Racism Has No Place In Our Schools

At high performing Beacon High School in Manhattan, where student acceptance is based upon their middle school academics and is, for the most part, color blind, racism has reared it's ugly head.

A White and Jewish girl privately complained to her guidance counselors about being "wait listed" by her university of choice while lower academically performing minorities were accepted.  She rightly felt that is unfair and discriminatory.  The guidance counselors,were apparently Jewish, sympathized with the student and agreed that the University's selection accounted for affirmative action criteria in selecting their student body and hurt her chances to get in.  It's common knowledge that top universities discriminate against East Asian and Jewish high school students when it comes to admissions and this girl was probably a victim of that discrimination as well as the affirmative action requirements.

Unfortunately, a Black student, who was waiting to meet with his counselor, overheard the confidential conversation and barged into the confidential meeting and berated the girl and her counselors and then reported it to his friends.   The same group that staged a sit in at Beacon High School on the school's selection system that limits the integration process because it does not look at race or practice affirmative action to increase Black and Hispanic students. The result was that the White and Jewish girl was subject to cyber bullying and racist rants at school.

Worse, a Black Science teacher identified as Mr. Green has told the group of students that  they should boycott school today and continue until their complaints are met.  This is unacceptable and the teacher should be disciplined since he is encouraging racism.  Moreover,the teacher is accused of inflaming racial tensions, encouraging kids to be insubordinate and violating DOE attendance and safety regulations.  I suspect that either SCI or OSI will be investigating this teacher and deservingly so.

Susan Edelman of the New York Post wrote an article about the situation and is a must read Here.

In a follow up article by Susan Edelman it appears the school's Principal, Ruth Lacey, actually supported the student boycott that has racial overtones rather than putting a stop to it.  No wonder our schools are having racial divides with principals like her who rather support than confront the racial issues associated with the student boycott.

Theoretically A Discontinued Teacher Does Not Mean That Teacher Cannot Get A Position At The DOE, Practically They Can't

A teacher cannot achieve tenure until they put in a minimum of three of the four years of effective or higher ratings and quite a few teachers need five years as the Principal or Superintendent may want to delay tenure by giving the teacher an extra year for a myriad of reasons.  if a teacher gets a developing or ineffective rating for the fourth year, the Principal or Superintendent can discontinue the teacher.  Usually, if a teacher needs a second year of the extension of probation, his or her days are probably numbered.  I know of many New York City teachers who were discontinued when they received a second year of probation.

A teacher who was discontinued in one New York City district can theoretically get another position in a different New York City district or has a license in another subject but few have dual licenses .  However, there is a problem.  The DOE will tell the principal of that district not to hire the discontinued teacher and to ensure that happens the DOE puts the discontinued teacher on a "do not hire list" and places a problem code on their file.  What Principal would go against the DOE?  None that I know of.

Therefore, once a New York City teacher is discontinued, forget about getting a teaching job in the New York City public school system.

Why Do Female Teachers Get Little Or No Prision Time When Caught Having Sex With A Student?

The Daily News reported that Bronx middle school Social Studies teacher Dori Myers pleaded guilty to preforming oral sex on a 14 year old boy and received a 10 year sentence of probation and had to register as a level 1 sex offender but no prison time.  The Daily News article them claimed that she retained her teaching certificate.

The truth is she will most certainly lose her teaching license in New York State when the NYSED files an article 83 against Ms. Myers.  The City cannot take away a teacher's certificate only the State can.  However, what caught my attention was that she received no prison time.

Interestingly, many female teachers like Ms. Myers,  get no prison time, when caught having sexual relations with students while male teachers usually get between 2 to 10 years in prison.  Why is there such a difference?  Apparently, the legal system looks at men as sexual predators who planned and groomed the student, while female teacher are looked at as nurturers who became attached emotionally and crossed the line by becoming sexual.  Hence the disparate sentencing between male and female teachers which is unfair and discriminatory.

