An Example Of The Danger In Being An ATR

When I rotated from school to school many teachers would pick my brain on various issues ranging from their pensions, work rules, discipline, or just simply to grip, lots of griping.  I would be greeted with "you're so lucky to be an ATR" .  They would say things like you don't have to comply with the punitive Charlotte Danielson rubric, or worry about the MOSUL,  the obscene amount of paperwork, blaming us for student failure, and the administrative  pressure to pass failing students.  In that regard they are right.  However, there is a down side in being an ATR. Just to name a few.

• A stranger in a strange school.
• Having no permanent location to call home.
• No place to store your belongings.
• Field supervisors who give you "fly by" observations.
• Few per session opportunities.

 Besides the above list the worst is the reduced "due process" rights that ATR have, thanks to the 2014 contract that has resulted is many ATRs being given a "U" rating and some even terminated!  Weekly I hear from ATRs the injustices they experience and how poorly they are treated.  Be it no bathroom key, continuous hall or cafeteria duty, being given secretarial work, assigned six classes to teach with four of them in a row. Even if the ATR was to grieve it, the damage is done and refusing an assignment can lead to 3020-a insubordination charges.  While the DOE abuses the ATR our disconnected union leadership  twiddle their collective thumbs and does little to stop these abuses.

That brings me to an egregious action taken by one Principal against an ATR that has not only hurt the ATR, but shows how little the union cares about helping ATRs when targeted unfairly by a vindictive Principal.


 The ATR is a 28 year veteran of the system that joined the ATR pool when his school closed.  In his 28 years he never was disciplined and always received "satisfactory" ratings.  He is considered an elite Math teacher and many schools recruited him to cover their Math programs Townsand Harris and Cardozo were his latest schools.  However, due to his $100,000+ salary no school was willing to appoint him without changes to the "fair student funding" that discourages schools from hiring the best teachers for their students.

This year, the Math teacher rotated to a small high school in Central Queens and on his second day at the school was assigned to cover a class.  Unknown to the ATR, the school had a "zero tolerance" rule about student cellphone use and when one student asked the ATR if he can take a picture of him the ATR saw little problem and allowed it.  Unfortunately, at that very moment, a teacher was walking past the room and saw the student with the cellphone and told the Principal that the ATR was allowing the students to use their cellphones in class.  Rather than taking the ATR aside and telling him what the rules were, he held a disciplinary hearing and give the teacher a Letter to the File (LIF) for the alleged infraction.  That's right, a LIF for such a trivial action that really didn't even rate a counseling memo.

Because he received a LIF, the ATR automatically received a "U" rating, despite not having an unsatisfactory observation!  The undeserved "U" rating not only was an ego deflater to a teacher who in his 28 years of teaching never even had a "U" observation but hurt him monetarily as well.  You see, the Math teacher teaches Summer School and has been doing it for over two decades but because the DOE gave him a "U" rating, he could not teach summer school.  Interestingly, in a year where fewer and fewer teachers are teaching Summer School and Math programs were either cancelled or reduced due to a lack of qualified Math teachers available for the Summer, an elite teacher is excluded from teaching and help struggling students to pass and graduate.

The Math teacher will grieve the unfair "U" rating but since only 0.3% are reversed, he has already contacted a lawyer to file Article 78 charges against the DOE and while it will cost him $5,000 and time, he believes that its the only way to stop the DOE abuse of the ATRs since the union shows no interest in supporting the ATR.  I wish him well.

This is just another example of the hardships of being an ATR and why ideology is more important than what's best for the students at the DOE.

More And More District 75 Teachers Have Stopped Working Summer School Due To The Stress Of The Teacher Evaluation System.

This summer a highly regarded District 75 school who had most of their teachers work the summer found, to their shock ,that a majority of the teachers refused to work over the summer.  This was despite the fact that these teachers get federal 683 money or 17.5% of their pay to work the six weeks. This is essentially double their salary for the summer school position.  The question is why did so many teachers opt out working the summer?  The simple answer is the increased stress due to the teacher evaluation system and its only going to get worse.

Starting last year, many teachers found out that the State and DOE were insisting that teachers instruct their students in Common Core and academics when many of the students don't have the ability to function independently in the world they exist in.  That's right District 75 teachers who used to teach "life skills" like taking their students to a supermarket and buy things by counting change are now being taught in the classroom Geometry and other academic subjects despite these students not being testable but are being tested anyway and their results are being used to evaluate their teacher.

Gone are the teaching of "life skills" such as counting change, dressing one self, taking mass transit, making simple meals, do domestic chores, and investigate their neighborhood.  Skills necessary to be a functioning adult,  Instead they are being taught about the Presidents,  using Geometry to determine angles, and read  non-fiction books.  Many of the District 75 students are incapable of doing the academics demanded by the SED and the DOE but the teachers are told to do it anyway.  Predictably, the results are terrible and many of the teachers saw their "highly effective" and "effective" ratings drop accordingly.

With the new, more punitive testing requirements imposed by the SED, their is a real danger that many District 75 teachers will be unfairly rated "developing" or even "ineffective" since the high-stakes test is 50% of a teacher's evaluation and these District 75 students will be assigned a grade, even the untestable ones if the State gets its way!

