers who were foolish enough to take PIP+ have a 90% chance of being terminated.

It would appear, based upon the information above, there are less settlements and an increased termination rate from 25% back in June 2010 to close to 50% now if you take into account resignations and retirement. I would like to give you real numbers but the two groups keep everything top secret.

Even The General Public Realizes That The Mayor's Poodle, Chancellor Dennis Walcott Is Doing A Poor Job Educating The City's Children.

2011-12-15T17:57:00.010-05:00

A new Qunnipiac poll found that more New Yorkers disapproved of the job Chancellor Dennis Walcott has done then approve his job performance. The poll showed that 34% of the general public disapprove of the Chancellor's job performance and that 45% of New York City public school parents gave the Chancellor poor marks. Disturbingly for the Chancellor, both numbers have increased by 13% since May of 2011 when Dennis Walcott became Chancellor. By contrast his approval rating only inched upward to 33% (from 31%) over the same time period.

The data from the Quinnipiac poll suggests that as more people get to know Chancellor Dennis Walcott, the less they like his job performance. The Chancellor's overall approval rating is actually 4% lower than when the increasingly arrogant and despised ex-Chancellor Joel Klein was Chancellor and only beats the incompetent Cathie Black's 17% approval rating.

Obviously the general public increasingly sees the Chancellor as a puppet for the Mayor and has shown not one ounce of independence from the Bloomberg agenda of ignoring parents, closing neighborhood school, and strongly supporting privately funded Charter schools. The Quinipiac poll shows that the more you get to know Chancellor Dennis Walcott, the less you like his policies on education which is simply Mayor Bloomberg's "children last" education policy.

Why Mayor Bloomberg's Small Schools Are Destined To Fail Over The Long Run.

2011-12-13T19:32:00.005-05:00

While I watch the once great comprehensive High Schools close (Jamaica, Beach Channel, Christopher Columbus, Washington Irving, etc), I am sent to the small schools that has replaced them. Being an ATR, I have a unique perspective of the small schools that have popped up throughout Queens and have found why many of them are destined to fail in a decade.

The reasons that this Bloomberg schools fail is that eventually the small schools end up with the same student population as the closed and closing large comprehensive high schools they replaced. Or as some would say it's like "rearranging the deck chairs". However, there are many more reasons that the small Bloomberg schools are destined to fail. Let's look at them.

Poor Administration lead by a "Leadership Academy Principal".
An inexperienced teaching staff with poor classroom management skills.
Limited academic electives or extra-curricular activities.
Pressure to keep student numbers up to ensure a continuous funding stream.

Let's look at each one of the problems.

Poor Administration: Many of the small schools have had "Leadership Academy Principals" in charge and quite a few of them lack the necessary classroom skills and mentoring to help their teaching staff. Furthermore, these principals have been taught to not collaborate with the teaching staff and will use intimidation tactics to get their way. The result is high teacher turnover and an unstable school environment. Finally, many of these principals tend to ignore student discipline issues and staff morale suffers. More than one Principal has told their staff that they will call in any student accusations to the investigative agencies OEO, OSI, and SCI no matter how frivolous it may seem to be.

Inexperienced Teaching Staff: Many of the small schools suffer from inexperienced teaching staffs, many of them untenured. Worse, a majority of these teachers come from the Teach For America and Teaching Fellows alternate certification programs and are not even certified! Is it any wonder that these small schools fail within the decade? While many of these teachers are enthusiastic, enthusiasm is not as important as curriculum knowledge and classroom management which these teachers lack.

Limited electives and extra-curricular activities: These small schools have limited or no electives that attract the well-rounded student and is usually the biggest complaint, even in the small specialized schools. The same goes for extra-curricular activities and many students feel cheated of a total high school experience without these necessary and important additions to the core subjects of the school.

Pressure to keep student numbers up: Many of the small schools are increasingly competing with each other for the diminishing amount of high achieving students. To ensure that the schools keep up their student numbers and funding, these schools are taking increasing number of students that are less than academically inclined. With only a few remaining large comprehensive high schools available, the high need and academically challenged students are finding their way into the Bloomberg small schools and the "student screening" that was allowed previously by the DOE is increasingly frowned on and those wonderful academic gains are rapidly disappearing and in some cases have disappeared altogether.

The UFT's Jackie Bennett did a study that showed that the "college readiness" of the small Bloomberg schools were lower than the larger schools and this shows very conclusively that the Bloomberg small schools are a failure and the sooner we go back to giving the children of New York City a total learning environment the better.

Why Are There Different Rules For Charter Schools?

2011-12-10T11:46:00.008-05:00

The DOE has decided to close an additional 25 schools over the next couple of years for so-called poor performance. However, they gave a reprieve to a terribly performing Charter school that should have been the first in line to close. This Charter school has a myriad of problems including major violations of Charter Policy and State Law. This school has already seen the Principal replaced in May and the Operations Director this school year. The Charter school is called the New York French American Charter School and is located in Morningside Heights. The DOE, despite finding many different violations, a few of them major, has decided to put the Charter school on probation. Gotham Schools has a more detailed analysis of the DOE report Here.

Major Violations identified in the probation letter are as follows:

An astounding 60% of the teaching staff are not certified!
Giving a parent keys to the school despite never being fingerprinted.
The same parent was found sleeping in the school overnight.
Missing or inaccurate student attendance records.
Financial irregularities.
Operational disarray.
Lack of books and other classroom materials.
Poor student discipline procedures.

The school suffers from an inexperienced staff with the majority having no certification and have classroom management issues as a commenter reported on Insideschools.

You would think that with the litany of violations, the DOE would be closing this school. However, because it is a Charter school they fall under different rules and are given many more chances then the public school has.In other words "different strokes for different folks".

Breaking News. Cleo Lacy Tells All About His Role On The ATR Oversight Committee And Much More.

2011-12-07T16:32:00.020-05:00

Up until now the UFT has refused to disclose who is on the ATR Oversight Committee and what issues have been discussed, if any. Why the secrecy? However, I have managed to get an exclusive interview with the one and only Cleo Lacy. Yes the very same Cleo Lacy who hijacked my blog back in 2006.

Chaz: It is my understanding that you are on the ATR Oversight Committee. Is that correct?

Cleo Lacy: Somebody must represent those “lazy and bad teachers” who are ATRs, It might as well be me.

Chaz: Why are there no ATRs on the ATR Oversight Committee?

Cleo Lacy: Because their opinion does not count and only our union leaders know how to negotiate with the DOE.

Chaz: You mean like the 2005 contract that caused the ATR crisis in the first place?

Cleo Lacy: Grrrrrrrr. We got them a raise didn’t we?

Chaz: Have you met with the DOE on the problems associated with the ATR Agreement?

Cleo Lacy: What problems? There are no problems. Everything is running smoothly. Look how many “lazy and bad" ATRs found jobs?

Chaz: Many of those placements are provisional and in terrible schools in a different Borough.

Cleo Lacy: “So what”. A job is a job.

Chaz: Did you meet with the DOE?

Cleo Lacy: I did but I can’t remember what was discussed.

Chaz: How can you not remember what was discussed?

Cleo Lacy: The meeting was so boring that I fell asleep.

Chaz: Didn’t the UFT bring up the ongoing problems like Principals not hiring ATRs for their vacancies? The insane commutes for High School teachers In District 76. How about the failure of the DOE to live up to the ATR Agreement?

Cleo Lacy: I don’t see any problems and neither do the rest of the ATR Oversight Committee.

Chaz: Did you come to any agreement?

Cleo Lacy: Yes, we all agreed the ATRs are a pain in the ass!

Chaz: You think it is fair for the teachers in District 76 to travels two hours to Get to their weekly assignment in Brooklyn or Staten Island?

Cleo Lacy: When I did teach in the classroom decades ago, I walked 6 miles uphill in the snow to and from the school and never complained.

Chaz: What do you hope happens to the ATRs?

Cleo Lacy: I wish they would retire or resign. Their complaining gives me a headache.

Chaz: What about the age discrimination issue and the data that appears to support it?

Cleo Lacy: There is no age discrimination. Look at me, I am older than dirt and ugly to boot. The union just worships me. The senior ATRs are not being hired Because they are not “quality teachers” ask Mayor Bloomberg & Chancellor Walcott.

Chaz: Why didn’t you leave to Washington D.C. with Le Gran Fromage?

Cleo Lacy: Because she wanted me to spy, eh, I mean be her “eyes and ears” in NYC.

Chaz: If you were to become UFT President. What would your priorities be?

Cleo Lacy: Global advocacy of teacher rights like Durfur, Somalia, and Mexico.

Chaz: How about ATR rights?

Cleo Lacy: They have a job don’t they? Nobody is putting them in jail.

Chaz: Would you allow the DOE to impose a ATR time limit?

Cleo Lacy: Let the DOE fire them. I am not Michael Mulgrew and I am not bound to protect those “lazy and bad” ATRs

Chaz: Wouldn't that violate civil service protections and start a "slippery slope" to destroy tenure and teacher rights?

Cleo Lacy: Who gives a shit! Hmmmmm maybe I need to rethink my answer on that issue.

Chaz: How do you feel about the DOE pilot program to evaluate ATRs in Brooklyn?

Cleo Lacy: Great idea. I would have approved it myself, except I fell asleep at The last meeting when it was discussed.

Chaz: Finally, what was your reaction on what Mayor Bloomberg said about teachers and class size?

Cleo Lacy: We need more teachers, not less so we can collect more dues and I can raise my already bloated salary and fund our pet projects. However, I have no objection to increasing class sizes since I no longer teach in a classroom with those horrible kids.

Chaz: How do you feel that many members believe you are loyal to the union Leadership and not to the members in the trenches?

Cleo Lacy: Screw them, screw them all. They are just jealous about my double pensions, air conditioned private office and six figure salary. Punks! I hope they all die.

Chaz: Thank you for your time and for letting the public know what the real Cleo Lacy is like. I wish the other UFT Leadership Committee members would step forward and out of the shadows to inform us of what is really going on behind closed doors.

The Union's Motto "We Are One" - Except If You Are An ATR!

2011-12-04T20:11:00.009-05:00

Here it is December and I finally was given the UFT 2011-2012 teacher planning book titled "We Are One" by a sympathetic Chapter Leader. Reading the UFT's motto I had to laugh since the union Leadership has treated the ATRs as "second class citizens". It is bad enough that the DOE treats the ATRs as some "tool" to be used and abused weekly by principals but it is something else when our union allows the DOE to ignore the ATR Agreement and close their collective eyes to the principals who fail to interview or hire an ATR to cover their hidden or listed vacancies.

Why do I believe the union has treated the ATRs as "second class citizens"? Lets look at what the union leadership has failed to do for the ATRs.

ATRs must go to 65 Court Street to receive their paychecks, not the school they are placed in.
ATRs no longer get paper pay stubs.
The union refuses to give ATRs a voice in determining their future.
The union failed to place an ATR on their oversight committee and to make matters worse refuses to identify who is on the committee and what has been discussed.
Many high school ATRs are subject to insane commutes, especially in District 76 and the union remains silent about this hardship.
Schools continue to treat ATRs differently from teaching staff. No parking permits, no keys, and many of the Chapter Leaders fail to meet with the ATRs.

Remember, it was both the DOE and UFT that caused the ATR crises in the first place and it is time to restore the old excessing rules if the ATR crises is to be resolved and that the ATRs are not treated as "second class citizens". For the UFT to ignore this issue and the only action they do is propose "toothless resolutions" rather than publicly show how the DOE continues to violate the ATR Agreement is unacceptable.

Update: The DOE is setting up a pilot program for the Brooklyn schools to evaluate (terminate) ATRs. You can read the complete letter below.

From: Atrassignment <Atrassignment@schools.nyc.gov>
Subject: Important Update on Supervision
To:
Date: Monday, December 5, 2011, 10:37 AM

Dear Teacher,

The Department of Education is piloting a new model for supervision of teachers in the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR). This pilot will be implemented for most ATRs assigned to community school districts in Brooklyn as well as the Brooklyn High School superintendency, District 73; you are receiving this email because you will likely be included in the pilot. Under this initiative, you will be supervised by a licensed administrator, called a Field Supervisor, who will periodically observe your practice and provide you with feedback to support your professional development. The Field Supervisors are aware that as an ATR you do not have a regular program and that you rotate school assignments and they will take this context into account in their work with you.

At some point in the next two months, you should expect your Field Supervisor to visit your assignment site to meet with you in person. At this initial meeting, the Field Supervisor will work with you to develop a plan to support your professional growth and job search process. The Field Supervisor will make an effort to contact you via your DOE email in advance of the initial meeting to give you a sense of when you can expect him or her; however, he or she may not always be able to provide advance notification.

Sincerely,

NYC Department of Education

Sounds like bullshit to me. What has been the union's response to this outragouis attempt to go after ATRs? Nothing, absolutely nothing. Maybe this is what the union and DOE agreed to in their secret meetings to screw the ATRs,

Mayor Bloomberg Believes That Seventy Students In A Classroom Will Be A Win For The Students - How Clueless He Is About What Goes On In The Classroom.

2011-12-03T08:18:00.009-05:00

Mayor Bloomberg has shown how clueless he is about what goes on in the classroom when, on Tuesday, he gave a speech at MIT that his idea of a good education would be to fire 50% of the teachers and weed out the "ineffective teachers" from the remaining 50%. Furthermore, he sees little problem that teachers would have class sizes of 70 and that a "quality teacher" who is highly compensated and come from the top colleges is all that is needed to improve education. How clueless the Mayor is when it comes to the classroom. His entire speech is on Gotham Schools and can be found Here. He also said that the teachers union is the blame for his failure to change the NYC Schools. The mayor's ill-advised speech on teachers and class size must be looked as a further "nail in his coffin" claiming to be the "Education Mayor" and as UFT President Michael Mulgrew correctly called the Mayor's speech a "Cathie Black moment"

If you follow his speech carefully he never defines what a "quality teacher" is. Except that teachers should be recruited from the top colleges. Sounds like Teach For America to me. However, we do know how the Mayor thinks and in Mayor Bloomberg failed bid to get rid of "last in, first out" LIFO he targeted senior and highly paid teachers who may have been out of favor with principals for termination. Therefore, it is very likely that the Mayor's purpose would be to have a young, replaceable, and untenured teaching staff. Consequently, it is a reasonable assumption that the Mayor idea of a "quality teacher" is a teacher that works hard for the few years they are in the classroom and leave before they are vested for retiree benefits or even long enough to achieve tenure. A tip off of the Mayor's disdain for experienced teachers was this speech he made during the height of the LIFO fight and reported Here.