Here are the 50 most infamous female cases and the majority never received prison time.  By contrast, this article shows the disparate treatment when sentencing male and female teachers. Moreover, another article shows that same thing.  Finally, read this article.

The bottom line, male teachers are likely to get significant prison time while female teachers are most likely to receive little or no prison time when caught having sex with a student.

Renewal And Struggling Schools Get More Teach For America Two-Year Wonders.

Back in 2014 Chancellor Carmen Farina told the news media that the Renewal schools will be sent "highly effective" teachers.  Instead, the Renewal schools ended up hiring "newbies" instead.  Brooklyn's Automotive High School was the poster child of this failure to hire quality teachers.   Some of these "newbies" were from Teach For America (TFA) and few lasted beyond their two year commitment.

Fast forward to the upcoming 2017-18 school year and Teach For America claims it has increased the amount of college graduates, without a teaching degree into the New York City Public Schools.  According to Chalkbeat, TFA claims that 146 of their two year wonders have been offered positions in the 2017-18 school year.  That means that up to 4,762 children will be guinea pigs for an instructor with no education degree and classroom  experience.  Maybe Ms. Nicole Thomas's daughter will be fortunate enough to get one of these uncertified "newbies" as her teacher, complete with a five week training course on how to teach (lol)..

This is just another example of principals who hire these TFA "newbies" showing that they care more about their budget and control then  what's best for the students of the school/ 

Bad Teacher? Maybe. Bad School? Absolutely!

Over the last couple of months a 25 year veteran teacher was accused of corporal punishment and ended up being arrested and getting a 30-day jail sentence for shoving a 7-year old child that didn't result in any physical injuries to the child and wasn't reported for a month.  While the teacher has had letters of reprimand for previous corporal punishment and verbal abuse, none rose to the level of a 3020-a termination hearing, least not being arrested for.   In 2013, the teacher was accessed previously of  a serious corporal punishment incident.  However, the charge was found to be unsubstantiated and dismissed.  All the rest were minor and simply resulted in a letter of reprimand at worst.

The real story begins with the elementary school itself  PS 194, Countee Cullen in Harlem between 2008 and 2012 there were 200 reported violent incidents and six sex offenses and this is an elementary school!  Moreover, the Principal during that time had a habit of not reporting incidents and coming in late you can read it Here.  You can also  see the YouTube video Here. 

Things have not improved under the new Principal as the high poverty and 95% Black and Hispanic student body still struggles academically and teachers gave the Principal an 18% trust factor, one of the lowest in the City .  Moreover,  only 24% think the Principal clearly communicates her vision.  Finally, the Math and English scores remain in single digits of 9% and 7% respectively, again,  one of the lowest in the City as the school has been among the list of violent schools. You can see the school's snapshot Here. This is what the teacher said of his school

“PS 194 has been a constant member of the most dangerous schools — it is a school where we have a lot of students with real problems that are not addressed,“ Couey had said.


In fact, the other teachers agree with him, according to the school's snapshot only 7% of the teachers feel the students are safe in the school while the City average is 94%!

 When it comes to the child in question, you can read a slightly more informative take by the New York Post.   Obviously, the child has serious behavioral issues that were not adequately addressed by the school administration.  Like how does a school allow a 7-year old child to run the hallways unattended during class time?  Where did he go without permission and why wasn't he disciplined by an administrator?  Why didn't the teacher have a co-teacher in a classroom with Special Education students as required by law?  If the child was diagnosed with ADHD and autism, as the Daily News article stated, what services, if any,  did the school supply to the child?

The teacher spent his entire 25-year career at the academically struggling and dangerous school and stayed when other teachers left for better schools and more respect and he was rewarded for his loyalty to the school with not only an arrest and a 30 day jail sentence but a 3020-a charge to terminate his employment.  Just because he tried to discipline a misbehaving student because nobody else wanted to bother with the child.

Is he a bad teacher?  Maybe to some people who don't understand what's its like to teach in such a hostile and chaotic environment without administrative support and where a single slip up can cost a teacher their job.   You can make your own decision on that.  However, is PS 194 a bad school?   No question about it.  Absolutely it is.