With the added stress of the Danielson rubric and the 50% high-stakes testing requirement for the teacher evaluation system, many District 75 teachers have decided not to work the summer as they prepare for the next school year with the real losers the special education students who lose their teachers for the summer months.

Children last...always. Especially the most needy!

Academic Fraud Is Common In The New York City High Schools.

I once wrote about how few students were "college ready" especially in poor and minority communities and was criticized by some for using a metric that really didn't determine the academic abilities of the students and their school.  While they may have a point the reason I used the "college and career readiness"  metric is because it cannot be easily manipulated by school principals unlike the graduation rates and credit accumulation metrics, the hallmark of the Michael Bloomberg era.  It seems now that Mayor Bill de Blasio has replaced Michael Bloomberg as Mayor of the City, the media has decided to question the "credit recovery" and graduation rates as if this was only an issue in the last two years and under Mayor Bill de Blasio.  Be it that it may, academic fraud has been around for the last decade when it came to the New York City high schools.

Its common knowledge that many of the New York City high schools have been using "credit recovery" programs that lacked "rigor" and even real instruction to pass along students and give them easy credits.  In fact, the State was so appalled by the bogus "credit recovery" programs the New York City high schools were using that they forced Chancellor Walcott in 2012 to make significant changes to the "credit recovery" programs and the abuses were to stop.  Remember this outrageous action?  how about this one?  And who can forget this? Of course the DOE looked the other way when schools apparently ignored the new standards. The result was many academically unprepared students were graduated despite not having the skills to succeed in the adult world.

In school after school I hear stories of undeserving students being graduated out by the use of bogus "credit recovery", Principal pressure, grading policy, and manipulating attendance.  Many "Leadership Academy Principals" demand an 85% passing rate, including students on a teacher's roster who refuse to attend class.  When the teacher objects, he or she is refused tenure or is given poor observation grades.  Moreover, attendance figures were manipulated in such a way as to show the student attended class when the student did not.  Finally, many principals require a minimum grade of 55% this ensures that if a student can pass a marking period, they can receive a passing grade for the entire year.  Its a wonder that the New York City High School graduation rate is not higher?

In today's New York Post we find another instance of the DOE looking the other way when it comes to Regents cheating and again Superintendent Amiee Horowitz is linked to having a school's teachers regrade the Regents.  After denying that a school's teachers were regrading the Regents, an email was published showing that at Richmond Hill it directed three teachers do do just that.  The DOE response?  Dead silence.  Is it any wonder that 78.3% of the students who go to CUNY have to take remediation?  What about the students who were pushed through without even the opportunity to develop the academic skills necessary to be productive adults?  To me this is academic fraud and the administrators involved should not only be fired but go to jail.

Academic fraud will continue in the New York City high schools regardless of who is in charge of the New York City schools until more stringent and academically appropriate rules are implemented in the future.

Chancellor Carmen Farina Fails Yet Again.

With much fanfare, educators in New York City looked forward to a new era now that Michael Bloomberg and his non-educators no longer were in charge at the DOE and installed policies that made teaching in the New York City classroom a more hostile environment.  Unfortunately, very little has changed when Mayor Bill de Blasio placed Carmen Farina in charge of the New York City schools.  Ms. Farina has basically followed the Bloomberg era policies and the few things she actually changed, like the elimination of the Children First Networks, and criteria for the Leadership Academy were the ideas of her arch nemesis,  Eric Nadelstern, who allegedly pushed her out and into retirement back in the early years of Chancellor Joel Klein's tenure.  When it came to other Bloomberg era policies, like the ATR crisis, fair student funding, education on the cheap, and large class sizes, nothing changed.  Yes, she gave Superintendents back their authority but some of her picks smacked of cronyism and not competence.   One of her primary goals was to remove the 400 principals she believed should not be running their schools.  However, saying it is one thing, doing it is another and in this she has failed miserably.

Take the latest travesty, the removal of Principal Kathleen Elvin of Dewey High School in Brooklyn.  Despite pleas from Dewey staff and allegations of credit accumulation fraud that resulted in a suspected large increase in graduation rates, Chancellor Carmen Farina failed to remove the Principal.  Interestingly, Principal Elvin was selected by then Superintendent Amiee Horowitz, who apparently ignored complaints by Dewey staff about Principal Elvin and her questionable policies before she moved on to head the renewal schools program.  Yes, the same Amiee Horowitz that discontinued a highly competent Science teacher who reported Regents cheating at her school.  The story is Here.

As far back as when Carmen Farina took over as Chancellor, she was apparently informed of the problems at John Dewey High School but chose to ignore it.  Instead, it was the John Dewey staff that contacted SCI, who dumped it to OSI for review.  OSI apparently sat on the case for over a year as the DOE was hoping the issue would blow over and let the Principal continue her reign of terror on veteran staff and the bloated graduation rate that made the DOE look like their policies were successful.  However, the Dewey staff, sensing that little was going to happen if they let OSI sit on the investigation, took it to the WCBS-TV and the New York Post who blow the phoney "credit recovery" program wide open.  The "credit recovery" scam was known as "easy pass" by students and staff alike and was a joke.