Previously, I wrote an article about the Mayor's disrespect for teachers Here. Now we have his speech at MIT that knocks teachers and wants to terminate a minimum of 50% of the teaching force. Even his education reformer friends must have cringed when he made this speech. I have noticed not one education reform group has supported the Mayor on what he said at MIT.
Interestingly, I did agree with the Mayor on one part of his speech where he said that technology has not materialized as an important component of better learning. He was quoted as saying the following:

Bloomberg also questioned the impact of technology in the classroom, despite rising spending by the Department of Education on technology and e-learning .

“It may be heresy in this day and age to say so, but there’s not a lot of evidence that when you introduce a lot more technology in the classroom the results are better,” he said, arguing that what really mattered was the quality of teachers.

Mayor Bloomberg is a typical hypocrite as he thinks class sizes of 70 is " a good deal for the students" while he sent his daughters to the private Spence school with class sizes of 16-18. His speech at MIT increasingly shows how clueless the Mayor is about the classroom and his disrespect for New York City Public School teachers.

Droopy Pants And Poor Academic Achievement In Male Students Seem To Have A Correlation, So I Have Observed.

2011-12-01T16:01:00.009-05:00

In my travels as an ATR I have been in eight high schools and observed each school's culture. Being in the classroom and after speaking to many Deans and teachers there seems to be a correlation between how low male students keep their pants and the grades they receive.

Apologists will tell you that it is simply prejudice by teachers who give these boys low grades because they wear these droopy pants with their underwear showing. The reality is that many of these boys show disrespect to school staff and their peers and the droopy pants are simply an expression of that disrespect for others. Even some community leaders have expressed disgust of this prison-inspired dress. A few schools I have been in tolerate the droopy pants look and their tolerance of this dress and thuggish behavior is reflected in the school's poor grades and terrible academic performance. By contrast the better schools with good academic performance have very few male students that wear droopy pants and the few who do are told to pull up their pants. In the high-achieving specialized school I was at not one male student wore droopy pants!

The Deans tell me that the boys who wear their pants so low that their underwear show all the time are also the students must likely to "dropout" or need massive "credit recovery" to graduate. The CTT teachers echo this and add that these boys tend to sit in the back of the room, away from the teacher and instruction, and have to be reminded repeatedly to take off their hats and hoods. The same teachers say when they try to reach out to these students it is "like pulling teeth" to get them to participate in any academic activity and quite a few simply go to sleep. By contrast the honor classes in the same schools have no male students wearing droopy pants and are actually embarrassed when a fellow classmate points out that their low-riding pants are so low that the top of their underwear is showing (I saw it myself twice).

Yes, I know the apologists will claim that teenagers should express themselves and that teenagers are naturally rebellious. However, droopy pants are more than simply an expression of being a teenager. In this case, the male student's droopy pants is associated with disrespect of school staff, fellow students, and is correlated with poor academic achievement.

Think what you like but "the truth is the truth" that male students who wear these droopy paints with their underwear showing, are associated with poor academic achievement and schools that tolerate this type of dress are destined to continue to fail the students academically.

I Accuse NYC Principals Of Cowardice For Not Signing The NYS Principals Letter To The State Asking For A Delay In Using The Teacher Evaluation Plan.

2011-11-29T20:34:00.022-05:00

Across New York State principals are signing on to a letter asking the New York State Department of Education to delay implementing the flawed and untested "teacher evaluation plan" until more data and a much needed "pilot program" is started and evaluated. The letter can be found here. Even the State admits that the "teacher evaluation plan" is "a work in progress" but because the Governor, Andrew Cuomo is pushing it, the NYSED shows no willingness to delay the implementation of the plan despite the rising chorus of complaints by Administrators. What is very interesting is that a NYSUT sponsored six school "pilot program" that had principals and Superintendents input as part of the program and is called the Teacher Evaluation and Development (TED) system has proven successful and fosters a collaborative atmosphere between school administrators and teachers.Yet the State has shown little interest in trying this superior approach in educator evaluation.

The principal revolt was led by some of the top principals on Long Island and as of November 27th has had 658 out of 4,500 principals (15%) throughout New York state signing on and more do every day . Their complaints are many: the evaluation system was put together in slapdash fashion, with no pilot program; there are test scores to evaluate only fourth-through-eighth-grade English and math teachers; and New York tests are so unreliable that they had to be rescaled radically last year, with proficiency rates in math and English dropping 25 percentage points overnight.

While more and more principals are signing the letter throughout New York State, conspicuous by their absence are principals from New York City. To date only 18 out of 1,500 principals have signed the letter, an incredibly miniscule 1.2%. The main reason for the lack of NYC principal participation is that they are afraid of what the Bloomberg/Walcott Administration, who strongly support the "teacher evaluation plan" might do to them. In other words they are cowards. To a lesser degree 19% of the NYC principals are "Leadership Academy Principals" who are clueless of what goes on in the classroom and cannot or will not question what they don't understand. Finally, there are many vindictive, insecure, and petty principals who look forward to the "teacher evaluation plan" as a way to remove a teacher they don't like or want. These principals are known as "principals from hell". Unlike suburban principals who are selected based upon merit, their long-term teaching career, and who learn to collaborate with staff for making a better school, many NYC principals are picked based on politics while some were never even tenured as a classroom teacher. Since Tweed has given these principals almost unlimited power to make decisions and many of those decisions are biased on what's best for the Principal and not for the school. Is it any wonder that they think and act differently then their suburban counterparts and another reason that few NYC principals have signed the letter.

The failure of the NYC principals to sign the NYS principals' letter asking for a delay to a flawed, untested, and inferior "teacher evaluation plan" is just a cowardly action on their part.

Update: Gotham Schools reports that David Abrams, the Assistant Commissioner of Standards, Assessments, and Reporting since 2004 has abruptly resigned effective immediately. Mr. Abrams has been criticized for the inflated State test scores that had to be rescaled in 2010 and was held responsible for the NYSED's ill-advised advocacy in increasing student test scores to count for 40% of a proposed teachers evaluation system which helped spark a rebellion by principals to the teacher evaluation plan and a NYSUT lawsuit which is now tied-up in court.

"First Mayor Bloomberg's Bill Came For"......

2011-11-27T20:55:00.010-05:00

Over the Thanksgiving weekend I heard a rumor from an acquaintance that the Bloomberg Administration was very unhappy that Governor Andrew Cuomo did not support his bill to repeal "last in , first out", otherwise known as LIFO. In addition, it is becoming increasingly clear that the effects of the teacher evaluation system is at least two years down the road and maybe more if the increasing number of New York State principals (not NYC principals) can convince the State to delay it further. Therefore, his staff, with the cooperation of the DOE, are in the process of revitalizing a new LIFO repeal bill for the 2012-2013 school year. While my contact and I have no idea what the new bill will include. If it will be submitted, I do believe it is very likely a clone of last year's LIFO bill.

It is possible that because the Mayor is increasingly being seen as a "lame duck" and his legacy as the "Education Mayor" is shattered, the new bill, if the Mayor actually goes through with it, might, be more limited, such as getting rid of the ATRs or teachers who were "U" rated, etc. but I doubt it. It is highly unlikely that even the Republican Senate will fall in line this time since the Mayor's political power is rapidly disappearing as he faces the end of his unpopular third term. Furthermore, the ever rising class sizes, teacher attrition, teacher evaluation procedures, and an enforced City hiring freeze may make the rationale of a LIFO bill unnecessary. However, this might not stop Mayor Bloomberg from trying anyway. It even might be in his best interest to at least make an attempt to submit a new LIFO repeal bill to satisfy his ed deformer friends. What might the Bloomberg Bill contain? Well let's put it to the words of Pastor Martin Niemoller back in World War II.

First, Mayor Bloomberg wanted to terminate teachers who received "U" ratings in the last 5 years. I had not received a "U" rating.

Then he went after teachers guilty of disciplinary issues and 3020-a charges. I was never subject to discipline issues.

Then he went after the ATRs and I never was an ATR.

Than he went after teachers with lateness or absences and I am never late or rarely absent.

Then when I became older and was approaching my vesting date, he went after me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Yes, it can and will happen to you unless we stand together as a profession.

My Thanksgiving WishesTo Some And The "Turkey Award" To Others.

2011-11-25T10:57:00.016-05:00

It is the day after Thanksgiving and it is time to give thanks to the people and organizations that have helped me through some trying years and the ones that should disappear forever.

I gave thanks to:

My family who supported me throughout my ordeal.

The many teachers and bloggers who were on my side.

My Chapter Leader who is was always there and testified in my behalf.

NYC Educator who convinced me to start my blog.

The union who keeps telling me "we saved your job". First, when I was in the "rubber room" and second while I am an ATR. Thanks.

The many students that contacted me and wanted to testify in my behalf.

My NYSUT lawyer who always believed in my innocence.

The State Arbitrator who found no misconduct on my part.

On the other hand, my "Turkey Award" to those organizations and people who should disappear from education forever.

My ex-Principal who was canned by the DOE for his poor decision-making and Administrative skills but not before he made sure to charge me with phoney 3020-a charges..

The DOE Office of Legal Services who failed time and again, to realize what a frivolous case they had but still managed to keep me incarcerated in thee "rubber room" for 1567 days.

The "scumbag teacher" who met with SCI secretly outside the school and lied to them. Thankfully, even the biased SCI investigator realized he was lying and he now finds himself as an ATR and ostracized by the other teachers who know the story.

Ex Chancellor Joel Klein who demonized "reassigned teachers" and ATRs by calling them "bad or lazy" teachers.

The Mayor's poodle, Chancellor Dennis Walcott, who has not changed any of Joel Klein's failed and destructive education policies since taking over the position seven months ago.

Mayor Bloomberg who has almost single handedly tried to destroy the New York City Public Schools and is ending up destroying his legacy as the "Education Mayor".

The DOE and the Union leadership whom have allowed the ATR crises to exist in the first place.

The fraudulent DOE algorithm which is simply a sick joke for the weekly ATR.

The union's failure to allow ATR input in their failed, violated, and unenforceable ATR Agreements that makes a mockery of their advocacy for the ATRs and make them "second class citizens".

Tweed's bloated Bureaucracy, Consultant contracts, and Technology, while they refuse to stop principals from violating the toothless "ATR Agreement".

I can only hope that our union does their job and realize that they need to include ATRs in their committee and make sure the "ATR Agreement" is enforced.

More Evidence That Mayor Bloomberg's & Chancellor Joel Klein's Education Policy Is A Failure. Look At The 2-Year College "Dropout Rate"!

2011-11-22T16:07:00.011-05:00

There is a growing body of evidence that the Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott Administration has failed the New York City Public School students. The latest news is the publishing of the two year community college "dropout rate" of New York City students. According to the Wall Street Journal an astounding 51% of the New York City students "dropped out" and only 28% have attained either an Associate of Bachelor degree. Image, that a majority of New York City students entering the two year community colleges "dropped out"!

When you place the two year community college "dropout rate" with the increase in students needing "triple remediation" (22.6%) and the explosion of "credit recovery programs", many of these programs were bogus, that artificially raised the New York City graduation rate, it is very obvious that the New York City students are unprepared for the real world after high school. This is evident with the low "college readiness" grades and is really the reason that the majority of students entering the community colleges dropout.

Combine all the above statistics with the widening income/racial academic achievement gap and you can see the Administration's Education policy is all "smoke and mirrors". In other words, a bunch of lies.

In summary, the community college "dropout rate" is just the latest piece of evidence to show that the Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott Administration's effort to improve the New York City Public School System is a failure and a fraud "Children First"? Not in this reality.

The DOE and The UFT Have Made The "ATR Agreement" A Joke As Principals Refuse To Hire ATRs For Their Vacancies And Are Not Punished For It.

2011-11-20T15:46:00.014-05:00

Here we are approaching Thanksgiving and principals still fail to fill the many vacancies, hidden or advertised, that are available in the New York City Public School System. How does the failure to fill vacancies, hidden or not, help the children? It doesn't of course. In my travels I have found a minimum of eight vacancies in the schools I was assigned to. Of course, the union's position is "did I report them to the District Rep"? The answer is I did in my third school and nothing came of it. As for the other schools, I made sure that Chapter Leaders did report it to the District Rep. What has come from that? Nothing! Absolutely nothing! As one Chapter Leader told me "what is the use of reporting school vacancies when the union is doing nothing with it"?

With much fanfare the DOE and UFT came up with an "ATR Agreement" that would require principals to hire ATRs for their vacancies. Yeah, right, and I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you if you really believe this. Instead of hiring ATRs for their vacancies, the principals simply ignore the "ATR Agreement". Let's look at the many examples of what high school principals do as to not to hire an ATR.

Flushing High School Principal hires a day-to-day substitute who is not certified in Earth Science to teach five Regents classes.

August Martin High school fails to hire a Social Studies Teacher for their vacancy.

Long Island City High School refuses to fill many vacancies. Here, here, and here.

Fredrick Douglas Academy VI in Far Rockaway does not hire an English teacher.

Metropolitan High School ignores student complaints about not hiring a Chemistry teacher and apparently uses a Special Education teacher to teach Physics.

Apparently the Principal at Queens High School of Teaching tries to hire a "newbie" Earth Science teacher by using Crag's list.

I am sure there are many more egregious examples of principals refusing to follow the "ATR Agreement" and not hire an ATR but these are the ones either I personally knew about or read it from blogs and news media. For example, I heard from another ATR that claimed an elementary school Principal had bragged how she has a Special Education ATR cover a class for the year without the school being required to pay for the ATR. Another ATR told me of a middle school Principal who refused to hire a Math ATR and has a day-to-day sub covering the Math position. I am sure there are numerous stories of the "ATR Agreement" and nothing appears to be done about it.

The reality is that the "ATR Agreement" is another case of the union negotiating with the DOE an unenforceable and violated agreement that the union fails to ensure the DOE abides by. How easy it would be for the union leadership to bring up the numerous violations of the agreement to the mass media and embarrass the DOE in requiring principals to follow the "ATR Agreement" or suffer the consequences that the DOE can enforce. Furthermore, the union can easily show that the principals failure to abide by the "ATR Agreement" is hurting the children and contrary to the DOE's "children first" policy. Instead the union appears to be silent on the issue. Why? I previously wrote about the lack of action and information about what is happening in the DOE/UFT Joint Oversight Committee meetings. Why the secrecy and the lack of transparency?

I can only assume that both the DOE and UFT wish that the ATR situation would just disappear but they can't since both the DOE and UFT created the ATR crisis in the first palace. Therefore, both the DOE and UFT treat the ATRs as second class citizens. Sure, they both claim that they want the ATRs to have their own classrooms but "actions speak louder than words". The actions are the ridiculous DOE algorithm that randomly sends ATRs weekly to different schools in the District and the failure to hold principals "accountable" for their willful failure to abide by the "ATR Agreement". The only way the ATR issue disappears is if the DOE requires Principals to hire ATRS and hold firm on the City "job freeze", no other solution is possible without negotiating a new contract which is not going to happen until Mayor Bloomberg and Dennis Walcott are replaced in 2014.