Its Goodbye And Good Riddance To A Terrible Teacher

I have been accused by some principals of only going after them for their incompetence and vindictive actions and rightly so since they run their schools.  Remember, bad administrators makes for a bad school.  However, there are occasions I do mention teachers who should not be exposed to our students and this is one of those stories.

The teacher is known as "Mr. Sleazy" and I have been informed that he was forced to resign or retire back in the 2014-15 school year after allegedly being "U" rated two consecutive years.  How he lasted the fifteen years in the system is more an indictment of the DOE incompetence than his ability as a teacher.

Mr. Sleazy was known as the school snitch and most teachers of the school gave him a wide berth.  In one disgusting action Mr. Sleazy asked the Principal if he could meet with the "Special Commissioner of Investigations" (SCI) since he had valuable information to aid in the investigation of a recently removed teacher from the school.  However, fearing that other teachers could find out that he was meeting with SCI, he requested that he meet with them outside the school. The Principal eagerly complied since the SCI investigation of the teacher was going nowhere and finding no evidence to support the Principal supported allegations against the teacher.

Mr. Sleazy told the SCI investigators that he was hearing many of his assigned students, both female and male, had requested that they be transferred to the other teacher's class.  Mr. Sleazy claimed that the other teacher had to be making some sort of arraignment with these students.  Why else would they request a transfer?  Of course SCI did investigate and found out that Mr. Sleazy was a lousy teacher and had the lowest Regents passing rates in the subject.  Moreover, they were told he could not connect with his students and because of him, teacher shopping was out of control as students assigned to Mr. Sleazy's class went to their guidance counselors to request a transfer.  The end result was SCI disregarded Mr. Sleazy's information.  Mr Sleazy was so bad as a teacher that the school eventually made him a Dean rather than have him in the classroom.  You can read the stories about Mr. Sleazy Here.

Thankfully, Mr. Sleazy has left the DOE and can no longer damage students and snitch on teachers he come in contact with. Its goodbye and good riddance to a terrible teacher, Mr. Sleazy. 

Do Statistics Lie? When It Comes To The Regents Passing Rate The Answer Is Yes.

During my 20 years of teaching in the New York City schools, I have worked with many Science teachers.  Most of them I can say were caring, nurturing, and had the best interests of their students at heart.  However, there were a select few who did not particularly care about their students and I wrote about one colleague years ago, who is now a rotating ATR and loves the fact that he doesn't need to know his students.

There were also another group of Science teachers that I encountered at schools where I was provisionally assigned for the school year who would brag about their Regents passing rate.  One even claimed she had a 100% passing rate!    However, I must admit this group of Science teachers did have an unusually high Regents passing rate. These passing rates were high because of the large amount of students who these teachers excluded from taking the Regents.

What these Science teachers did was to ban the low achieving students from taking the Regents by giving them low marks on their weekly laboratory reports or discourage them from even attending lab!  In either case these struggling students would give up and stop attending the Science lab class and therefore be banned from taking the Science Regents.  In one outrageous case (the teacher who claimed to have a 100% Regents passing rate) a teacher had banned 50% of her classes from taking the Regents!  Worse, their Assistant Principals will crow about these Regents passing statistics, knowing full well that the high Regents passing percentage was due to the large amount of students banned from taking the Regents due to the lack of lab reports from students who were discouraged from completing the lab requirements.

Why doesn't the Assistant Principals confront these teachers?  Because the Regents passing percentage is part of the school report card and teacher evaluation grade.  Therefore, its not how many students were in Regents classes but the percentage eligible to take it!.  Hence, the reason the school administration will look the other way when these teachers exclude large number of low performing students from taking the Regents and the easiest method is to encourage them to ignore the lab requirement.

Do statistics lie?  They certainly do.  Just ask Mark Twain who was quoted in saying the following:

Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Mark Twain's Own Autobiography: The Chapters from the North American Review

Why The Richard Parlini Case Has Little To Do With Teacher Tenure.