Interestingly, the DOE leadership kept the Principal in place, despite the media onslaught and Chancellor Carmen Farina even said that most of the accusations were unsubstantiated!  However, the media pressure was unrelenting from both WCBS-TV and the New York Post and OSI had no choice to complete and publish the investigation.  What was their conclusion? That much of the "credit recovery program" was a sham with no instruction and work that consisted of packets that in many cases were not completed.

Confronted with the overwhelming evidence of "credit recovery" fraud, Chancellor Carmen Farina changed her tune and now says that she has removed Principal Elvin and will fire her..  It only took eighteen months after the Chancellor was informed for Farina to very reluctantly remove Principal Elvin.  If she was a teacher how long would it have taken to remove her?  Probably one day.  As we see the DOE "double standard" remains alive and well under the disappointing Chancellor Carmen Farina who protected the Principal for eighteen months as too many students were graduated, unprepared academically and shows once again that she has failed the students of the New York City schools.

The Mulgrew/Weingarten Sellout Of The Rank And File Will Result In Members Refusing To Pay Dues.

This post is an extension of the NYC Educator article dealing with the lack of democracy and ignoring the rights of many of the members by the UFT leadership.  The consequences next year may devastate the UFT when it comes to collecting dues from its increasingly alienated rank and file if the U.S. Supreme Court rules that dues are voluntary.  Under the "Unity" caucus with Randi Weingarten and now Michael Mulgrew as UFT President, the rank and file have been subject to massive "givebacks", a hostile classroom environment, reduced "due process rights", inferior contracts, and questionable spending of member funds for causes that have nothing to do with the classroom or teacher rights.

It was the "Unity" caucus that agreed to the punitive Danielson rubric that has made teaching in the classroom a horror and the support for Common Core that most educators are against.  In fact, Michael Mulgrew threatened to punch you in the face if you attack his beloved Common Core. Worse, the "Unity " caucus has supported the high-stakes testing, complete with the "junk science" that has made teaching "high needs" students and English Language Learners a ticket to "ineffectiveness".

Changes to the 3020-a:  First, under Weingarten the 3020-a law was streamlined in 2001 that eliminated the three arbitrator board for incompetence cases.  Furthermore, the nyc teacher was no longer allowed to pick an arbitrator from a list supplied by the State.  Instead the arbitrator was imposed by the DOE, with the approval of the UFT.

2005 Contract: That brings me to the terrible 2005 contract that brought us the ATR crisis, the probable cause suspension without pay or health benefits, and a longer school day for a raise that barely equaled the inflation rate! Our union leadership also agreed to the elimination of the seniority transfer, the grievance procedure of most letters to the file, and the reimposing of the circular six requirements.

Fair Student Funding: Part of the 2005 contract included the "fair student funding" that resulted in principals hiring the "cheapest and not the best teachers" for their schools.  When "fair student funding" was proposed by Chancellor Joel Klein, he didn't think that the UFT would agree to it and was willing to withdraw it if the union put up a fuss since it would leave veteran teachers without a position.  Shockingly, Randi Weingarten agreed to it, thinking that the DOE would never waste over $100 million dollars on teachers without a classroom.  How wrong she was.  The result is a group of mostly highly paid and older teachers, ranging from 1,400 to 2,400 who the DOE pays to rotate or temporarily replace other teachers.

2007 Contract:  While this contract was decent, it included two significant "givebacks".  The first was "Peer Intervention Plus"  known as PIP+ that resulted in a 90% termination rate for teachers who were fooled in taking this program, thinking it would help them continue teaching.  The other "giveback" was an expansion of the "probable cause" actions, including most felonies.

Reducing TDA Interest Rate: Randi Weingarten's final stab in the back in 2010 was to agree to the City's request to eliminate their contribution to the TDA by 1.25%.  Instead of receiving 8.25% that all the non-UFT members get, UFT members receive only7%.  Yes, we got back the two days before Labor Day but we should have never given it up in the first place in the infamous 2005 contract.

This ended Randi Weingarten's tenure as UFT President and ushered in Michael Mulgrew who brought with him a biting wit and promised improvements and respect for his members. His failure to finalize a contract with the City was expected but he unexpectedly supported the Obama administration's teacher evaluation system in 2010, despite member distrust of the Race to the Top (RttT) that tied test scores to teacher effectiveness and has proven to be a disaster.. Not a promising start to impress the membership.

Common Core:  If supporting the badly flawed teacher evaluation system was bad enough, his embracing of the Common Core was a slap in the face of all parents, students, and educators alike..  He even threatened in 2014 to "punch in the mouth" people who would dare take away his Common Core".

2014 Contract:  It goes without saying that Michael Mulgrew sold the rank and file a vastly inferior contract with a 1.4% raise for ten years and even that was extended for a month and a half to pay off his retiree friends.  All the retro payments were back-loaded as far down the road as to 2020.  Moreover, he agreed to a very significant "giveback" by making ATRs "second class citizens" with reduced "due process" rights.  Finally, his embracing of Chancellor Carmen Farina is disgusting as the rank and file suffer repeated insults from the DOE with excessive paperwork, large class sizes, weakening of student discipline policies, and the use of Charlotte Danielson as a punitive rubric and not as a guide.