The DOE Continues Their Effort To Destroy The Remaining Large Comprehensive High Schools. However, The Small Schools Replacing Them Are Failing!

2011-11-18T19:27:00.009-05:00

At one time the pride and joy of the New York Public School System was the large comprehensive high schools. Only the best principals and teachers found their way to these schools and the majestic buildings that housed them.These schools not only had a full menu of academic courses but also included a wide range of electives, clubs, and extracurricular activities. Almost every Advanced Placement course could be found in these schools and academic achievement associated with these schools can be found in the graduates that have become leaders of the present generation. These schools operated as a "home away from home" for the students. Then came Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Joel Klein who had declared war on the large comprehensive schools and are winning that war.

The hallmark of the Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott Administration was to close the large comprehensive schools and open up small themed or charter schools to replace them. First, the Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott Administration started the propaganda offensive by claiming that the large comprehensive schools as "dropout factories". To ensure that the statistics verified their propaganda, they dumped increasing numbers of "English Language Learners" and "Special Education" students into the targeted schools. To further make their point, the recently opened small schools were allowed to exclude the "English Language Learners" and "Special Education" students for the first two years and were allowed to selectively exclude other students who had academic, attendance, and behavioral problems. This allowed the Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott Administration to claim that their education reform was working.

The Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott Administration claimed that "small learning communities" were the wave of the future in education. These small schools could supply individual attention to struggling students and give a sense of community to the school. Given everything else being equal, there is some truth to it. However, the reality is quite different. The small schools opened by the DOE were usually lead by a "Leadership Academy Principal" with little or no classroom experience and an inexperienced staff usually populated by "Newbie" and untenured teachers. These teachers lacked classroom management skills and curriculum knowledge. To make matters worse, the class sizes were as large as what was in the large comprehensive schools they replaced. Look what happened to Erasmus High School. They closed it down due to poor performance and made four small schools out of it. They all failed and replaced by other failing small schools. Left unsaid, is that small schools have limited, if any electives, few extracurricular activities, and no Advanced Placement courses. One of the biggest complaints by students who go to these small schools are the very limited courses given by the schools.

Unfortunately, this has not stopped the Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott onslaught on destroying the large comprehensive high schools. Even the few remaining "quality schools" in Northeastern Queens (Bayside, Cordozo, & Francis Lewis) have seen a doubling of students with Individual Education Plans (IEPs). In other words a doubling of the amount of "Special Education" students. Eventually, as there will be few remaining large comprehensive high schools, the small schools will increasingly compete for students. This is already happening in the Bronx and Brooklyn. These small schools are now required to accept every applicant to keep their numbers up and their education success is now simply "smoke and mirrors". Look at the poor "college readiness" rates the NYC students have and it is even worse for the small schools.

The bottom line is that the Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott Administration's small school policy is a failure but the damage to the few remaining large comprehensive high schools is everlasting and that is a shame.

Even New York State Questions The Bogus Graduation Rates And How The NYC High Schools Are Using "Credit Recovery" Programs Inappropriately.

2011-11-16T14:06:00.006-05:00

My, my. New York State Commissioner John King has finally and publicly questioned the NYC graduation rate and said that the abuse of "credit recovery" programs appears to be the main reason for the improved graduation rates. In fact, Commissioner King stated the following:

‘Hey, do this computer program for 10 hours, write me a five-page paper and I’ll check it off that you passed,’ ” State Education Commissioner John King told The Post.

Interestingly, the DOE failed to defend the increased graduation rates like it usually does, in the New York Post article . The DOE spokesman even agreed with the State that some principals might have abused the "credit recovery" program to increase their graduation rates. The City did an audit of 60 schools that have unusually large "credit recovery" programs and it should be available soon. Given that the DOE did not defend the use of "credit recovery", I suspect the numbers do show some principals artificially raised their graduation rate by abusing the "credit recovery" program. Remember these outrageous examples Here, Here, and Here just to name a few.

I believe that finally, the State correctly interpreted the failure of the majority of NYC students to meet the "college and career readiness" standards they developed. Therefore, this brings into question the validity of the graduation rates and the amount and quality of the "credit recovery" programs used to graduate students from the NYC high schools. It should be very interesting when the DOE actually publishes the 60 school audit on the use of "credit recovery" and their graduation rates. I am certainly interested.

Who Are The People On The Joint Oversight Committee And Why Didn't The UFT Put An ATR On It?

2011-11-14T07:34:00.013-05:00

The ATR Agreement that was signed by the DOE and UFT as part of the deal not to layoff the "newbie teachers" (like the Mayor would have really done that) has a section that requires that the two parties meet twice a term to determine if the Agreement is actually working and whether there are abuses to the ATR assignment process. In typical UFT fashion of claiming that a "lemon is really lemonade" the ATR Agreement is working as they cheer that 228 of the ATRs took provisional (not permanent) positions in the NYC school system. Left unsaid is that still leaves 1,200 ATRs going from school to school weekly, mostly senior teachers and that is what the union calls success?

The question is who is on the Joint Oversight Committee? Is it Michael Mendel? Amy Arundell? Leo Casey? (please let this be no). Who? How about the DOE? Andrew Gordon? Who else? Who cares? Well I care. First, why is there not an ATR on the Joint Oversight Committee? You would think that first hand knowledge of how the ATR Agreement is really working would be sought after by both the DOE and union? However,, the union chose not to put an ATR on the committee since they don't want to hear the inconvenient truth of the failure it is. You wouldn't want real information to be given to the affected members would you?

Every time the ATRs complain about how the union does not protect them, the unions answer is always the same. "We protected your job" . Unfortunately, the truth is the union aided and abetted the DOE in causing and perpetuating the ATR crises. Let's look how this happened.

First, the union agreed to the ATRs in the infamous 2005 contract that eliminating excessing and bumping and allowed principals to hire from the outside. Second, the union failed to challenge the Chancellor and allowed Joel Klein to demonize the ATRs in his famous 2006 memo to principals not to hire them because they are "lazy and bad teachers". Third, the union allowed the DOE to drop the "job freeze"during the summer hiring season to ensure the few ATRs would be given an opportunity to interview for positions. Fourth, the UFT bought into the DOE propaganda that their algorithm would maximize and match schools with vacancies and ATRs. In reality the algorithm is a fraud and some teachers were assigned to schools that didn't even have their subject area! The DOE algorithm simply randomizes the ATR with the schools in their district and does not take into account potential matches. Finally, many principals are either hiding or not filling their vacancies and the UFT does nothing about it. Some District Reps have been diligent in reporting these vacancies to the leadership, while others don't. Regardless, the leadership at the UFT appears not to be too interested in pursuing principals for their failure to either fill their vacancies or using day-to-day subs in violation of the ATR Agreement. Here is one example. Notice how the union's newspaper, The New York Teacher, seems never to have articles about the ATRs? I guess "out of sight, out of mind".

I believe the UFT suffers from the same lack of transparency as the DOE does and this secrecy and disinformation is not in the members interest, especially the ATRs., It is the responsibility of the two parties to provide the following information to the affected members.

Names of the people on the Joint Oversight Committee
Issues discussed
Agreements reached
Items not resolved
Numbers of ATRs placed using the DOE algorithm

Many of us want our own classroom. However, this is extremely difficult when the union allows the DOE to abuse and use the ATRs as they see fit. To claim the ATR Agreement is working is pure disinformation, a disgrace to the ATRs and a disservice to the students. I thought it was "children first...Always". I guess I was wrong.

The Disgraceful Disconnect Between The DOE's School Progress Reports And The NYS List Of Failing Schools Is Exposed By The Latest Data.

2011-11-12T14:13:00.006-05:00

Last week New York State came out with a list of "failing schools" in NYC and of the approximately 1700 schools in the NYC system, an astounding 38% were found failing. Yes, 640 schools are "failing their students". If that doesn't surprise you how about this troubling statistic? over 200 of the schools the State found "failing their students", received either an "A" or "B" on the DOE's yearly progress report. Unbelievable, but true.

To make matters worse, 350 new schools were added to the "failing schools" list and an astounding 180 of those schools received either an "A" or "B", only 12 schools were taken off the list this year. In addition, the New York State Regents Chancellor, Meryl Tisch has criticized the DOE for closing schools and allowing the "warehousing of students", especially in the remaining large comprehensive high schools by claiming these unlucky students don't have a shot of succeeding. She went on further by citing her visit to Automotive High School where only 1% were found to be "college and career ready".

The Mayor disagrees with the New York State Regents Chancellor by bringing up the same old song of the bogus graduation rate and closing schools that fail. However, seeing is believing and the State Regents Chancellor saw students not learning due to their behaviors, students wandering in the hallways during class time, and many students were missing from the classroom.

It is a pity when even the New York State Regents Chancellor realizes that the Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott Administration has failed the children in their ongoing "children last" polices.

The "Numb Nuts" At The DOE Adds More Responsibility & Paperwork To Teachers By Now Requiring Them To Report Child Abuse Directly To ACS.

2011-11-10T17:46:00.008-05:00

The "numb nuts" at the DOE has added yet more responsibility and paperwork and possibly putting teachers "at risk" by now requiring that teachers report any suspicion of child abuse directly to New York City Administration for Children Services (ACS). While teachers have always been "Mandated Reporters" when it came to suspicion of child abuse, it was the Guidance Counselors who did the interview and determined if ACS should be informed. Remember, Guidance Counselors are trained to talk to the students about potential abuse not teachers. Therefore, it made sense to let the trained personnel to interview the student and make the proper assessment whether to bring in the ACS investigator.

Now the DOE has decided that untrained and unqualified teachers should do the initial oral report, get a call ID number, and file a written report (LDSS 2221-A) within 72 hours of suspected child abuse or neglect. Furthermore, this report includes the name, title, and contact information of every staff person who is believed to have direct knowledge of the allegations in the report. The DOE then threatens teachers by claiming that failure to report suspect child abuse could result in disciplinary action.

While I understand we must protect children from abuse and neglect, many teachers are not qualified to evaluate child abuse. We are not trained in identifying abuse or neglect, except for taking a three hour course, that may have been taken a decade ago. By contrast Guidance Counselors are trained to evaluate abuse and neglect and their offices are set up for privacy, a phone on their desk, and time to talk to children one-on-one. By contrast, when can teachers make time to talk to the child one-on-one? Unlike Guidance Counselors, teachers have no private offices with phones and have classroom duties. Teachers work in rooms with up to 34 students and privacy is not available to many of them. Worse, even if you can find the private area to speak to the student when does the teacher have the time to call ACS and write a written report? At home? during lunch? Maybe during the weekend but you better do it within 72 hours or else!

I can only say that the "numb nuts" at the DOE obviously didn't think this out and have not only increased teacher responsibility and paperwork but puts those very teachers "at risk" for disciplinary action if they fail to detect abuse or neglect because they are not trained in identifying these in children. I hope the union can convince the DOE that this is unsound policy and that the DOE should let the experts, the Guidance Counselors determine whether students are being abused or neglected not teachers. Their job is hard enough without he extra responsibility and paperwork associated with this unfair and unfortunate change in reporting child abuse and neglect.

The "Restart/Transformation" Schools Are Shortchanging The Students By Not Giving Them A Proper Science Education.

2011-11-08T18:05:00.009-05:00

I have been to three "Restart" Schools this school year and one of my ATR friends have been to a "Transformation" school and we both found that the four schools are shortchanging the students by not providing a proper science education and jeopardizing their ability to obtain a "Regents Diploma".

All four schools only give four, not five classes of science weekly. These schools shortchange the students who take Science by one class weekly. This means that more pressure is put on the teachers to keep the students on task since the Science curriculum is based upon five classes weekly, plus a laboratory period. This requires that enrichment lessons to make science more interesting has to be abandoned as the teachers strain to fit five days of work into four, not an educationally sound plan. Especially for struggling students. Worse yet, many of the teachers teaching Earth Science, the second Science needed to get a High School diploma, are not certified in the subject. Many of the Science teachers teaching Earth Science are Living Environment teachers and are required to teach the Earth Science classes which is not educationally fair to the students. Especially, the ones who want the more valuable Regents diploma. Furthermore, all these schools appear to have vacancies, either hidden or announced and have failed to fill them. The question is why?

You might ask why would the "Restart/Transformation" schools shortchange the Science students and not fill their other vacancies? Don't they need to show academic improvement to survive? Wouldn't extra teachers help student academic achievement? You would think so. wouldn't you? However, it is really about the budget for these principals. First, by shortchanging the students one class weekly, the school does not have to hire two Science teachers and by having uncertified Science teachers teaching Earth Science, they don't have to hire hard to find Earth Science teachers who tend to be highly paid. The schools know that they only need to achieve a 60% graduation rate and reduce the dropout rate by 5% to meet the federal funding requirements so if the students are failing their courses, just give them "credit recovery programs" for the last month to get them to pass and not dropout. Knowledge, what knowledge? Who cares if these students are not "career or college ready"? That's society's problem. For the school it is meeting the 60% graduation rate and reducing the dropout rate by 5% by any means possible.

As for the long-term future of these students? It is not the school's problem once they award the academically challenged students their bogus diplomas. "Children last. Always".

If You Don't Believe That Principals Are Trying To Get Around Hiring ATRs For Their Vacancies And Long-Term Leave Positions Then Just Read This!

2011-11-07T20:22:00.005-05:00

A friend of mine found an advertisement on Craigslist from a high school in District 26/77 in Bellerose Queens and if you have any doubts what principals are doing about hiring ATRs to fill positions? This advertisement should put this to rest.

The position is a 9th grade Earth Science long-term leave replacement and notice it talks about the UFT collective bargaining agreement. It would appear that the Principal is trying to get around the hiring freeze by any means possible. You can read the advertisement Here.

Another ATR Agreement that the DOE violates at will and the union does nothing about it.

Is This Really Something To Cheer About As One Out Of Every Ten ATRs Have Been Provisionally Placed For The School Year?

2011-11-05T09:37:00.010-04:00

The latest statistics supplied by the DOE via Gotham Schools, shows that 10% of the ATRs have found provisional (not permanent) placements in schools throughout New York City. This leaves approximately 1,200 ATRs who are forced to move weekly to different schools. Interestingly, the longer term ATRs had less success in finding a long-term placement, with only 4.4% long-term ATRs were able to find a position for the school year. It would seem that principals were not interested in the ATRs that had been in the pool over a year and is similar to employers who don't want to hire the long term unemployed as if there is something wrong with them.

The real question is the information behind the statistics that the DOE has but has not made available. Here is the information that needs to be given to determine who is being offered positions and who are not.

What is the average age of the ATRs selected by the schools when compared to the age of the entire ATR pool?

What is the average salary of the ATRs selected by the schools when compared to the salary of the entire ATR pool?

How many years of experience did the ATRs selected by the schools have when compared to the experience of he entire ATR pool?