In a New York Post opinion piece, some of the parents that were outraged when they found out that teacher Richard Parlini was reinstated to his teaching position at P.S. 101Q in Forest Hills, despite accusations of corporal punishment, verbal abuse, and bullying, stated why they joined the lawsuit against teacher tenure.  According to the Daily News, Mr. Parlini made a deal with the DOE and paid a $2,500 fine and took a six hour course to make the charges go away.  He was then allowed to return to the school and was scheduled to teach the first grade until some of the parents complained to the press.  Due to the negative publicity, Mr. Parlini was hastily assigned by the DOE to administrative duties at the school until another position is found for him at a different school.  Some of these parents then joined the teacher tenure lawsuit, citing the Richard Parlini case as a reason why teacher tenure laws needs to be changed.  However, if one looks at the Richard Parlini case, it has little to do with teacher tenure but everything to do with the DOE deciding not to go forward with 3020-a charges and his Principal wanting the teacher back at the school.

First, if the DOE's Office of Legal Services really had a solid case against Mr. Parlini, they would have pursued 3020-a termination charges against him as they have done to too many others and let an independent arbitrator determine the "award" (penalty).  Second, the DOE may have realized that the accusations lacked credibility when they did the preliminary investigation.  Finally, its very obvious that the Principal of the school wanted him back, otherwise he would have been immediately assigned to the ATR pool since he agreed to a stipulation and paid a fine.  Is Mr. Parlini guilty of what he was accused of?  Who knows?  However, if the DOE believed they had real evidence, Mr. Parlini would have gone through a 3020-a termination hearing as many other teachers have done.

The fact that the DOE reached a settlement with Mr. Parlini had nothing to do with the teacher tenure issue but has everything to do with the credibility of the accusers and the Principal wanting him back into her school's classroom.  With or without tenure protections, the result would probably end up the same way since it was up to the DOE to initiate charges and decided not to.  Place the blame on where it really belongs, the DOE for sending Mr. Parlini back to his school and not the teacher tenure issue.

New York State Education Department Is Going After Teacher Licenses Under Article 83 For Non-Criminal Actions.

Over the last few years the New York State Education (NYSED) has directly or indirectly used some of the RttT funds to go after teacher licenses who were terminated in their 3020-a hearings for  "moral turpitude".  While the State always went after educators found guilty of a crime or criminal actions and removed their teaching license, it appears the State has expanded their definition of "moral turpitude" to include non-criminal actions as well in an attempt to get rid of more teachers. Lately the  Office of Teaching Initiatives has allocated more money to investigate more 3020-a termination cases that were not criminal in nature.  According to my sources, NYSED has used a portion of the increased federal funds allocated to the State  (RttT?)  to expand the State's  "good moral charterer" determination to include non-criminal actions of sexual misconduct, corporal punishment, and other non-criminal actions that lead to the teacher's termination in the 3020-a hearing process.

Moreover, the NYSED has also included educators who took a stipulation to resign or retire rather than go through their 3020-a hearing that fit into the ever broadening definition of  "moral turpitude". It appears all this is part of NYSED's attack on teachers, be it the badly flawed Teacher Evaluation System, their insistence to use high stakes testing against teachers while admitting that it's not appropriate for students, or the ever broadening of the "moral turpitude" clause of Article 83..  In fact, I know of a case of a teacher who was unjustly terminated in 2011 for corporal punishment in which she tried to restrain a violent child and never hurt the child in restraining him.   When her unfair 3020-a decision was reversed by the State Supreme Court as being "shocking to the conscience", only to be reversed again in a 2 to 1 Appellate Court decision, ahe found herself three years later subject to NYSED's punitive Article 83 regulation.

While nobody wants teachers who are a danger to the children to have a license, it appears that the NYSED is using a broad brush to label many educators as not deserving of a teacher's license and many deserving educators can no longer be a teacher simply because the NYSED has expanded the "moral turpitude" clause to include educators who are not and never have been a danger to the children and that's not fair or right for that matter.