The legacy of the "Unity" caucus under Randi Weingarten and Michael Mulgrew can be summed up as a legacy of inferior contracts, continuing "givebacks", and unresponsiveness to member concerns.  If the U.S. Supreme Court rules against the union, how many members would be willing to voluntarily pay their $1,200 yearly dues to a union so unconcerned about its rank and file?  My guess would be somewhere about 20% or about the amount of active members who bothered to vote in the past UFT election.  However, don't worry Mikey, your 750 strong traveling companions and those that would sell their souls for a cushy union job will always be there to lick your boots and tell you what a wonderful leader you are.  Its just the rest of us you will have to convince and so far you have failed in that regard.

Michael Mulgrew's Grade Is An Ineffective.

Most teachers are evaluated and range from "highly effective" to "ineffective".  Therefore, its only fair to evaluate UFT President Michael Mulgrew for his work since Bill de Blasio became Mayor of New York City using the same rating criteria.  Mr. Mulgrew was rated on four major categories, contract negotiation, member rights, transparency,  and truthfulness.

Contract Negotiation:  Michael Mulgrew agreed to a very cheap contract that not only screwed his members but the rest of the city workforce by agreeing to as 10% raise for 7 years, or 1.4% annually.  He also back loaded the contract by giving us our retros from the 2009-10 time period as far down the road as  the year 2020!  The contract also included "givebacks" unlike other union contracts.  The "givebacks" included reduce due process rights for ATRs and no retros for teachers who resigned or were terminated.  Micheal Mulgrew falsely claimed that the City could not afford more and there would be no money left if we rejected the city's offer.  Of course, the city has reported record surpluses of billions of dollars because of the cheap contract that Michael Mulgrew negotiated. 

Member Rights:  The reduced "due process rights" of ATRs, negotiated by the union is legendary, with forced placements, forced resignations, mandatory interviews, and the tweaking of the 3020-a process that tips the scales against teachers who are teachers rated "ineffective" who now must prove they are not "ineffective" rather than the DOE having to prove they are.  Even teachers subject to the old 3020-a rules are discouraged from bringing in character witnesses and to wrap up the hearing right after the final date rather than wait for the transcripts to write a closing statement.   Mulgrew claims that he doesn't go after principals because they are fellow union members but has no qualms about funding an anti cop protest led by Al Sharpton. Finally, to date, the union has not bothered to publish the new contract book, I wonder why?

Transparency:  Under Michael Mulgrew, transparency and democracy is just a fiction.  This year Michael Mulgrew shut off the open mike when James Eterno was speaking about giving ATRs proper representation.  He also made sure his flunkies were strategically placed and recognized to support his agenda.  The Roberts rules were routinely ignored under Michael Mulgrew.  Moreover, when the ATRs clamored for their own chapter, Michael Mulgrew ignored their pleas and claimed that the ATRs are a temporary situation, despite some ATRs being one for almost a decade!

Truthfulness:  There are rumors that each "Unity" member must take an oath to support the leadership, no matter how the member felt.  Michael Mulgrew claims there is no such oath.  However, the entire 750 member "Unity" block votes in lockstep with what the leadership wants, be it at the delegate assembly, or at NYSUT.  As for Michael Mulgrew himself?  He declared victory when the NYSED required that 22 components of Danielson be used to evaluate teachers and then claimed victory again when it was reduced to 8 components, really?   In the latest teacher evaluation, Michael Mulgrew again claimed victory as he was given minor changes in the draconian teacher evaluation system that makes high-stakes testing 50% of a teacher's evaluation and even allowed the Democratic State Assembly to vote for it   Finally, he claims that there is a change of tone at the DOE but ask any classroom teacher if things have changed at their school?  The answer is no.

Using the above criteria of contract negotiation, member rights, transparency, and truthfulness, I find that our UFT President to be "ineffective".

Another School Year Ends With The Destructive Bloomberg Policies In Place.

When the Bloomberg administration left office, teachers throughout the five boroughs eagerly anticipated real change in the hostile classroom environment.  We hoped that the continued attacks and mandates on teachers from Tweed would end as the new Chancellor would replace the decade long Bloomberg era policymakers with real educators who understood what the classroom was about. Real change was coming to the DOE claimed our UFT President Micheal Mulgrew, and he sensed a new era of collaboration between the DOE and the union.  Unfortunately, the collaboration between our union leadership and the DOE did not extend to the staffs of the schools or the classroom teacher.

To me, real change is what is going on in the classroom and after a year and a half under Mayor Bill  de Blasio  and his disappointing Chancellor, Carmen Farina, very little has changed.  Let's look at the policies and practice under the DOE before and after the changeover and see how little has changed.

Class Sizes:  Under Bloomberg, class sizes rose over the years and despite Mayor De Blasio claiming he was going to reduce class sizes, the opposite occurred with no reduction in class sizes, the highest in the State.  Moreover, the latest City budget reduces funding to solve the school overcrowding problems, especially in Western Queens.