In addition, how many of those ATRs panicked and settled for positions in schools that have a history of high teacher turnover, terrible Administration, are restart/transformation schools or schools outside their District or Borough?. Finally, the question that still has not bee addressed by either the DOE and UFT is the failure of principals to fill their vacancies with certified teachers in the subject area.

The statistics are nice but it's the information behind the statistics that is needed to adequately determine what is really going on in the ATR hiring process.

My Interview With Students "Alex and Andrea" In a Class That Has No Teacher But Is Not Listed As A "Vacancy".

2011-11-02T18:42:00.005-04:00

I found myself covering a group of classes that has not had a stable teacher since school started. What is bad is that this class ends with a Regents in June and the students are starting to realize that time is running out on them. They complained to me that they have rotating teachers, probably ATRs, and two of the classes have subject teachers who are given coverages and don't seem to care about them. What is worse is that this class and the others in the group are not considered a vacancy according to the school!

I sat down with two students "Alex & Andrea", not their real names, and asked them how they felt about the situation of having no stable teacher for their classes. Alex spoke first and said that when the school year started the Principal came in and told the class that the teacher who will be guiding you will be leaving the school in October (probably an ATR) and I am hiring a teacher who will be the permanent teacher for the year. During October the teacher disappeared and we were given teachers weekly (definitely ATRs). During this time four people were brought into our class to do a demonstration lesson. The first was a middle aged man who really knew how to teach, he got us involved in the lesson and the class really liked him but alas, he never came back. The next two were women and both did not connect with us. The class found both women boring and they also never came back. The final teacher was a young man who did a poor job with the class. He tried to get us to participate and we would have if we understood what he was talking about. He spoke above us and his demonstration was the poorest of the four. However, we were desperate for a teacher and were happy when rumors spread that they hired the teacher. Unfortunately, he also never came back. Someone said the Principal could not hire him. My guess either he was not certified or the Principal could not get the DOE to waive the hiring freeze.

At this point "Andrea" spoke and said that her mother came to the school to talk to the Principal about her daughter's class not having a teacher. The Principal assured Andrea's mother that the class has certified teachers giving instruction and that the school was working on assigning a teacher permanently to the class. Andrea told her mother that the Principal is lying. that most of the teachers require them to read a few pages and do the questions. The teachers offer no actual instruction. Their homework is never collected and some teachers give them dittos that have little academic merit. She also said that they have not had even one test yet! She seemed very upset as she told me her story and wanted to know who should her mother talk to since talking to the Principal is not the answer. My response was that she should email and call the Chancellor and ask him what is being done for her daughter's class?

Let's hope that "Alex and Andrea" actually gets a teacher and all other "Alexs and Andreas" who are student victims of principals who refuse to fill their vacancies. Shame on these principals and shame on the DOE and UFT for knowing about these secret vacancies and not acting to correct the problem.

Children first. Always is just a sick joke.

Mayor Bloomberg Offers Only "Tricks" And No "Treats" To The New York City Schools This Halloween.

2011-10-31T16:26:00.009-04:00

Here we are, Halloween 2011, and Mayor Bloomberg has presented the New York City Public Schools with more "tricks" in the form of budget cuts. Bringing the total cuts to the schools averaging 21.7% by the start of the 2011-12 school year. The Mayor once thought that he would go down as the "Education Mayor". However, even he now realizes that his so-called advances in student academic progress was all "smoke and mirrors". Now it seems he wants to starve the New York City Public Schools of resources, especially for the classroom and find ways to cut staff by any means possible.

Let's list some of the devastating changes in the last few years in the schools since the Mayor has taken charge of the schools.

An additional 8% budget cut on top of a 13.7% reduction in the last three years.

Largest class sizes in a decade.

The elimination of 7,000 teaching positions since 2008 and more to come.

Laying off 1,179 school aides in the last few years who are necessary to run the schools and help the most vulnerable of children.

No teachers' choice and less resources for the classroom.

A more hostile classroom environment with increased paperwork & duties.

Billions on worthless technology that are useless in the classroom. (ARIS & SESIS).

Closing of schools and being replaced by privately funded Charters.

A widening racial/income academic achievement gap since 2005.

Failure to properly educate students. Only 21% of college graduates are ready for college or careers.

Only 46% of high school graduates attend college. In addition, an astounding 22.6% of high school graduates going to college needed triple remediation.

Yes, this is the same Mayor who was quoted as saying "teaching experience does not count". Now he has made his pet poodle, the Chancellor of the New York City Public Schools who on the Mayor's orders will shit on the schools. With this Mayor it is "children last". Always.

Will The DOE & UFT Do Anything About Principals Who Are Not Filling Their Vacancies With Qualified Teachers In The Subject Area? Don't Count On It.

2011-10-29T14:29:00.020-04:00

More and more information is being sent to the UFT about principals who refuse to fill or hide their vacancies because they one, do not want to hire ATRs and two, they want to save money by hiring day-to-day substitute teachers or give teachers coverages to cover the classes. Other principals are simply using the weekly ATRs to cover the classes. In any case, this is not good for the students since they have unqualified subs running the class or tired teachers nd ATRs who are forced to cover the class on a temporary basis. This "children last" policy is best applied to the outrageous behavior by a Principal can be found in the NY1 news article about Long Island City High School which has five vacancies that have not been filled and has caused an uproar among students, parents, and teachers. A NY1 follow-up story appears Here and the New York Times story Here.

Yet despite the rising clamor by Chapter Leaders, ATRs, and appointed teachers for the union to do something about this serious situation that is hurting the students in these uncovered classes, the union leadership is strangely quiet about attacking the vacancy issue. In fact, the union leadership reminds me of the three monkeys "Hear no evil"' speak no evil" and "see no evil". Here we have anywhere between 1,100 to as much as 2,000 ATRs in the system that are being wasted in a totally useless weekly assignment from school to school while vacancies are not being properly filled by principals.

Both the DOE & UFT have apparently put their collective heads in the ground hoping to ignore this problem and wishing it will just disappear. However, even the news media are starting to sniff around on why students don't have qualified teachers and it is up to the union leadership to stop being a monkey or an ostrich and do what is right for the students and make sure every vacancy is being covered by a certified teacher in their subject area. No other solution is acceptable since it is "children first". Always!

The DOE Assignment Algorithm Is Simply A Fraud And Our Union Actually Bought The DOE Line, "Hook, Line, & Sinker"!

2011-10-27T16:49:00.007-04:00

Now that I am going to my fifth school and have already contact the Administration to see if they have a vacancy at the school in my subject area, they do not. I can safely say that the $4 million dollar ATR algorithm developed by the DOE is a failure. It is very obvious to me that the DOE algorithm simply randomizes the ATR's schedule within the District's schools without any thought of which schools are the best fit for the ATR. In my case, my first ATR assignment was in a school that didn't teach my subject! What is most disturbing is that our union claimed that the DOE algorithm was developed with the goal of matching the ATR with the proper schools that have vacancies in their field. It is very obvious to me that THE UNION LIED TO US!

It is bad enough that the DOE treats the ATRs as "second class citizens" and at the same time refuses to punish principals who hide vacancies which one ATR claims that the school she is in has five. But it is worse when our union leadership lies to us by telling us the DOE algorithm was well thought out and it is a great chance for ATRs to obtain a position. Worse is the union's inaction and lack of concern that principals are hiding their vacancies. In one outlandish case that I am personalty acquainted with the Principal refused to hire an ATR in a hard to place subject, despite the Assistant Principal's request to hire the ATR. Instead the principal hired a day-to-day sub who is not certified in the subject area. Just another outrageous example of "children last".

Sure the union will tell you how ATRs are offered vacancies but what they won't tell you are the vacancies are in the:

"Worst schools with notoriously high teacher turnover".
"Bad school administrations that are on the "do not apply" list.
Low poverty schools who are going through restart or transformation.

Unfortunately, the union's propaganda machine continues to make the ATR crises into lemonade and it is not working. We ATRs see through the union's deception and it still is a lemon, sour taste and all. Tthe union needs to change their uncaring ways and at a minimum, do the following:

Publicize the plight of the ATR and how the DOE algorithm is a failure.
Pressure the DOE in making sure principals are filling their vacancies.
Press conferences that not placing ATRs in vacancies is contrary to the DOE's "children first" policy.

Finally, the union's plan to have the Chapter Leaders greet the ATRs is a complete failure. In my case, I only met two Chapter Leaders in the four schools I have been sent to and I actually had to seek out one who was very reluctant to help me. It is one thing for the DOE to abuse the ATRs but it is another when our own union fails to protect our rights.

Mayor Bloomberg Do You Still Claim To Be The "Education Mayor" After The Terrible College Remediation Results Were Published?

2011-10-25T15:32:00.010-04:00

Well, the Mayor's claim that he will go down as the "Education Mayor" seems like a fantasy as even more data shows that New York City high school graduates who attend college needs more and more remediation before taking legitimate college courses. It is bad enough that 79% of the entering freshmen need remediation in at least one course but an astounding 22.6% need triple remediation in reading, writing, and Math, unbelievable but true. This triple remediation level has risen 7.2% since 2005 when it was 15.4%. This dramatic rise in students needing triple remediation appears to correlate with the rising high school graduation rate and associated with the increased use of questionable "credit recovery programs". Remember, this does not include those high school graduates who never bothered to attend college.

Furthermore, only 46% of all graduating high school students actually enrolled in college. That means the majority of high school graduates never go to college according to the New York Daily News. The newspaper actual quoted the Mayor in defending the poor results in which he said the following:

"Do every one of our 1.1 million kids that go to New York City public schools get a great education?" Mayor Bloomberg asked rhetorically. "No, but that is our objective, and we're going to keep working until we get there."

What a crock of shit! What the Mayor should have said is: "We are just trying to increase the High School graduation rate by any means possible. Be it bogus "credit recovery", phony credits, and changing grades. What ever works".

The statistics really show that the Bloomberg/Klein/Black/Walcott era has been a dismal failure and the Daily News editorial states it best. "Flunking Grades". How about their "accountability" for failing the New York City school children? Oh, I forgot "accountability" is only for the educators not the people at Tweed and City Hall where "children last" runs supreme.

Do You Know Know Your Rights As An ATR?

2011-10-22T08:46:00.019-04:00

There seems to be some confusion on what the rights of the ATRs are. Most schools appear to be using the ATRs appropriately as teachers in a classroom or doing circular six duties that other teachers do. However, some schools are making ATRs do the work of school aides or doing clerical work which violates the teacher contract. A few schools are requiring the ATRs to do all day hall duty or Cafeteria duty which would also appear to violate the contract. Most Chapter Leader (CL) have failed to meet with the ATRs despite union assurances that the CLs were told to greet the ATR (In my first three schools I met only one, my first school) and despite union assurances, having CLs represent the weekly ATR does not appear to be working. My District Representative (DR) always seems to be on the run and it is difficult to contact him on a timely basis. That brings up the question what are the ATR's rights when showing up to a school for a weekly assignment? This post is an attempt to answer those questions.

First and foremost, ATRs are teachers and can only do duties assigned to teachers! They should not be doing the job of school aides or clerical work unless the school's appointed teachers are doing such duties, subject to the School Based Option (SBO). That is why the ATR must make immediate contact with the CL to ensure that the Administration does not abuse the ATR.

Second, the ATRs must be given a lunch and a prep period and, if possible, be given a bathroom key.

Third, the school the ATR is assigned to cannot loan the ATR out to other schools without written authorization from Central to the ATR.

Fourth, In mufti-session schools the ATR must be assigned to one session only!

Fifth, an ATR can refuse a "mandated interview" outside their district by simply emailing the reply to the person who sent the email or the Principal of the school. Do not let the words "mandated interview" or "as an ATR you must attend". These are just scare tactics and if it is outside the District you have the right to refuse to go. However, if it is in your District you are required to attend.

Sixth, if a Principal offers you a long-term or vacant position and you do not believe it is a "good fit" for whatever reason, you have the right to refuse the offer and proceed to the next weekly assignment. Remember, you are not required to accept a long term or vacant position in a school that you are uncomfortable in, just say no thank you.

Seventh, if you are asked to cover an additional class, you should make sure that the school pays you for the coverage. Do not let them claim that you are required to give them a "free coverage". Inform the school that you already did a "free coverage" at a previous school and you would only be too happy to cover an additional class as a paid coverage and "get it in writing"!

Eighth, yes, in theory you can be observed for classroom management issues even if you are not teaching in your subject area. However, it is highly unlikely that an Administrator will bother to observe you if you are there only a week. It would be too much trouble to observe the ATR, write up an observation, and meet with the ATR. Certainly the observation will not be a formal one where a pre-conference meeting is required. Furthermore, your file is probably in the last school you had an appointed position in so what does the Administrator do with the observation?

Ninth, you can go back to the school you were excessed from for a weekly assignment. Furthermore, due to DOE incompetence, even teachers who were charged and removed from schools can end up back in those schools for a weekly assignment.

Finally, the school must give the ATR a list of the school rules that students must abide by, be it a dress code, use of cellphones, or discipline codes. Lack of knowledge about school rules can put an ATR in a position that could lead to disciplinary action. Take it upon yourself to contact the CL about the school rules.

Remember ATRs are teachers and can only preform duties that are assigned to the appointed teachers in the school that the ATR is assigned to. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of the school's administrators to provide meaningful lessons to the ATRs to give to the students. It is not the responsibility of the weekly ATRs to develop lessons for the class!

More information about the rights of the ATR can be found in the "ATR Agreement". By the way if I have missed any ATR rights please feel free to let me know in the comment section of this post. Knowledge is power and the more we know the more powerful we become.

Principals Are Hiding & Filling Vacancies With Non ATRs As They Attempt To Circumvent The "ATR Agreement". What Is The Union Doing About It?

2011-10-19T16:21:00.014-04:00

There is increasing anecdotal evidence that principals are either hiding or filling their vacancies with substitute teachers or requiring teachers in the school to cover (usually at per session rates) the otherwise uncovered classes. Complaints to the UFT leadership has been met with shrugs and indifference. Instead the UFT proudly announced that 100+ ATRs have been placed into long term positions (vacancies, or leaves).Yes, according to the UFT, a measly 5% of the 2,000 ATRS received a job tryout since the DOE's "ring around the rosy" started, using a selection algorithm that is next to worthless. However, many of the ATRs took positions in struggling schools out of their Borough where there is high teacher turnover rate. Therefore, unless the union publishes what schools and where (by Borough) these ATRs took positions, I am not impressed. I was offered seven jobs, three in Brooklyn and three in the Bronx. The one school in Queens that offered me a position is closing and is not a viable option. Since I am a Queens teacher, I expect to work in a stable Queens school. Therefore, if I was desperate and wanted to work in far and away Transfer schools, or travel for an hour or more, to other Boroughs I could have been part of the 100+ too! I do not call this a victory by any means.