But Can They Teach?

It is interesting how education reformers praise Teach for America (TFA) which brings graduates from the top colleges to teach in high poverty areas, including New York City.    However, in the next breath these same reformers complain that many of these very same high poverty schools have the most teachers rated "unsatisfactory".  I would not be surprised that an analysis would show that many of the "unsatisfactory" teachers were TFA teachers.  Moreover, the combination of TFA teachers with "Leadership Academy Principals" is a recipe for disaster and I wouldn't be surprised if a closer look at these schools showed just that.

Many of the TFA teachers last just two years and use their limited teaching experience to "jump start" their career in business, law, or Administration.  They are increasingly looked at as "temporary teachers" and never gain the necessary experience to obtain the  curriculum knowledge and classroom management skills to gain tenure or spend enough time in the classroom to be considered a "great teacher". Examples of this are found in the leaders of the "Educators 4 Excellence (E4E) organization, founded by Bill Gates, and other hedge fund managers. These "fifth columnists" seem to move out of the classroom as quickly as possible and many are not even there long enough to be granted tenure.  However, this does not stop them from claiming how they know what is best for our schools and students.  What a joke!  In New York City these TFA graduates obtain all, of seven weeks of training and nobody, except for Mayor Bloomberg and his poodle, Chancellor Walcott, really believe they make a difference.  We all know they are simply warm bodies to throw in front of a classroom with a low enough salary that principals could afford on their tight budgets.

Schools with large amount of TFA teachers are unstable and provide no lasting academic impact on the community and their children.  The constant teacher turnover makes it virtually impossible for students to thrive in such an unstable school environment.  In fact, one outstanding educator who is known to favor issues advocated by the education reform movement has now realized that the TFA with its  temporary teacher turnover is "the problem and not the solution" when it comes to raising the academic achievement of high poverty schools.

Teaching is as much an art as it is a skill .  While, I do not question the intelligence of these TFA teachers, I will say this it takes anywhere between three and eight years to gain teaching mastery in the classroom.  Since these teachers spend three or less years in the classroom, they never achieve mastory in the classroom and never will become the "great teachers" that the education reformers claim they want.

The question we should be asking to the TFA teachers is "but can you teach for the long term and make a difference"?  It appears, for the most part, the answer is a resounding no!

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

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.

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

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 phony.

The Stories Of "Ebony & Ivory" And "Mutt & Jeff" Continue - "Bad Teachers" That The DOE Made A Deal With.

In the LIFO argument some people have claimed that I have said that all ATRs are "great teachers". This is far from the truth. While many ATRs are "great teachers", there are some who are "bad teachers". This post is about four such teachers who, thanks to the DOE Office of Legal Services, were put back into the classroom to bring misery to whomever crosses their paths.

Last year I wrote an article about "Ebony & Ivory". How these two teachers reaped havoc in the "rubber room", calling the police and not following the rules. Both were charged under State Education Law 3020-a in part to their behavior at the reassignment center once removed from the classroom. To call these two "characters" is being kind, they were downright dangerous to everybody who came in contact with them. Incredibly, the DOE, rather than going after the "worst of the worst" teachers, settled with both for a fine and a course. For Ebony it was the second time in the last five years that the DOE charged her under 3020-a only to make a deal with her. Along with "Mutt & Jeff" who I also wrote about previously, they all took deals offered by the DOE and were sent to schools as ATRs. Now it is Spring break of the next year and what have our four "bad teachers" found themselves in.

"Ebony" has gone to two different schools this year as she has had trouble with the Administration at both schools. I have heard that she may be charged yet again under section 3020-a for her behavior at the present school. If Ebony is charged it will be her third 3020-a in the last six years.

"Ivory" went to a school only to be taken out of the school and charged yet again under section 3020-a. She was actually put back to the Children First Network Office despite teachers no longer being removed from a school while awaiting disciplinary hearings because of her behavior at the school. Unbelievably, the DOE made yet another settlement with her, shocking even her own lawyer. She is now in another school and having more problems.