School Budgets: Shockingly,  Chancellor Carmen Farina froze the already tight school budgets, despite the rapidly improving City economy.  Worse, she left in place the bloated DOE bureaucracy with the emphasis on mindless data mining and accountability not to mention the ever increasing headcount of the legal division to prosecute teachers under 3020-a.   While more and more money went to the already bloated DOE bureaucracy, the schools, who had seen an average 14% reduction in funds since 2008, were starved for resources and were forced to beg their teachers to take an extra period to save on hiring in an effort to save money. In too many schools teachers uncertified in the subject were instructing students, usually with disastrous results.

DOE Policies:  The polices that the DOE implemented under Bloomberg resulted in increased paperwork, the ATR crises, and a funding method called "fair student funding" that forced schools to hire the "cheapest and not the best" teachers for their students have remained unchanged under the disappointing Chancellor.

Principals:  Despite Carmen Farina's claim that she will remove the system of 400 principals who shouldn't be in charge of the schools, few have actually been removed.  Just take a look at some of the principals in my blog or in the newspapers, they are still in charge of their schools.  Moreover, the infamous DOE "double standard" still exists when it comes to disciplining staff and school administrators.

While our UFT President hugs the Chancellor and claims a new era of cooperation between the UFT and DOE is here, the reality is very different.  When it comes to the classroom, its still a hostile environment and a "gotcha system".  Nothing has changed under the disappointing Chancellor as the destructive Bloomberg policies are still in place and experienced teachers are fleeing the system in greater numbers..

The Unsatisfactory Rating And Substitute Teaching After Retirement.

One of the questions I am asked frequently is "if I retire with a "U" rating can I still apply for a substitute teacher license"?  The short answer is "no".  However, the actual answer is really quite complicated.  It should be noted that few retirees actually apply for a substitute teaching license. maybe less than 5% of all retirees and in that group there are few retirees with a "U" rating, so it only is an issue for a very small group of retirees.

To get a substitute teaching license a retiree or a teacher who resigns must  be in good standing (have five consecutive "satisfactory" ratings in their last five years of teaching for the DOE).  Under the new teacher evaluation system a teacher rated developing or higher is considered "satisfactory".  However, to get around this onerous requirement, a retiree can ask a Principal to nominate him or her and the retiree might be able to work in that school but no other school unless other principals sponsor the retiree. I do know of a retiree who was "U" rated his last year by a newbie "Leadership Academy Principal", he is still called to substitute in three schools that have long-term principals who he worked under in his 30 years of teaching despite not being able to obtain a citywide substitute teaching license from the DOE.   However, I am told this is a rare occurrence as the DOE discourages principals from nominating teachers who received a "U" rating.

Of course, the retiree can appeal the "U" rating but historically only 0.2% are reversed and filing an Article 78 at State Supreme Court can cost up to $5,000 dollars and take two years or more!  Therefore, for almost all retirees that received a "U" rating in the last 5 years, its highly unlikely that the DOE will authorize a substitute teacher license. Presently, the percentage of "U" ratings successfully reversed in the DOE under the disappointing Chancellor, Carmen Farina,  remains unchanged then during the Bloomberg era despite our disconnected union leadership would have you believe ts getting better.

For those retirees who want to substitute teach, I believe you should first get physiological counseling and if you still want the "blood money" along with the stress and student disrespect then here is the procedure you need to follow.  Good luck, you will need it.

Is This Another Regents Cheating Scandal Involving A School Under Superintendent Amiee Horowitz?

In the New York Post today an article by Susan Edelman has exposed a potential Regents cheating scandal that involved Automotive High School.  According to the article students who failed the Living Environment and Algebra Regents in January, were allowed to appeal their grades and 5 of the 9 students were found to have passed one or the other Regents.  While I'm sure that Regents grade appeals are very common throughout the City, the question is who where the educators that re-graded the Regents test papers?

My understanding is that any appeal of a Regents grade is done by outside educators who have no affiliation with the school or subject to pressure from the District Superintendent.  However, according to the New York Post article an insider claimed the re-grading was done by a select group of teachers at Automotive High School appointed by the embattled Principal Caterina Lafergola.  The article included the following:

Automotive insiders said Lafergola instructed several teachers to go into a room and re-score the January exams in March.

Of course, the DOE disputed the claim and said that no Automotive High School teachers were involved in the re-grading.  Maybe the DOE should supply the names of the re-graders and their school affiliation to put the accusation to rest.  However, the DOE has not done so further fueling speculation of another Regents cheating scandal.

As for Superintendent Amiee Horowitz?  This is not the first time she has been linked in a Regents cheating scandal.  Remember, the  post I wrote about her earlier this year?  That's right, while Superintendent of District 20, she not only failed to look into a Regents cheating allegation but tried to take the license of a untenured teacher who was the whistle blower that she discontinued after the teacher reported the Regents cheating.  Interestingly, SCI eventually did investigate the Regents cheating and substantiated the discontinued teacher's accusation which resulted in 3020-a charges against the educator who was involved in the Regents cheating at the school.