The union inaction is appalling, a real pro active union would file formal complaints and expose the apparent Principal "hi jinks" surrounding the vacancies in their schools. Furthermore, why is the union allowing the principals to bring in substitute teachers to cover vacancies or long term leaves? Granted, the union has lived up to their promise in saving ATRs from the DOE ax. However, many ATRs are "quality teachers" and allowing the DOE and principals to abuse the "ATR Agreement" is unfair to the students who suffer from a lack of these "quality teachers". It is one thing for the DOE to practice "children last" polices but it is another for our union to aid and abed the DOE in this hurtful practice.

The GEM-ATR Committee has a list of proposals that all ATRs support and can be found here.

Chancellor Walcott's Six Month Grade IS A "F"

2011-10-17T18:20:00.010-04:00

It has been six months since Dennis Walcoot took over as Chancellor for the incompetent Cathie Black with promises to lower the overheated attacks between the teacher union, parents, and the DOE. He promised to listen to the parents, discuss civilly with the teachers' union on various issues and demand "accountability" from the DOE. Six months into his regime, the Mayor's poodle has failed to change any of the destructive polices of the Bloomberg/Klein Administration. True, he lowered the temperature a bit and listened to parent complaints but when it came to any real change, there was none whatsoever.

Chancellor Walcott's first speech was to support the Mayor's LIFO bill and to make it clear that he was not going to change direction and will follow the destructive deforms started by Joel Klein. While some people might say that six months is not enough time for the Chancellor to make his mark. I beg to differ. Dennis Walcott was Deputy Mayor for Education for the eight years and worked closely with Chancellor Joel Klein during his destructive Administration. Therefore, Chancellor Walcott came in with a working knowledge of the New York City Schools and a learning curve was not necessary. Let's look at why Chancellor Dennis Walcott gets a grade of "F".

Independence from the Mayor:

There is good reason that I call Chancellor Dennis Walcott " the Mayor's poodle". He has not deviated one iota from Mayor Bloomberg's misguided vision of what makes for a good education. The Mayor's legacy as the "Education Mayor" is just a sick joke with the ever widening racial/income achievement gap, low "college and career readiness rates", rising class sizes, reduced school staffs, and a bloated DOE Central Bureaucracy where high priced consultants and wasteful technology rule. Moreover, the Chancellor has supported the Mayor's actions to circumvent the union's "collective bargaining rights" and to support the layoff of 4,666 teachers!

Closing Schools/Charter Schools:

The Chancellor has continued the DOE's assault on the large comprehensive High Schools by closing them and has supported the Charter Schools at the expense of the neighborhood schools. This has resulted in an increase of ATRs to 2,000 and to make matters worse, lifted the hiring freeze for three months exacerbating the ATR crises.

Lack of Accountability:

Time and again the Chancellor claimed that he will make principals accountable for any cheating or bogus "credit recovery programs". However, to date, the Chancellor has been "all talk and no action". Even the New York Post has questioned the graduation rates. Where was Chancellor Walcott and his investigators when the New York Post exposed the phony credits given to students at Washington Irving High School? How come we haven't seen and results of the claims that the Chancellor made about investigating the various principals that teachers emailed him by way of Michael Goodwin? I know the investigations are ongoing ZZZZZZZZZ. Wake me up when those investigations are complete 1n 2014 when the new Chancellor arrives..

Technology Rules While Teachers Drool:

The DOE has imposed a $79 million dollar SESIS program on Special Education teachers that is a fiasco. Despite union pleas, the Chancellor and his subordinates at Tweed has refused to see that the program does not work without teachers spending extra time, either at home or at lunch just to keep up with this terrible program. The union has actually filed a PERB complaint and a grievance to stop the abusing of teachers that are required to work with the SESIS program.

Disconnect With Classroom Teachers:

Dennis Walcott seems not to understand what rising class sizes, lack of resources, and lack of student discipline does to classroom teaching and student academic achievement. He follows in Joel Klein's boots in blaming the student ills on the teachers and like his Mayor only wants the "best teachers". Of course the definition of "best" is young, controllable, and inexpensive.

Blaming Principals When It Was His Policy That Led To The Layoffs of 676 School Aides And Parent Coordinators:

Probably the most outrageous action by the Mayor's poodle was his laying off the lowest paid school staff despite DC37's attempts to come up with reasonable compromises. Rather than agree to furloughing them on school days when children were not present and a reduction in hours, similar to the accepted agreement with the Park's Department, the Chancellor refused to negotiate. To make matters worse he blamed the principals by claiming the principals had set their school budget and selected the people who were laid off. However, according to the principals union President, Ernest Logan, had the principals knew of the compromise, they would have found it preferable to the layoffs. Finally, under Walcott 30% of the Principal's unspent school funds must be returned to Tweed for their use. This year, the principals can only keep $44 per student, assuming they get a passing grade on the DOE's school progress repor, tany unspent funds over that figure will be sent back to Tweed. Good job Walcott as you continue to "rob Peter to pay Paul".

The bottom line is that Chancellor Dennis Walcott deserves a grade of "F".

The Union Should Prepare Their Own Survey Of Principal Effectiveness & Grades If They Really Care About Their Members.

2011-10-15T08:20:00.011-04:00

One of he most overlooked issues that has been under the media radar is the decreasing quality of the Administration at schools. Until the Bloomberg/Klein era most principals came up through the ranks with ten or more years of teaching experience and five years as an Assistant Principal. However, now we have the infamous "Leadership Academy Principals" with little or in some cases no teaching experience in the New York City Schools! The result is a reduction in the quality of the Administration when it comes to leadership of the school.

Now that it is becoming increasingly clear that Administration observations will become a very important part of the "teacher effectiveness evaluations". It is time to put the people who will be doing these evaluations, which could be 60% of the teacher grade, under review. My proposal would be that unions will issue an Administrator evaluation survey to all UFT represented staff at each and every school. These surveys will be comprehensive and include, but not limited to, the following items:

Leadership
Competency
Fairness
Budget Allocation
Accessibility
Respect
Unreported Violence

While these are just some general areas that the staff can rate the administrators on, I believe if the union leadership put their collective minds and our dues money to it, they can come up with a more detailed Administrative evaluation system.

The Principal evaluation report would be a counterbalance against vindictive and incompetent Principal observations in any teacher termination process under State law 3020-a. This could greatly help "level the playing field" at the teacher termination hearings. Moreover, by rating principals the union can identify those principals that should not be school leaders and publish a list to the media of these terrible principals. Furthermore, the list of "bad principals" will be given to all teachers who wish to transfer and bypass those schools. blogger jd2718 had the right idea in making a "do not apply" list of schools that teachers should stay clear of. The union should expand that list to all schools in the City and put the DOE on notice that the union will not tolerate bad administrators, especially principals. If the union really cares about its members, they must be pro active and put out a list of "bad principals" who received a "D" or "F" based upon their staff's evaluations. Anything less is a disservice to us all.

How Much Does Mayor Bloomberg Hate Teachers? This Much!

2011-10-12T15:46:00.008-04:00

To many teachers, Mayor Bloomberg has blamed the various ills of students on them. Not the dysfunctional parents, not the poverty or community, and certainly not the waste of money by the bloated Tweed Bureaucracy on high priced consultants and useless technology. His blaming the teachers was apparent when he tried to not only layoff 4,666 teachers but even tried to get the State to pass a bill that would make the layoffs permanent and those laid off could not get their jobs back even if the economy recovers. His hatred for teachers made him use all his influence to circumvent the teacher union's "collective bargaining rights" which failed of course. He even embarrassed himself by claiming experience does not count in teaching! Finally, he refused to follow the "City pattern" by unilaterally freezing teacher raises while giving the very same raises to all other unions.

All knowledgeable people know that the City's Finances are much better than the State's. However, Bloomberg's budget called for 6.3% of the teachers being laid off while the average Statewide School District only had a 3% layoff rate. Some people may claim that the New York City Schools have too many teachers. However, the reality is that New York City Schools have the largest class sizes in the State, yes the largest! Ranging from a low of 22.3 in Kindergarten to a high of 25.5 in fifth grade. The Middle School averaged 27.8 students per classroom and the High Schools averaged 27.5 students, based upon the 2010-2011 school year. With an additional 2,500 teachers leaving the classroom and not replaced, it is expected that the average class sizes will go up between 1.5 students (DOE estimate) to 3 students (UFT estimate). It will be very interesting what the "average class size" will really be for the 2011-12 school year.

Will the union negotiate with this Mayor? I certainly hope not since his only goal is to destroy the teacher union's power and make teaching in the New York City classroom as miserable as possible.

Are Principals Really Telling The Truth About Why Hiring A Senior Teacher Will Significantly Affect Their Budget? Probably Not.

2011-10-10T08:15:00.010-04:00

Time and again I have heard the same complaint from principals. " I would like to hire a senior teacher but I don't have the budget to do so". The question is were they telling the truth? For the last two years I truly believed them since the "fair student funding formula" imposed on schools by the Joel Klein Administration required that school budget reflect individual teacher salaries in calculating school budgets back in 2008. However, what was little known was that there was a "hold harmless" provision that delayed the use of individual teacher salaries in school budgets. Instead, the school budgets are based upon the baseline 2008-2009 school year "average teacher salary". This baseline, with adjustments for teacher raises, is still in effect and this means that in most cases hiring a senior teacher would only make a small difference in many school budgets. Let's look at some examples.

School "A" - Large Comprehensive High School:

The "average teacher salary" is $75,000 and there are 150 teachers in the school. A $50,000 a year teacher leaves and a $100,000 a year teacher is hired. How does it affect the school's teacher budget? Under the fully implemented "fair student funding formula" the school budget would need to come up with $50,000 dollars to hire the senior teacher. However, since it is based upon the "average teacher salary" the increase is calculated as follows:

$75,000(.9933) + $100,000(.0067) = $75,167 or a $167 increase for teachers in the school's budget!

School "B" - Mid Sized Middle School:

The "average teacher salary" is $70,000 and there are 80 teachers in the school. A $50,000 a year teacher leaves and a $100,000 a year teacher is hired. How does it affect the school's teacher budget? Under the fully implemented "fair student funding formula" the school budget would need to come up with $50,000 dollars to hire the senior teacher. However, since it is based upon the "average teacher salary" the increase is calculated as follows:

$70,000(.9875) + $100,000(.0125) = $70,375 or a $375 increase for teachers in the school's budget!

School "C" - Small School:

The "average teacher salary" is $50,000 and there are 25 teachers in the school. A $50,000 a year teacher leaves and a $100,000 a year teacher is hired. How does it affect the school's teacher budget? Under the fully implemented "fair student funding formula" the school budget would need to come up with $50,000 dollars to hire the senior teacher. However, since it is based upon the "average teacher salary" the increase is calculated as follows:

$50,000(.960 ) + $100,000(040) = $52,000 or a $2,000 increase for teachers in the school's budget!

As you can see, even in the small schools the hiring of a top salaried senior teacher is not a budget breaker. Therefore, the question becomes do principals really know how their school budgets really work? Or they do know how the budget really works and use the fully implemented "fair student funding formula" as an excuse not to have knowledgeable senior teachers in their schools by falsely claiming that they can't afford to hire them? The answer is probably both, depending on the school and whether the principals understand how their budget really works.

Remember, the DOE under Joel Klein had encouraged principals not to hire ATRs and called them "bad or lazy teachers". While Joel Klein is long gone, his propaganda resonated with the principals who think the hiring an ATR is like being dealt a "bad hand". This is especially true with the "Leadership Academy Principals" who have told from the time they went into the Leadership Academy that they should hire the "newbie teacher" who they can mold rather that somebody else's reject who is set in their ways.

Next time you hear from a Principal why he can't hire a senior teacher because of the school's budget, you now know it is because the Principal is ignorant of the budget process or putting his or her own requirements above what is best for the school's children. In either case it "children last" when it comes to the students they claim they are doing the best for.

The UFT Tried To Make "Lemonade Out Of A Lemon" But To The ATRs It Still Tasted Sour.

2011-10-07T19:06:00.023-04:00

The union's "dog and pony show" came to Queens on Thursday to explain to the over 100 ATRs why they should be thankful that the UFT had their backs. The UFT "dog and pony show" consisted of all the UFT District Reps,the Borough Rep, Rona Freiser, and the Queens Special Rep, Washington Sanchez, from UFT headquarters were Co-Staff Director Leroy Barr who kept order and Special Representative Amy Arundell, who explained the ATR agreement. Admittedly, Amy Arundell was very impressive as she discussed the ATR situation in detail and is obviously a rising star in the union (she has always cared about teachers and that is why she was a hero when it comes to teachers). They tried to make the lemon of the deal that forced ATRs in weekly placements as lemonade and a win for the ATRs as principals will be required to fill their vacancies with the ATRs. However, to the ATRs, including yours truly, it simply left a sour taste in our collective mouths.

The Union's View:

Ms Arundell explained that moving the ATRs week to week was to stop principals from using ATRs as "free help" to cover vacancies and then jettison them at year end rather than hiring them. Now, according to Ms. Arundell, principals will be forced either to provisionally hire the ATR on their budget, or the ATR will be sent to the next school. She also stated that an ATR does not have to take the provisional placement if they don't want to and would then move on to the next school the following week. In other words, the ATRs are simply "gypsies" that move from school to school weekly or as another ATR put it " 30 schools in 30 weeks" of the school year. She claimed it was a win-win for the ATRs. She also said that the DOE developed a computer algorithm that places teachers in schools that theoretically has a need for a teacher in the subject area is based upon the "best fit" and maximizes the chances for ATRs to gain a vacant position. Based upon what I see, this algorithm is simply a joke and in the first round I do not know of any ATRs that were actually offered positions. I, myself was put in a school that didn't even have my subject area in their curriculum! I guess it is garbage in, garbage out.

What was most interesting to me was what Amy Arundell said about the "fair student funding formula" and how principals were deliberately misusing it. According to Ms. Arundell the "fair student funding formula" has never been fully implemented and that the school budget is based upon the school's average teacher salaries of 2008, with adjustments for rising teacher salaries over the years, and not the actual salaries of the individual teacher. Ms. Arundell stated that many principals claim that they cannot hire senior teachers because they cost too much. However, many of these principals are either unaware that the "average teacher salary" is used in their school budgets or uses the confusion of the "fair student funding formula" implementation as an excuse not to hire senior teachers. Her attempts to talk to the DOE about this has been met with "principals have total control of their budget and are autonomous when it comes to hiring and personnel decisions". If Ms. Arundell is correct then a fraud has been perpetrated on teachers as principals have told various Chapter Leaders that the school's ever tightening budge cannot accommodate a senior teacher when in fact, hiring the senior teacher would result in the school's teaching budget to go up by a few hundred dollars! I will publish the calculations and how it really works in my next post.