"Mutt" decided that his reassignment was a vacation and would disappear from the reassignment center for hours at a time. he was caught and received a "U" rating for his disappearances and behavior at the reassignment center. However, the DOE failed to add this to his original charges. This school year he was supposed to work for a DOE office and decided he was "Maynard G. Krebbs" and allergic to work. He would sleep all day in a conference room and hide when he thought the Office had work for him to do. Rather than the DOE file new 3020-a charges against him, he was allowed to settle his original charges with a fine and a course by the DOE. He was told to report to a school and showed up unshaven, with his most dingy and dirty clothes he had. It worked, the school threw him out and he decided to wait for a new school by staying home and getting paid for what seemed months, or so as told to me. "Mutt" is now in another school and I pity the children exposed to him.

Finally, we have "Jeff" who seems never to stay in any one school for the entire year. This year he was kicked out of one school and landed in another were the Chapter Leader spends too much of his time representing "Jeff" in "U" observations and is destined for another "U" rating. Remember, the DOE had more than enough evidence to terminate" Jeff" but choose to make a settlement instead.

Yes, there are "bad teachers" but more often then not the DOE chooses to make deals with the "worst of the worst" and send them back to school to cause more damage and we all suffer from it.

The "Toxic Teacher" Who Is Also The "School Snitch".

In my old school, which is slated for closing. We had one of those "toxic teachers" who couldn't teach and students begged their guidance counselors to get them out of his class. I had written about him previously, Here and Here. and I do not need to rehash it in this post. To make matters worse he was the "school snitch" and didn't think twice about badmouthing other teachers to the Administration. However, the "school snitch", let's call him Mr. S. went even further in one case, Mr. S through the Principal, Snidely Whiplash, secretly contacted the "Special Commissioner of Investigations" (SCI) to accuse a recently removed teacher of making "secret deals" with the students to get them to leave Mr. S's class and enter the teacher's class. Let me paraphrase how SCI reported it.

The SCI investigator was contacted by the Principal, Snidely Whiplash, that Mr. S had some very important information that could help prove the rapidly weakening case against the recently removed teacher. However, Mr. S. did not want anybody to know that he was meeting with SCI and requested that he meet with them outside the school. The SCI Investigator could not believe his luck. All he had so far was third person hearsay, rumors, and high school gossip against the recently removed teacher and was hoping that Mr. S would provide the "smoking gun" needed to make a real case against the teacher. The SCI investigator asked Mr. S what he knew about the recently removed teacher. Mr S stated that he was sure the recently removed teacher demanded secret favors from students who wanted out of Mr. S class, mostly females. The SCI investigator asked him what kind of "favors" did the recently removed teacher demand? Mr. S response was "I don't know" but why would they leave my class unless their was some secret deals made with these students? The SCI investigator already had realized that the major misconduct the Principal, Snidely Whiplash, accused the recently removed teacher of committing was not true and he was considered a "great teacher" by the students he interviewed. After going to the school an unprecedented 8 times and not finding anything other than the usually hearsay, rumors, and typical High School gossip about the teacher, the investigator knew that what the Principal accused the recently removed teacher with was "bullshit". Now here was the "school snitch", Mr. S accusing the teacher with making deals without any evidence. By the time the interview was over it was quite obvious that the reason the students were leaving Mr. S class was that he was a "terrible teacher". The SCI investigator ignored Mr. S's accusations and finally closed the case despite complaints from the Principal that he did not look hard enough for the evidence of major misconduct which never materialized or ever occurred.

The recently removed teacher was found not to have committed any misconduct by an Arbitrator and was sent to another school to resume his career. What happened to the "toxic teacher", the "school snitch" Mr. S? Good news for the students he has only limited classroom interaction and is now a hallway Dean as he continues to "kiss up" to the Administration.`

What is most interesting Mr. S would not be in any danger of being fired under Bloomberg's Bill to end LIFO despite the fact he is a "terrible teacher" since he "kisses up" to the Administration.
Go figure.