While there is no proof that Superintendent Amiee Horowitz condones Regents cheating but if these new charges prove to be true, her failure again to take appropriate action against school administrators who have been implicated in the Regents cheating is very troubling and makes me wonder if she is competent to be a Superintendent.  Then again under the disappointing Chancellor, Carmen Farina. its cronyism over competence, when selecting who should be a Superintendent under her administration.

Is The DOE Using Different Standards When Evaluating ATRs? It Appears So.

A couple of years ago it was brought to my attention that the DOE had separated ATRs into two lists.  The first list were ATRs who were excessed from schools.  The second list are for ATRs who were disciplined or "U" rated.  I was never able to actually see these lists and didn't think much more about the lists or why the DOE would separate the ATRs since it had no relevance at that time since nobody was getting a permanent position anyway.  However, its now become obvious to me and many others that these lists still exist in some form or another and is being used to target the second group of ATRs to harass them until they resign or retire.

It seems to me, that after speaking to many ATRs, that the ones who won their 3020-a termination hearings or were "U" rated the previous couple of years were assigned ATR field supervisors (assassins) as early as September and were continually observed throughout the school year (one ATR claimed she had 19 visits).  While the ATRs who were excessed had either no ATR field supervisors or were observed one or two times during the school year.

I suspect the union is well aware of the different standards being used in observing the ATRs but has apparently done nothing to stop the harassment.  Maybe, they are actually encouraging this abuse of authority and hoping that some of the ATRs actually leave the system?  It's no secret that both the DOE and UFT want to "thin the herd" to the union the ATRs are an embarrassment and while they want them back into the classroom, they would be quite happy if they resigned or retired.  That's why the union leadership does not want an ATR Chapter Leader and prefers that they be disenfranchised by claiming their situation is temporary, despite some people being ATRs for nearly a decade!  As for the DOE?  They would fire all ATRs if they could and save $160 million dollars in the process.  Its no wonder the DOE has instituted policies that made ATRs a second class citizen and some practically an untouchable in their attempt to eliminate the ATR pool and the union is complicit by even allowing it to be part of the latest contract!

Letters have been written to the Chancellor and calls made to the Mayor to eliminate the ATR issue. However, these pleas have been met with unresponsive silence and for the next school year I see nothing changed in resolving the ongoing ATR problem that deprives students of "quality teachers" and drain $160 million dollars that could be used to reduced class sizes and the savings would add resources to the classroom but then its still "children last" when it comes to the DOE as ideology wins over what's best for the students in the New York City public schools.

The John Dewey Easy Pass Saga Continues As Students Graduate Unprepared Academically.

After a year and a half OSI investigation of grade fixing and phony credit recovery courses at John Dewey High School in Brooklyn.  The investigation is still ongoing which is very puzzling to me.  In fact, according to the Daily News, Chancellor Carmen Farina claims that the OSI investigation has failed to substantiate many of the allegations logged against Principal Kathleen Elvin and her administration but that the investigation is still ongoing.  I guess the ten teachers who cooperated in the OSI investigation exposing the grade fixing and phony credit recovery is not proof enough that academic fraud is being perpetrated to artificially increase the school's graduation rate at the expense of the student's education.

It seems that the school's "easy pass" system is geared to give struggling seniors essentially free credits so to graduate them despite being academically unprepared.  Juan Gonzalez of the Daily News exposed this in his article back in April and showed massive fraud when it came to awarding credits.  I also summarized the problems at John Dewey High School in my May post as well.  Since then the local CBS affiliate has reported that the DOE has decided to "circle the wagons" and protect the school's administration while allowing their highly questionable credit recovery system called "easy pass" by critics to artificially inflate the graduation rate. In fact, the local CBS affiliate has claimed that the Chancellor refuses to talk about why she has failed to remove the school's Principal and has now employed a personal bodyguard to shoo away their reporters who wanted her to explain her decision to leave the school administration in place.

It seems that the Principal Kathleen Elvin is very vindictive and according to the New York Post retaliated against staff by giving half the school's teachers failing grades.  Of the 101 teachers on staff, 16 were rated "ineffective" and 35 were rated "developing".  By contrast, only 8% of the teachers citywide were rated "ineffective or developing".  Interestingly the school was rated "effective" on the State tests but the terrible observation reports lowered the teacher evaluation grades.  One teacher was quoted that "She has a personal vendetta against the teachers and is using the observations as a weapon against the teachers to force them to leave or retire".  Interestingly, in the school snapshot a majority of teachers do not believe that the Principal is an effective manager and the union grievance director called the poor rating a "red flag".

This is just another case of a bad Principal being protected by the DOE and a Chancellor that can't see the forest for the trees as the OSI investigation drags on with no report of the alleged educational fraud at John Dewey High School in Brooklyn..

The City's Use Of Uncertified Teachers Results In Poor Student Academic Achievement And That's A Crime.