Finally, Ms. Arundell admitted that weekly ATRs better have direct deposit because the DOE will not be able to transfer checks to the schools you have been sent to and that includes pay stubs. So much for the $900 million dollars in technology the DOE spends at the expense of the schools.

The ATR Response:

By contrast, many of the ATRs felt that they are being sacrificed and abused by the ATR Agreement. That means that the ATRs will need to beg for a bathroom key, experience parking and transportation problems, and an unfamiliarity with the school, its staff, students, and culture. In other words, the ATRs felt like "outsiders" with no real connection to the schools. The union's retort was we saved 4,600 jobs. The ATRs showed no faith in the DOE developed computer algorithm or with the imposition of the hiring freeze that more ATRs will actually be hired by the principals. When it was brought out that Mayor Bloomberg had no intention off laying off his cheap "newbie teachers" and bluffed the union to give in and allowed the DOE to make the ATRs life even more miserable by making them travel to a different school every week. The union's reaction was "We saved your jobs by fighting the Mayor's LIFO bill and not agreeing to a contract that the City wants with an ATR time limit". The response by the ATRs were low-level grumbling and disbelief. Almost every ATR in the room had their own personal horror story and injustice only to hear the union act as if everything was going fine was unbelievable and just added to the growing distrust and disconnect between the union and many of the ATRs.

Winners & Losers:

That brings me to the "winners and losers" in the ATR Agreement. Let's look at the winners first.

The Union: The UFT is a winner because they made sure that no teacher was laid off. Remember, the "newbies" pay the same dues as the ATRs do, so the union gets extra dues money. The union also claims victory because they stated that principals will be forced to hire ATRs in vacant positions, assuming it is a good fit for both the ATR and the Principal. We will see about that, so far this prediction has been shown to be untrue. The union is also a winner because they can claim they stood up to the Mayor and won (if you are not an ATR).

The DOE: The DOE is a winner because the schools can use the weekly ATRs as day to day subs and save Tweed money by not paying for both the ATR and a day to day substitute. The DOE is also a winner because a few ATRs will probably get hired by the schools or quit rather then continue the weekly Russian roulette of trying to get to and fitting into the various schools in their District. In either case they are off the DOE's payroll.

The losers are:

The Principals: The principals lose because they can no longer cover their vacancies with ATRs without picking up their salaries. The question is do the principals really understand this? It seems many principals don't or won't and even into mid-October many classes go uncovered by teachers certified in the subject area as principals have been reluctant to hire qualified ATRs from the ATR pool.

The ATRs: The ATRs lose because they are being treated as "Gypsies", going from school to school weekly without any expectations to put in roots in the school community. Furthermore, the ATRs will be treated as "outsiders" and be treated simply as an expendable "tool" by school administrators. In other words, the ATRs are simply warm bodies and glorified "baby sitters". Age and salary discrimination runs amok at the DOE and the ATRs bear the brunt of the very real ageism issue that the union chooses to ignore.

The Students: The biggest losers are the students who are caught in the middle between principals not filling their vacancies and a succession of weekly ATRs with no interest in bonding with the classes that they will not have the next week. In these classes the students will suffer academically, lack stability, and lose any discipline with the parade of weekly ATRs coming and going. Imagine what emotional trauma these students will experience with such an unstable situation? This is truly a "children last" situation that needs to be corrected as soon as possible.

I did not list everything that was discussed since others have already done that for the other Boroughs. Read what other Borough ATR meetings were like at NYC ATR here, here, and here.

Finally, I must appeal to my union and demand that they take action on two issues immediately. First, that the union needs to launch an advertizing campaign about how ATRs are "quality teachers" and that the DOE is wasting millions of dollars to demonize them rather than encourage principals to do what is right for the children in the classroom. Second, the union knows the vacancies in subject areas within the District and needs to take real action" to pressure principals in hiring ATRs to fill those positions as quickly as possible. The existing situation is unacceptable and intolerable.

Will The Bloomberg Administration's Hiring Freeze Be A "Game Changer" For Hiring ATRs Into Existing Vacancies?

2011-10-05T17:18:00.010-04:00

Yesterday, the Bloomberg Administration announced a total hiring freeze of new City employees as well as an across the board reduction of 2% for this fiscal year and an additional 6% cut next fiscal year. Apparently, this hiring freeze overrides the relaxation of the previous hiring freeze by the DOE over the summer. Moreover, the new citywide hiring freeze also applies to the so-called shortage areas of Physical Science, ESL, and Special education teachers, and principals can no longer request an exemption to hire an outside teacher. What is unknown is whether the hiring freeze will affect the new small schools that could recruit 40% of their teaching staff from the outside (almost all "newbie teachers") and the Chancellor's proposed middle school incentive that will replace 50% of the existing teaching force in the 50 targeted schools by using the entire "2012 recruiting class of "Teaching Fellows". The Chancellor's comments was reported in Gotham Schools , that the hiring freeze is total and no new staff can be hired from outside the DOE. Of course, let's see what happens during the summer of 2012 when the new schools hiring and the Chancellor's initiative goes into effect?

If we are to assume that the DOE will not allow any exceptions to the citywide hiring freeze (knowing the Mayor and his poodle, the Chancellor, an admittedly unlikely assumption, especially as the summer of 2012 approaches and look for a new LIFO bill from the Mayor) it may be a real "game changer" for the 2,000 ATRs. Already some "newbie teachers" are fleeing the classroom. In my friend's high school, two "Teaching Fellows" have already left the school leaving eight science classes uncovered and the Principal told my friend that he cannot find replacements for the classes. When my friend reminded him that there are ATRs who are Science teachers, the Principal frowned and said he might have no choice but hire from the ATR pool. With the hiring freeze, this scenario should be the rule with principals having little choice but to place ATRs in their vacancies.

The real question is whether the Bloomberg Administration will require the DOE to abide by the hiring freeze or will they allow the DOE to insert loopholes that make a hiring freeze meaningless. Only time will tell.

That leaves the union's role in this. The union most shake off their apathy about the ATR crises and demand, through the media, that all vacancies must be filled by ATRs to save money and ensure that a "quality teacher" is in the classroom. Furthermore, require that DOE to become fiscally responsible by cutting the Administrative bloat at Tweed and making sure that no outside consultants are hired during this time of fiscal constraints. It is up to our union to put the DOE's "feet to the fire" to ensure the dwindling resources are spent in the classroom and not on the already bloated Central Bureaucracy.

ATR Meetings Scheduled This Week. Please Go And Express Your Disappointment And Disapproval On The Union's Inaction Dealing With The ATR Crises.

2011-10-03T16:02:00.014-04:00

This week, starting today, in the Bronx, the UFT will be hosting a question and answer informational sessions with the almost 2,000 ATRs in the system. Realistically, the union set up these meetings to forestall any independent effort to bring the ATR travesty to the public's attention. Presently, the UFT inaction has embarrassed their members and alienated the ATRs that they are supposed to represent. While, I cannot tell you the union's actual agenda, you can bet they will say that the new ATR agreement was a win for the union and the ATRs since principals must place ATRs in vacant or long-term leave positions. Further, the union will proudly announce that no ATRs can be laid off. Finally, look for them to tell you how they saved the ATRs jobs by defeating Mayor Bloomberg's LIFO bill in Albany. Of course, the truth is very different. First, the ATR Agreement is an unenforceable farce and principals are still hiring "newbie teachers" to fill their vacancies and long term leave replacements. Even the New York City Comptroller's Office question the DOE about allowing principals to hire "newbie teachers" while more experienced ATRs were available. Second, under New York State Law, only the newest teachers with the least seniority ("newbies") could be laid off, not the ATRs. Finally, all New York State unions opposed Mayor Bloomberg's LIFO bill since it was an end around "collective bargaining" and would affect all unions down the road.

What should the ATRs be asking the union at these question and answer sessions? That is up to you but here is what I will be asking.

Why didn't the union object publicly to the DOE's decision to lift the hiring freeze?

Why not start an advertising campaign showing that the ATRs are "quality teachers" and that not hiring them hurts the students?

Why not file an age discrimination lawsuit with the AARP on the apparent ageism that is being practiced by the DOE?

Why didn't the union take the DOE to task about their ridiculous ATR "job fairs"?

Why didn't the union demand a continuation he hiring incentive for ATRs?

The GEM-ATR committee has issued a list of demands and you can find it on the NYC ATR blog. I agree with almost all of them as it states out the issues and resolutions that our union should be implementing and demanding from the DOE.

ATRs are "quality teachers" and using them as day-to-day subs are just a waste of talent.

Arnie Duncan's Legacy Is The Same As Joel Klein's. Failed Education Reforms And A Widening Income/Racial Achievement Gap As A Result Of Their Failures

2011-10-01T08:48:00.014-04:00

The University of Chicago did an extensive and long-term twenty year study on the Chicago Public Schools and found that the various education reforms had failed to improve public education. Most disturbingly, was an actual widening of the income/racial achievement gap during the Arnie Duncan "diversification" Administration. Yes the very same Arnie Duncan who is now the head of the Federal Department of Education and President Obama's basketball buddy. The Chicago study questioned the almost exclusive use of the State tests as the basis of student achievement and found that the State test was a poor indicator of student academic achievement.

The University of Chicago study found that over the twenty year study the Chicago elementary scores showed no improvement in Reading and only a marginal improvement in Math. In fact, the major improvements actually occurred in the higher achieving affluent neighborhood school, while the struggling high poverty neighborhood schools showed the least amount of progress. Interestingly, the constant education reform of test preparation did show some academic progress for the high schools. However, due to the "cut scores" on the State tests student academic achievement could not be easily identified and did not show up in the statistics.

The conclusion by the University of Chicago was that reliance on the State tests and "cut scores" along with continuous "test preparation" does not determine real academic achievement. Instead, the report came up with these items that were correlated with student academic achievement:

The consortium said that schools that showed growth were strong in the five pillars they had identified as being crucial to success — instructional leadership, adequate professional support, ambitious instruction, a good learning climate, and strong community and family ties.

It would seem that the legacy of the Arnie Duncan Administration is closely tied to the legacy of the Joel Klein Administration. Fuzzy math, over reliance on dubious State tests, constant test preparation, and worst of all a widening student income/racial academic achievement gap during their failed Administrations.

The Mayor's Poodle, Chancellor Dennis Walcott, Demostrates Why He Is Clueless About The Classroom.

2011-09-28T18:32:00.009-04:00

The Mayor's poodle, Chancellor Dennis Walcott, held a press conference where he stated that he will close 50 poorly preforming middle schools and replace them with Charter schools and new public schools. He will use the "turnaround model" which means replacing the leadership and 50% of the teaching staff, while leaving the students in the schools. UFT President MIchael Mulgrew responded to the Chancellor's speech by claiming " that all you are doing is rearranging the deck chairs". However, the most serious aspect of the Chancellor's middle school proposal will result in 2,000 more ATRs or a doubling of the current ATR population. Furthermore, the Chancellor apparently has the right to decide which teachers to keep based upon some obscure and undefined merit selection process. Since the Mayor has already stated that the "best teachers are our new teachers" and experience does not count in teaching, guess which teachers will be retained by the "turnaround schools"? Moreover, how many public school teachers will actually accept assignments in the new Charter schools? Not many, if any, since many of these Charter schools do not have the union benefits and teacher "due process" that the public school teachers do. That means some of the "turnaround schools" that become Charter schools will replace their entire teaching staff! Who will replace the teachers that leave or excessed from those schools? Well. the Chancellor already has solved this problem. He stated that the entire class of "Teaching Fellows", with their five weeks of training will be sent to the "turnaround schools". Yes, for the Mayor's poodle, Chancellor Dennis Walcott, the "best teachers" are those"newbie teachers" that cost the least amount of money. In other words its "education on the cheap".

I can just picture what will happen in a classroom as the "newbie teaching fellow" is confronted by the unruly middle school students who were largely responsible for the problems of the school in the first place. The "Teaching Fellow", with no classroom management skills, working in a new and challenging, if not hostile environment, and struggling with a new curriculum is just what the Chancellor ordered to improve these schools. Yeah right! If you really believe that "newbie teachers" are the answer then I have a Bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Besides putting the entire recruiting class of "Teaching Fellows" in the "turnaround schools" some of the schools will be the first middle schools to participate in the online based IZONE, where students are essentially self-taught on computers with little teacher guidance. Even in the carefully selected high schools this technology based online program has received mixed reviews at best. Now the Chancellor and his minions naively believe that technology alone will succeed by making immature children responsible in a self-taught program that requires the academic discipline which many of them do not have. Finally, to make matters worse, the already large class sizes will continue as the Chancellor has no intention of lowering class size, an integral part of improving student academic achievement.

Let's see, the Chancellor expects improvements by replacing experienced teachers with poorly trained "newbie teachers" and in the IZONE schools no teacher, keeping large class sizes, and ignoring the social-economic problems these students are exposed to outside the school environment which is the primary cause of the problems with the failing schools. To me that is simply a fantasy and it shows how clueless the Chancellor really is about the what goes on in the classroom.

The New York City Schools Are Not Adequately Preparing High School Graduates For The "Real World" And That Is A Major Problem.

2011-09-26T17:59:00.010-04:00

The DOE propaganda machine is working full time in presenting the most optimistic face on the high school graduation rate and national SAT scores. Tweed went to great lengths to show that their pseudo education reform under the Bloomberg Administration was working as the high school graduation rate has risen to 61% and the SAT scores improved, especially for Hispanics. However, the truth is very different and disturbing. The majority of New York City Public School graduates are not ready for the "real world", especially Black and Hispanic students. The 2011 SAT scores have shown a widening racial academic achievement gap in the New York City high schools and no DOE playing with the statistics can dispute the numbers. On the whole, NYC SAT scores have declined a measly one point since 2007. However, when you look into the numbers and break it down by racial classifications it shows the ever widening racial academic achievement gap. Since 2007 here is how each group's SAT score have changed.

Asians...... +29 points
Whites........ + 9 points
Hispanics... -17 points
Blacks........ -27 points

Furthermore, the College Board has said that a SAT benchmark of 1,550 demonstrates college success. For Whites & Asians approximately half meet that benchmark while Hispanics and Blacks average well below the benchmark.

SAT Benchmark for College Success (1,550 points).

Whites 1,529 points
Asians 1,522 points
Hispanics 1,228 points
Blacks 1,215 points

New York State uses a different measure for college and career readiness and found only one out of five New York City Public School students were "college ready". What the racial breakdown is for both measures are a closely held secret and I cannot find it in the data. However, it is very obvious that under the Bloomberg Administration, student academic achievement has been non-existent and any academic improvements are simply an illusion.