The Hypocrisy Of The DOE’s Office Of Legal Services Knows No Bounds As They Allow The “Worst Of The Worst” Teachers To Go Back Into The Classroom

How many times have we read in the newspapers how Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Chancellor Joel Klein only want “great teachers” in the NYC school system? Now we all know their definition of a “great teacher” is young , cheap, and disposable that is consistent with their “education on the cheap” program. However, the DOE’s Office Of Legal Services do not even bother to determine who are “great teachers” when looking into the allegations charged against the teacher. To these lawyers and their supervisor if the teacher is willing to make a deal and plead guilty, they will settle with the teacher and make them an ATR, and send them to a school.

Now, the great majority of teachers who take a settlement are probably hard working and good with the students who may have committed some form of minor misconduct that was embellished and twisted due to a Principal who just wanted them out of the school. Therefore, they decided that it was in their best interests to settle their case and get on with their lives. To these teachers it is worth the DOE extortion that results from settlements ($5,000 to $15,000 and worthless courses)and are no longer a “threat to the children”. However, there were a select few known as the “worst of the worst”. This group of teachers was taken out of the classroom for a myriad of issues but they all had one thing in common. These teachers were true screw-ups, knuckleheads, and in some cases, downright dangerous to themselves and others. Incredibly, the DOE’s Office Of Legal Services after filing 3020-a charges against this select group of teachers made a settlement with them, even when they had a “slam duck” termination case against these teachers. By contrast some of the best teachers I have known refused to submit to the DOE’s extortion request and were forced to defend themselves in the 3020-a termination hearings.

Let’s look at some of these “worst of the worst” teachers who have been sent back to the schools. Previously, I wrote about two of them, Ebony & Ivory, and nothing more needs to be said about them. Now to promote gender equality I now bring you “Mutt & Jeff”. The two teachers are not only a danger to the classroom but to themselves as well. Mutt, was removed for erratic behavior as well as time and attendance issues from his school. Reliability was a problem for “Mutt” while at his school. Once “Mutt” was reassigned and received his 3020-a charges his erratic behavior and attendance problem persisted to the point that “Mutt” was given numerous disciplinary letters to his file and two consecutive “U” ratings during his reassignment. His eyes seemed bloodshot and there were allegations of improper behaviors exhibited by him and noted by the Site supervisor in his disciplinary hearings. Suspicions of drug use, drinking, insubordination, and sexual harassment were only some of the accusations associated with “Mutt”. However, the DOE’s “Office Of Legal Services” does not care whether “Mutt” is incapable of teaching children or that he is a threat to himself and others. As long as “Mutt” is willing to pay a fine and take a course, back he went to another unsuspecting school who’s children will be exposed to this unstable character.

As for “Jeff” . This teacher is a total screwup. He was taken out of classroom for a myrid of issues. He had separate SCI and OSI investigations and before his removal, even the State of New York came from Albany to evaluate his teaching ability, he failed. His charges were so many that I could not even list them in this post. This teacher was one of the laziest individuals I knew. The students called him “Mr. Ditto” because he never taught only gave photocopies of work sheets. Had he not been taken out for misconduct when he was, he would have been taken out for incompetence by the end of that year of his reassignment. His behavior did not improve while reassigned. He used a phony handicap parking permit to park in handicapped spots and when caught he just shrugged his shoulders and continued to do it anyway. He had time and attendance issues both at his school and during the reassignment, and would sneak up to different floors to steal food from workshops given at the building he was reassigned to. “Jeff” was a real screwup and yet the DOE’s Office Of Legal Services” did not care about his lack of teaching ability and his ability to screwup, the only thing they cared about was the money.

I can only laugh when I hear how Mayor Mike and Chancellor Joel claim they want only “great teachers” in the system while closing their collective eyes to the hypocrites at the “Office Of Legal Services” who see no problem in putting the “worst of the worst” teachers back into the classroom and endanger the academic welfare of the unfortunate students who have them.