This week I was grading the Earth Science Regents for many of the schools  in Queens.  During the grading, I observed two very important things.   First, approximately 33% of the graders were not certified in Earth Science yet they were selected to grade the Earth Science Regents and were even selected for per session grading.  Second, many of the schools graded that had poor Regents results had one thing in common.  Few of the school's students had a certified Earth Science teacher instructing them!  By contrast, schools that had a full complement of Earth Science teachers showed a much higher Regents passing percentage.   That got me thinking if some of these graders, who were uncertified in Earth Science, did not properly credit some student answers because of the grader's lack of knowledge of the subject and this resulted in the student received a failing 63% or 64% on the Regents rather than a passing grade of 65%? The question is how can the use of uncertified teachers instructing and grading students be condoned by the DOE leadership in their "children first" policy?   The simple answer is the DOE doesn't care.

An organization that really believes in putting student first would demand that every teacher be certified in the subject they are teaching in.  A teacher who has deep curriculum and subject knowledge is a prerequisite for real student academic achievement.  Moreover, a certified teacher provides the necessary information for a student to fully understand and not memorize subject material as is done in too many schools.  However, as I have traveled through the Queens high schools, I saw schools like Martin Van Buren, Richmond Hill, Long Island City, Newtown, and Bryant high schools without a certified Earth Science teacher on staff.   Further, many other schools had uncertified teachers teaching nearly full Earth Science schedules rather than hire the Earth Science teachers available in the ATR pool.

Many of the Bloomberg small schools had not emphasized Earth Science and pushed students to take Chemistry and Physics instead.  The result was disastrous as many students failed the higher level and much harder Sciences and eventually these schools had the teachers teaching Earth Science.  Now that many of these schools have Earth Science, they have not hired certified Earth Science teachers to teach it.  The DOE allows this by accepting the false claim that there are no Earth Science teachers available.  True, few newbie teachers are certified in Earth Science but in Queens alone there are 6 experienced Earth Science teachers in excess but because they are expensive, no school is willing to pick up their salary, thanks to "fair student funding".

When I hear that the disappointing Chancellor, Carmen Farina, wants "effective teachers in the classroom" I can only laugh because under the DOE its hiring the "cheapest and not the best teachers" that count and its all about the money and not what's best for the children's academic achievement that is most important. Until this policy changes the New York City schools are doomed for failure.

ATR Field Assassins Deliver The Bad News Last Week.

All over the City, ATRs who rotate were handed their "unsatisfactory" ratings by the ATR field supervisor, otherwise known as the field assassin.  Many of these "U" ratings are undeserved and are based upon "flyby" observations that have little relevance to a real observation.

Too many times do I hear that ATRs are being observed and rated in classrooms that they have no knowledge of the students or their academic abilities.   Moreover, quite a few ATRs are being rated and observed outside their subject area.  Finally, the field assassin's "plan of assistance" is a farce and offers no real support to the ATR. In fact, its used as a weapon to terminate the ATR.

The field assassin claims they are there to assist the ATR in landing a permanent position and to support their pedagogy.  However, the truth is very much different.  Many of the field assassins impose impossible standards on the ATR, like requiring Danielson and Common Core requirements and demanding differentiation in the lesson plan when the ATR has no clue what the academic abilities of the students are.  Further, they demand "rigor" but if the lesson is too difficult for the students, the field assassin "U" rates the lesson.  Of course, if the lesson lacks "rigor", the lesson is "U" rated for not being rigorous enough.  A no-win situation.

To back up the field assassin's "U" ratings is their fraudulent "plan of assistance" that talks about differentiation, classroom management. and effective teaching but offers no real support to the ATR.  The "plan of assistance" is used as a tool to not only "U" rate but terminate the teacher under section 3020-a. While  both the DOE and UFT agree that "Teaching for the 21st Century" should be used to determine if the ATR is "satisfactory" or not, neither organization appears unwilling or unable to tell the field assassins that and they go about their business to unfairly "U" rate the ATRs using almost impossible standards for them to meet.

How in the world can an ATR be expected to control student learning or behaviors if they don't know the students names or have any ownership over their grade?  Moreover, many field assassins actually ask the classroom teacher to leave the room which in many troubled schools is a signal for the students to act up and refuse to do the assignment.  Finally, its very obvious that some field assassins are harassing the ATRs with multiple observations, just hoping and waiting for the ATR to slip up so they can start the "plan of assistance" tool for supporting termination in the 3020-a hearings down the road.

The UFT leadership must demand that the field assassins be eliminated and that ATRs be placed in schools where vacancies exist.  However, I'm not holding my breath waiting for our disconnected leadership to do what's right for it's members.  That would be too much to ask.

The Uncaring DOE Forces Queens Chemistry And Physics Teachers To Grade In A Sweatbox.

Last year the Chemistry and Physics teachers in Queens were sent to William Cullen Bryant high school to grade.   The school is notorious for its horrible Leadership Academy Principal and for removing senior teachers on questionable 3020-a charges.   While these visiting teachers are not directly affected by the actions of this terrible Principal, she does determine where the teachers are doing the Regents grading.

Last year, she put the teachers in an non-air conditioned library, with no offer of liquids.  Moreover, the area has no parking available and the school has no parking lot.  While I might understand that the DOE might have made a mistake in selecting this location last year because they didn't investigate the situation, the fact that the DOE, for the second straight year, selected the same unacceptable grading location shows how uncaring the DOE are to teachers and their complaints.