That brings me to the issue is the DOE really training high school students to the "real world"? Unfortunately, the answer is a very loud no! In the "real world" employees need to be reliable, dependable, and trustworthy. However, the DOE discounts all these attributes when pushing students through to graduation. First, the DOE encourages principals to use bogus "credit recovery programs" that simply requires the student to take an online course and Google the answers. Remember this outrageous action? Second, the DOE pushed to eliminate the "seat time" requirement and shove even more unprepared students to graduation. Finally, administrators pressured teachers to pass failing students to improve the school's report card. The result is students are jettisoned into the "real world" without the necessary skills to succeed. Many of them not only unprepared academically to work in the "real world" but were unreliable, not dependable, and worst of all untrustworthy. The lessons they learned from their high school experience was that one did not need to work hard academically to graduate so why do I need to work hard now?

Gone are the days when school officials demanded that students do their best and give that extra effort to succeed academically and become a productive adult in the "real world". At Tweed it is more about the numbers who graduate, be it by using bogus "credit recovery" programs, or online courses from home, and not whether these graduates are academically or emotionally ready for the "real world". For the DOE it is not "children first" but to massage the statistics to make it appear they are succeeding when the reality shows that the students are really failing when it comes to the adult world of college and employment.

How Does One Define A "Quality Teacher"? To The Various Groups It Means Many Different Things.

2011-09-24T08:30:00.015-04:00

Everybody wants a "quality teacher" in the classroom. It doesn't matter if you are a traditional educator or an education reformer, a "quality teacher" is an important element for successful student academic achievement. The problem lies with the definition of what is a "quality teacher"?

Most people in education believe that a "quality teacher" is a teacher that rises student academic achievement and is a dependable and reliable presence in the classroom. However, beyond these general elements there is a wide difference of opinion on the specifics of what is a "quality teacher"?

Pseudo Education Reform:
It is easy to discount this group. The Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott political rhetoric that the "best teachers" are the young and cheap teachers, many of them recruited from alternate teaching programs like the "Teaching Fellows" or "Teach For America" who seem to disappear from teaching a few years down the road (E4E leadership are a prime example). For these politicians it is simply "education on the cheap" and a temporary, replaceable teaching staff means low salaries and no vesting rights for pensions and retiree health benefits. I am sure you all remember Mayor Bloomberg's press conference where he called experienced teachers irrelevant. These pseudo education reformers are simply people who want to reduce public education expenditures by encouraging Charter schools, reducing funding to public schools, and eliminating union protections.

Education Reformers:
For many education reformers the "quality teacher" is by far the most important factor in student learning. These same education reformers ignore class sizes, social-economic issues, Administrative competence, and lack of school resources as factors in student academic achievement. Furthermore, these education reformers blame teacher unions for many of the problems in schools. For example, they claim that teachers have "tenure for life", knowing full well that teachers accused of incompetence or misconduct can be terminated at an Administrative hearing in front of an impartial Arbitrator where the school board can present their case against the teacher. To most of us this is called "due process". Furthermore, the education reformers claim that teachers get automatic tenure. Again, this is a lie. Tenure can only be granted by an Administrator after three years of satisfactory service. Tenure can be denied or a teacher's probation can be extended until the Principal is satisfied that the teacher deserves tenure. Therefore, tenure is awarded not automatic and tenured teachers can still be terminated if the school district presents sufficient evidence to prove teacher incompetence or misconduct. Many education reformers support Charter schools and vouchers and believe that technology is a way to improve student academic achievement. Some of these reformers even believe that technology can replace teachers and support online learning as a way to improve student learning. In New York City $50 million dollars are being wasted in the izone program where almost all student learning is done online with little or no teacher interaction and at best has been received mixed reviews by schools who are part of the program. In fact, in Minnesota there are more dropouts in these online learning schools than regular public schools.To the education reformers a "quality teacher" is a teacher that raises student scores on standardized tests (test prep), and are always available day and night for student needs. Moreover, a "quality teacher" is a teacher willing to take over many non-teaching duties, without added compensation and does not hide behind the union contract. That is why the education reformers love Charter schools since teachers must do additional duties besides teaching, work an extended day and year, and have little "due process" in hiring/firing decisions. Of course the education reformers ignore the high teacher turnover and burnout that comes with their definition of a "quality teacher".

Traditional Educators:
The vast majority of educators who came from the classroom understand that education can be improved by slowly and carefully incorporating new ideas and testing them in the classroom. For example technology can aid teaching by supporting a lesson rather than replacing the lesson with its own. For the traditional educator a "quality teacher" is a teacher that not only know the curriculum but can go deeper into what each lesson means to student learning. Further, the "quality teacher" has the ability to tailor his or her lesson to best help the students in maximizing their academic improvement. In other words, "let teachers teach" A "quality teacher" can enhance the curriculum by telling his or her students a story that shows how a lesson comes alive and why it is important to understand the significance of the subject taught to the student. A "quality teacher" has the ability to place the student into the lesson taught and actually experience the academic significance in the real world. An example is to teach lower grades the significance of Math by using money to buy food to eat, buy toys, and save. For many traditional educators, a "quality teacher" is a teacher that can successfully impart knowledge, cares for the students, and can handle classroom management issues to maximize student academic achievement. Additionally, manageable class sizes, adequate resources, and Administrative support are all an integral part of being a "quality teacher".

The bottom line is a "quality teacher" is a one of the many important elements of student academic achievement. However, the definition of a "quality teacher" is very different for the different groups who dominate education policy and that is the major problem in shaping a truly effective education policy.

The Difference Between Smart Principals And Stupid Principals When Hiring Teachers For Their Vacancies.

2011-09-21T18:39:00.011-04:00

Over the summer I applied to ten vacancies in my subject area and received not one interview. I had no better luck at the DOE "job fairs", as many of the interviewers (principals, assistant principals, deans, school secretaries? Who knows?) simply had a tag that said "interviewer". Was it my breath? Could it be I had body odor? Maybe it was the way I dressed? Of course the real reason was my age and salary. That brings me to the title of this post. "The difference between smart principals and stupid principals when hiring teachers for their vacancies".

Stupid principals, many of them "Leadership Academy Principals" (17% of the total Principal population) hired the most inexpensive teacher they could recruit, preferably one or two year novice and untenured teachers. Failing that, the stupid principals would hire "newbie teachers" from the alternate certification programs (Teach for America, Teaching Fellows) by falsely claiming that the available ATRs did not fit the school's vision. These stupid principals are now saddled with teachers that have little or no classroom experience, incomplete knowledge of the curriculum, and non-existent classroom management skills. In other words the stupid principals are "penny wise and dollar foolish" as they make the children guinea pigs and expose them to poor teaching as these "newbie/novice teachers" blunder their way through a school year while academically hurting the students that they are supposed to help. Occasionally, one of these teachers turns out to be a "diamond in the rough" and will eventually become a "quality teacher" but at what cost to student learning as many of these "newbies" can't teach and academically harm the children under his or her care?

Smart principals on the other hand hire few "newbie teachers" and wait to fill the vacancies once the school year starts. These principals interview ATRs during the first week or two and weed out the ones that don't seem to click. Some principals require the teacher to do a demonstration lesson in front of a live class to see how the interaction between the teacher and the class works. Furthermore, smart principals also know that the ATRs are free to them and it gives both sides a chance to see if it is a good fit. In fact the ATR saves the school money since Tweed actually picks up the salary for the school year. True, what happens the next year? Hopefully, the ATR and the smart Principal finds that the ATR is an asset to the school and will find a way to add the ATR to the budget. Potentially, it could be a win-win for all as the smart Principal gets a "quality teacher" the students advance academically, and the ATR can finally show the skills acquired through the years.

For the stupid principals it is "children last" as the school and the students are exposed to an unknown factor in helping them to achieve academic achievement. By contrast, for the smart Principal it is "children first" as the school obtains an experienced "quality teacher" at little or no cost to the school and if it works out, a win for all, especially the students.

The DOE "Job Fair" Was Like Going To An Oldies Convention But Without The Music. What A Waste Of Time.

2011-09-20T18:47:00.012-04:00

I went to the mandatory DOE "job fair" for ATRs at the Brooklyn Museum and I felt I was at an oldies convention with almost all the teachers there being in their 40's, 50's and 60's. Only WCBS-FM was missing to supply the music. Conspicuous by their absence were young teachers. Of course the young teachers in excess were quickly gobbled up in the "Open Market Transfer System" and the "job fairs" over the summer as principals were looking for the cheapest, not "quality teachers" to fill their vacancies. What happened to the DOE's slogan of "children first"?

In my subject, which is considered a shortage area, I could found no Queens high schools looking to fill the position at the "oldies convention" oops I mean the DOE "job fair". Only a transfer school and a closing high school both in Brooklyn had openings in my field. On the positive side I did meet old friends I haven't seen in a year or two, including many who were excessed from my old high school. Normally, seeing so many excessed teachers my age could be depressing. However, meeting many of my peers and hearing their stories actually made for interesting conversation as we compared our futile search for jobs only to find how the principals were hiring "Teaching Fellows" and the "Teach For America" candidates and getting exemptions for the bogus "DOE hiring freeze" despite not having any teaching experience. I guess you can call it "education on the cheap".

If I were the DOE I would be very embarrassed about the "job fair". The preponderance of senior teachers, many of them "quality teachers" the DOE claims they need in the schools submitted resumes to the very few schools that seem to fit. In fact, almost half the seats where schools were supposed to be at the "job fair" were empty as the schools didn't bother to show up!. Moreover, the vast majority of the ATRs found few if any positions in their district or even Borough. To say it was "slim pickings" would be an understatement. The DOE should be ashamed of this travesty and the union has a lot of explaining to do in being part of it. Even the DOE promise of free parking was a lie as many of us were forced to pay between $5-$9 dollars to the museum parking lot even after showing them the paper we were at the "job fair". Of course, this is the DOE and lying to the teachers are just part of the game to disillusion us into resigning. Fat chance of that happening.

The DOE's Effort To Improve Student Academic Achievement Is Doomed To Fail With The Present Policies In Place.

2011-09-18T09:22:00.007-04:00

The DOE keeps coining up with various strategies and policies that they claim will be the "be all and end all" method to improve student academic achievement. Be it the "Workshop model", the "fair student funding" formula, or the "teacher data reports". Just to name a few. However, the results have been less then impressive with only minuscule or no improvement in the decade. Worse, has been the wide and at times a widening academic achievement gap due to both race and income over the last decade. In Tweed's never ending quest to throw good money after questionable programs with little or no academic value, the Central Bureaucracy has seen an explosion of Administrative positions. Between 2003 and 2010 Tweed grew from 1,322 positions to 2,286 employees, an astounding 70% increase! According to a New York Post article there has been an increase of over 16,360 positions in this decade in the DOE while teacher positions have been reduced by 8,000 over the last three years. The result has been large class sizes, experienced teachers without a position, and the influx of unproven and untested people who came from alternate certification programs such as "Teach For America" and the "Teaching Fellows". These programs allowed principals to bring in cheap and warm bodies to fill classroom vacancies without and real preparation to teach in the most challenging environment. This is "children first"? Worse yet was the closing of large comprehensive high schools and the mass excessing of "quality teachers" only to be replaced with small themed schools that are top heavy with administrators and staffed by"newbie teachers". Finally, unrelenting test preparation (teaching to the test) was the mainstay of school grades and students were drilled to do English and Math at the expense of the other subjects. In fact many parents complained about the DOE's narrow focus on the two testing subjects and were ignored, a hallmark of Bloomberg/Klein Administration. All of these issues made it nearly impossible to significantly raise student achievement or to narrow the racial/income academic achievement gap.

What are the solutions to improving the student academic achievement gap? Here are some suggestions that work.

Reduce Class Sizes:

Over the last few years class sizes has risen dramatically as 8,000 teachers have left the system. The increase in New York City large class sizes, the largest in the State, results in more noise, less individualized instruction, and adds to classroom stress. Only the Ed Deformers believe that class sizes don't matter. Just ask any parent, teacher, and student if class size matters; You will get a loud and unanimous yes to that subject.

A Quality Teacher In Every Classroom:

There is no doubt that a "quality teacher" is one of the two most important school-based aspects in improving student academic achievement; The other being class size. However, due to school budget cuts and financial pressure on principals to hire the cheapest teacher due to the "fair student funding" formula, the Bloomberg Administration's definition of a "quality teacher" is much different than everybody else. To the Bloomberg Administration a "quality teacher" is the young and inexpensive teacher that you can abuse and burn out before they ever became vested. To Tweed, recruitment of "newbie teachers" were more important then retention of their existing teachers. Is it any wonder that tenure acceptance rates have dropped drastically this year while the ATR crises just gets worse with almost 2,000 experienced teachers without a classroom position to call their own?

Eliminate The "Fair Student Funding" Formula:

The "fair student funding" formula has resulted in an up to 20% reduction in some schools while not appreciably increased the budget in the low wealth schools that it was intended to help. The result is to force principals to "hire on the cheap" when it comes to teachers and senior teachers are almost guaranteed not to be hired for vacancies at the schools. Furthermore, the inclusion of the actual teacher salaries in the school's budget rather than as a unit is also a disincentive for principals who would want to hire an experienced teacher for his or her classroom and do what is best for the students.

Place ATRs in All Vacancies And Give The Schools An Incentive To Have Them:

The DOE created the ATR mess by closing over one hundred schools, allowing principals to file frivolous or embellished charges against teachers to remove them from their school, and to encourage principals to hire the "newbie teacher" and grant them exemptions to a hiring freeze that have gaps that you can drive a truck through.

If the DOE really wants to improve student academic performance, then the recommendations I made need to be followed. To me that is really "children first".

"Breaking News" - The "Rubber Room" Is Alive And Well At Tweed!

2011-09-15T13:53:00.005-04:00

I have been informed that Tweed has started a new "rubber room" on the twelfth floor in the Chambers Street building where all 3020-a teacher termination hearings are held. My source told me that he saw chairs squeezed together and lined up against two walls with teachers sitting on them, apparently doing nothing, day after day. My source actually spoke to some of them and they told him that they were informed that they were reassigned out of the schools and to report to this location.

At first, I thought my source was playing a joke on me but my union source admitted that the DOE is indeed reassigning selected teachers to a temporary reassignment location while they figure out whether to pursue 3020-a charges against these individuals. According to my union source, the DOE always maintained the right to reassign teachers on a temporary basis while they investigate potentially serious allegations. So much for the "rubber room agreement" that was supposed to abolish the "rubber rooms" once and for all.

While it might be true that this new "rubber room" may only be temporary, as my union source claimed, it still is very disturbing that some teachers must travel long distances from the outer Boroughs to Downtown Manhattan simply because of an unproven accusation made against that educator. The least they should do is have them report to their "Children First Network" Offices where they can be given meaningful work while waiting for their cases to be finished.

Is this just another example of the DOE reneging on an agreement with our union? It certainly looks like it to me.

A Tale Of Two Teachers Who Went To A Hiring Hall And Why The ATR Crises Is Just Getting Worse For Senior Teachers.

2011-09-14T18:25:00.012-04:00

Two teachers wrote about their experiences at a DOE "job fair" and the very different results they ended up with shows why the DOE has no intention of solving the ATR crises.

The first teacher is Marc Epstein, a senior teacher with twenty years of teaching experience and who has been considered a "master teacher" and mentor for many new teachers in his old school. If Marc's name seems familiar, it is because his articles have been published in various newspapers, including the prestigious Washington Post, has appeared on the O'Reily Factor, and is a Huffington Post blogger. Marc and I taught in the same school for ten years and he has taught every social studies course offered by the school including Advanced Placement courses in History and Government. He is the "gold standard" when teaching to students and preparing them for college.

When Marc was excessed from Jamaica High School he applied to many vacancies on the "Open Market System" and received not one interview. He then went to an August "job fair" and found few vacancies for Social Studies teachers and of course, no interviews. Marc Epstein's own words can be found on the NYC ATR blog.

By contrast, I present you with four year Social Studies teacher Collin Lawrence who taught Global Studies and wrote some very insightful and entertaining articles in the Gotham Schools Community Section about his struggles at the Brooklyn Arts Academy. He decided to leave teaching after the DOE refused his request to take a one year leave of absence and this made it more difficult, in theory, to apply for a position since he would be considered an outside teacher and there is (or was?) a job freeze for Social Studies teachers. He also went to a "job fair" in August and had eight interviews and two job offers. He chose a school in Manhattan. What hiring freeze?

Why can't an extraordinary teacher like Marc Epstein not even get an interview while an up and coming great teacher (maybe) Collin Lawrence gets interviews galore and can pick between job offers despite resigning from the DOE a year earlier? Unfortunately, the answer is very simple, it is about money and age for principals who are hiring not what is best for the students in their schools. You see Marc Epstein makes $90,000 dollars annually and is in his 50s while Collin Lawrence is around 30 and makes $50,000 annually. Get the message?

The DOE has encouraged principals to hire based upon their budget and will even penalize them financially for hiring the Marc Epsteins of the world. Moreover, the DOE now appears to be looking the other way when principals hire teachers in subject areas that have a job freeze, like the Manhattan Principal that hired Collin Lawrence. The DOE seems not to take the apparent violation of the hiring freeze as something they are doing anything about at least at present since there is no pressure from our union to explain it. More disturbingly, is the union's silence about d the DOE's demonetization of senior teachers (more about our union's silence in my next post).

Finally, I don't want my readers to think I am criticizing Collin Lawrence. I do believe, given time (another 3-4 years), Collin Lawrence will be a "quality teacher" and someday may even be the "master teacher" that every one of us aspire to be and that Marc Epstein is.

We Finally Know Why Student Academic Achievement Is So Poor. It's SpongeBob and Apple Juice!

2011-09-12T18:32:00.008-04:00

There has been an increasingly bitter debate on why it has been difficult to raise student academic achievement. For the educators, except for E4E, it is large class sizes, lack of funding, high teacher turnover, and lapsed student discipline. Moreover, students in poverty had a much lower academic achievement than higher income children, allowing or a large academic achievement gap. For the Education reformers,, the no "excuses crowd", made up of billionaires, hedge fund managers, and politicians blame the teacher unions, and bad educators for the failure to raise the academic achievement of students, especially the students who live in poverty. However, it now appears that both groups are wrong.

Yes, it now seems that SpongeBob and Apple Juice are the real villains of why student academic achievement is lacking. A study done by the University of Virgina on sixty 4-year-olds show exposure to SpongeBob cartoons reduced their attention span and destroyed brain cells. Furthermore, it now turns out the the levels of Arsenic in Apple juice are much higher than in water. Some evidence suggest that Arsenic reduces the IQs of children and can cause learning difficulties.

Boy did I get it wrong. I really thought it was poverty, community, and parents. In addition to large class sizes, high teacher turnover, lack of resources, and poor discipline for the reason for our failure to improve student academic achievement when all along it was SpongeBob and Apple juice who are the cause of the failure to raise student academic achievement.

The DOE Is Encouraging Principals To Hire TF and TFA Teachers While Experienced Teachers Are Not Even Granted Interviews. "Children First". Really?

2011-09-10T08:16:00.009-04:00

It is becoming increasingly clear that Tweed's efforts to vilify ATRs as lazy, incompetent, and bad teachers along with severe budget cuts at schools (17.4% since 2008) have had the desired effect. Few experienced ATRs are being offered positions as principals do what is best for themselves and not what is best for the students in the school. The DOE "job fairs" are mostly a joke and only the worst schools that experience high teacher turnover, and transfer schools regularly show up and hope to pick off the youngest and possibly untenured teachers to fill their needs.

Privately, principals will tell you that they would just love to have experienced teachers in the classroom but their budget and the "fair student funding formula" makes it next to impossible for them to hire them. Even "Leadership Academy principals" have found that some experienced teachers are necessary if only to show the "newbie teachers" what teaching is about and act as a mentor. However, unless the DOE offers financial incentives to hire ATRs, principals will not hire them for their vacancies. In fact, since Tweed relaxed the hiring restrictions almost all schools are simply going through the motions of looking at ATRs only to hire Teach For America (TFA} or Teaching Fellows (TF) teachers by falsely claiming the ATR teachers don't meet the needs of the school.

NYC Comptroller John Liu published some data that shows how the DOE wastes money by not properly placing ATRs in vacant positions. Here. Is it any wonder that ATRs believe they are discriminated when applying for vacancies in the NYC schools? For the schools it is a financial disincentive to hire senior teachers because of the salary.

Presently, their are 1,940 ATRs in the system and the DOE, in its uncaring and incompetent ATR placement process has elementary school ATRs in high schools, high school ATRs teaching 2nd grade and shop teachers ATRs in schools with no shop courses. Should we trust these people with our future? I don't think so.

What is needed is a new ATR Agreement between the union and the DOE that encourages principals to hire ATRs in vacancies. This agreement should include the following.

Financial incentives for principals to hire ATRs like those offered in the 2008 ATR Agreement.

Ensure a school cannot hire a "new teacher" if there is a teacher in excess in the license area in the District.

Union oversight on any DOE granted exemptions to principals who claim that excessed teachers cannot properly fill the vacancy.

Eliminate the "fair student funding formula" that penalizes principals who want to hire experienced teachers.

Without incentives for schools to hire experienced teachers, very little progress can be made on the ATR issue and class sizes will just keep on increasing.

For the DOE, "children first" is properly placing ATRs in the right schools and encourage principals to fill their vacancies with the best, not the cheapest teacher qualified for the position.

The DOE Is Already Violating The New ATR Agreement By Not Giving The Most Senior ATRs First Shot To Fill A Position In Their Subject Area.

2011-09-07T19:10:00.007-04:00

One of the provisions in the ATR Agreement between the union and the DOE was that any vacancies or long-term placement would first be offered to the most senior ATR in the District and in their subject area. However, already the DOE has seemed to violate this most important provision by putting less senior ATRs in these positions in violation of the ATR agreement. How do I know this? It just happened to me!

I had inquired about a recently opened position in my subject area in a struggling school and contacted the school on my own time to arrange an interview to see if I can fill the position. I met with the Assistant Principal who was very happy to interview me and the interview went well. However, as the interview was winding down with the Administrator to my shock he said the following" I would give you a chance if the ATR Tweed sent me doesn't work out". The ATR the Administrator was referring to is somebody I know and has half the seniority that I do. How can the less senior ATR be given first dibs on an open position when the DOE and union claimed the following in the ATR Agreement:

"When one or more vacancies occur the DOE will send the most senior Excessed Employee in the District/Superintendency with the appropriate license to the school{s) for consideration for placement, except the DOE shall not be required to send Excessed Employees who have already been sent to a school for consideration of placement pursuant to the paragraph".

Here is proof positive that the DOE has violated the ATR Agreement and where is our union's response on this apparent violation of the Agreement? You guessed it, "we are looking into it". I am not holding my breath.

Just another example how ATRs are being treated by both the DOE and our union.

The Queens High School Statistics Show The Disconnect Between Graduation Rates And The Students' Readiness For College And Employment.

2011-09-04T10:49:00.014-04:00

The Bloomberg Administration claims with much fanfare how the high school graduation rate has increased over the years. However, educators in the know that the apparent improvement in the graduation rates are really a function of the increased use of "credit recovery" programs, massaging the dropout rate, and principals who are empowered to change student grades to graduate them. However, the increased graduation rates come with a real downside, that 75% of the NYC high school gradates are not ready for college or employment without remediation.

In Queens the disconnect between high school graduation rates and "college and employment readiness" is highlighted in many of the schools and are listed below. To be "college ready" the student must achieve a 75% on the English Regents and a 80% on the Math Regents. These numbers are for June and August of 2010 and the list only includes schools who had at least 60 graduates.

Queens high schools with the lowest percentage of “college readiness” graduates

School Graduated(#) College Readiness(#) College Readiness(%)

North Queens Community HS 62 0 0.0%

Far Rockaway High School* 164 4 2.4%

Beach Channel High School* 389 10 2.6%

August Martin High School 288 8 2.8%

Queens Academy High School 141 7 5.0%

Jamaica High School* 334 29 7.4%

John Adams High School 808 65 8.0%

Queens Preparatory Academy 95 8 8.4%

Flushing High School 588 50 8.5%

Flushing International HS 86 8 9.3%

Richmond Hill High School 867 81 9.3%

HS of Law & Public Service 171 16 9.4%

Arts & Business HS 187 18 9.6%

John Bowne High School 688 73 10.3%

Queens Vocational & Technical 271 29 10.7%

Newtown High School 773 85 11.0%

Hillcrest High School 766 102 13.3%

Martin Van Buren HS 755 104 13.8%

Campus Magnet 202 29 14.3%

Grover Cleveland HS 703 110 15.6%

Long Island City HS 718 127 17.7%

Newcomers High School 214 38 17.8%

Queens High School Of Teaching 201 55 19.6%

Channel View School Of Research 71 14 19.7%

* Closing schools

By contrast here are the Queens high schools with the highest "college readiness and employment scores.

Queens high schools with the highest percentage of “college readiness” graduates

School Graduated(#) College Readiness(#) College Readiness(%)

Townsend Harris HS** 278 276 99.3%

Queens HS For The Sciences** 107 100 93.7%

Fiorello LaGuardia HS 646 487 75.4%

Queens Gateway For Health 117 67 57.3%

Bayside High school 902 454 50.3%

Frank Sinatra School Of The Arts** 171 45 49.7%

Francis Lewis High School 1209 564 46.7%

Benjamin Cardozo High School 981 458 46.7%

Thomas Edison High School 819 352 43.0%

Forest Hills High School 959 370 38.6%

Aviation High School 368 127 34.5%

Bryant High School 810 195 24.1%

Robert F. Wagner HS 95 22 23.2%

HS or Construction Trades 177 39 22.0%

Robert F. Kennedy HS 159 35 22.0%

** Specialized schools.

The complete list can be found on the New York City Public School Parent blog here.

If you really want to improve academic achievement in schools we need to reduce, not increase class size, ensure that the best and not the cheapest teachers are in the classroom, and give teachers the ability to teach what is best for the classroom and not using the "one size fits all" method that may not be best for their students.

If I Was The Chancellor It Will Really Be "Children First" Not "Tweed First, Children Last" As It Is Now.

2011-09-01T08:26:00.009-04:00

It is September and the beginning of a new school year but unfortunately, we have the same old failed system run by those non-educators at Tweed along with a puppet Chancellor, the Mayor's poodle, Dennis Walcott. For people who had hoped for change with the new Chancellor, they have been disappointed yet again. The Chancellor has adopted all the failed policies of Joel Klein, and Mayor Bloomberg. That had me thinking about what would I do if I became Chancellor of the New York City Schools.

First, and immediately, I would restore the 13.7% cuts to the schools and reduce class size for better student learning. I would use the CFE State money to achieve that purpose. Presently, the DOE uses the money for other purposes. Furthermore, I would eliminate the "fair student funding" formula that penalizes almost all schools and at some middle class schools have resulted in a 20% reduction of much needed funding. (Interestingly, Charter schools are exempt from the "fair student funding" formula. I wonder why?) The teachers would come from the 1,940 ATRs, many of them experienced and quality teachers who just want a chance to get back into a classroom in their district. This would wisely allocate the $125 million dollars that is presently being wasted by the present Chancellor.

Second, eliminate the 62 "Children First Networks" (CFN) and their clusters and give the Administrative responsibility back to the District Superintendents. Realistically, you can eliminate many layers of bureaucracy and reduce the headcount by up to 75% with the elimination of the CFNs and their clusters. Moreover, no longer will many of these positions at the CFNs be put on the school budgets unless the schools and their "School Based Leadership Team" unanimously agree to fund the position. Presently, many principals complain that precious funds are being siphoned away to pay for increasing levels of bureaucracy at the CFNs. Here are some examples of this.

Third, hire an independent efficiency expert by competitive bidding, to identify administrative bloat, redundancy, and unnecessary positions at the DOE Central Bureaucracy. This should include scrutinizing consultant contracts, as well as assigning a numerical grade on each and every contract that affects the school system and in particular, the classroom. No longer will money be wasted in hiring questionable positions. We all remember this.

Fourth, bring back schools as neighborhood schools and ensure that struggling schools get extra resources to help those schools succeed. Instead of closing the schools the schools would get a crisis group of "great educators" (principals and teachers) who will observe, model, and review school safety and discipline procedures. Rewrite the Chancellor Regulations on A-420 and A-421 to give more leeway for school staff to discipline students without fear of retribution and termination. Presently, any school staff member can be brought up on 3020-a charges for a nasty look, a stare, a word, or for any physical contact. Only serious verbal abuse or corporal punishment should and will be subject to discipline.

Fifth, stop the destructive practice of co-locating Charter schools with existing schools. No longer will Charter schools exclude students with disabilities or English language learners. These Charter schools will have the same representation of student diversity as the neighborhood school. Moreover, if Charter schools are found to consul out struggling students rather than provide the services the student needs, the Chancellor has the right, no the obligation, to reduce or even suspend funding to the school.

Finally, restructure Tweed and put a majority of educators in the leadership positions. Presently, there is only one educator in the Chancellor's inner circle. Is it any wonder that there is a disconnect between Tweed and the schools?

Also on my agenda would be the elimination of the "double standard" between disciplining teachers and administrators, no funding of the infamous "Principal Leadership Academy" and requiring a minimum of 10 years of classroom teaching before an educator can become a Principal. In addition, there will be no hiring of outside teachers unless there are no teacher in excess available in that subject area and administrators found to have violated the rules, or abused their staff will be subject to termination.

As Chancellor I will reduce class size, put experienced teachers back into the classroom, and reduce the bloat at the DOE. This is what I call "children first" and so would you.

Hmmm Chancellor Chaz. It has a nice ring to it.