One teacher told me that the DOE sent him an e-mail that to dress comfortably and bring water to the grading site and don't even think of bringing your car.  That means the DOE was well aware of the problems of selecting the William Cullen Bryant grading site and didn't care!  With so many high schools available that have both parking and air conditioning.  Bayside, Francis Lewis, Cardozo, Jamaica Campus, Springfield Gardens Campus, Martin Van Buren, John Bowne, Campus Magnet, Forest Hills, John Adams/Richmond Hill, Hugh School of Teaching, Maspeth, and Metropolitan high schools why Bryant?

The answer is simple.  The DOE does not care to make teachers comfortable.  Instead they make their lives difficult by the overwintering paperwork, inadequate resources, poor administrators, and terrible working conditions and the selection of Bryant high school is just another example of making a teacher's life as difficult as possible by the DOE.

Chancellor Carmen Farina Has No Clue What An Effective Teacher Is.

Since Carmen Farina has taken over at Chancellor of the New York City Public Schools she preaches to whomever would listen that she wants every child to have an effective teacher in the classroom.  It matters little to her whether her audience are principals, the media, teachers, or even at the secret February meeting with the 3020-a State arbitrators, NYSUT, and DOE lawyers.  Her message is the same;  "I want all students to have effective teachers instructing them".  Nice words if you ask me but as this post will point out the Chancellor fails to "practice what she preaches".

If the disappointing Chancellor really wanted to have effective teachers in the classroom she would be pushing policies that encourage principals to hire experienced teachers to cover their vacancies and implement polices that eliminated the ATR pool by giving schools an incentive to appoint an experienced ATR to their school.  However, Chancellor Carmen Farina has instead, continued the Bloomberg/Klein ideological policy called "education on the cheap" that shortchanges the schools of vital resources and deprives students of proper educational material for their classrooms.  Her freezing of the already tight  school budget for the 2014-15 school year, despite the City's economic recovery and more money sent to DOE Central is a prime example of the continuation of the Bloomberg/Klein policy to starve the schools and the classrooms in their "education on the cheap" policy.

Moreover, rather than save over $160 million dollars annually and place experienced teachers in vacancies, Carmen Farina continues the destructive "Fair Student Funding"(FSF) formula that not only shortchanges schools of proper funding for their students but forces principals to hire the "cheapest and not the best teachers" for their schools.  The result is the most needy students get the inexperienced teachers who suffer from their own steep learning curves in the classroom.  While 50% of new teachers leave the New York City classroom in five years, over 80% will leave the school they started at by that time.  With the Open Market Transfer System, a principal cannot keep an effective teacher if a better school offers that teacher a position.  Therefore, struggling schools suffer from high teacher turnover, which a recent study shows reduces student academic achievement, and lose their best teachers to higher achieving schools.The result is while highly experienced and effective teachers languish in the ATR pool, students in low achieving schools are subjected to many inexperienced teachers who lack the classroom skills to effectively teach and the few who become a "quality teacher" will leave for more comfortable classroom environments in a higher achieving school or district.

Finally, if Chancellor Carmen Farina was really serious about having effective teachers in the 

classroom, she would reduce class sizes to the State average, penalize schools that rely on teachers uncertified in the subject they are teaching in, and ensure that inclusion classes are not being abused by putting too many special education students in the class, a common abuse of Federal and State requirements.  Even in the New York Post, an article showed the problems of having an inexperienced and uncertified teacher instructing poor and minority students. More proof can be found Here!

When it come to Chancellor Carmen Farina she talks the talk but fails to walk the walk.She's shown to be more the problem than the solution.

The DOE Double Standard Continues Under Chancellor Carmen Farina.

Over the last eight years I have written various articles on the DOE "double standard" when disciplining teachers and administrators.  Our union leadership said this would stop with a new Mayor and Chancellor.  However, under the disappointing Chancellor Carmen Farina, the DOE "double standard" continues.  Today in the New York Post, there was an article that the City settled two sexual harassment suits against embattled Principal Howard Kwait for $275,000!  That's right!  The City paid off the two female assistant principals who allegedly suffered from unwanted sexual advances from the John Bowne High School Principal rather than fight the charges.

This was not the first time the City settled a harassment case against Principal Howard Kwait.  Back in 2012, a pregnant Assistant Principal was forced to leave the school and filed a lawsuit against Howard Kwait and the City, after reviewing the evidence, decided to settle that case as well. He also cost the City $225,000 for falsely arresting a student of cyber bullying, Finally, he was fined $4,500 by the Conflicts Of Interest Board for taking a vacation with a female subordinate.

Astonishingly, the DOE, who claims to have "zero tolerance" for any sexual misconduct has allowed Howard Kwait to remain as Principal, despite the three separate lawsuits that the City had to pay the victims to settle their cases.  Yes, this is the same DOE that put another Principal who was found guilty in a jury trial of harassing a female subordinate, in charge of Flushing High School.  If that is not enough?  How about the DOE's failure to remove Principal Carlos Borrero as he made sexual overtures to staff members and is subject to a federal lawsuit?  The ICEUFT blog has a more personal observation of the Principal.  Finally, who can forget the DOE's amnesia when it comes to Principal Namita Dwarka of Bryant High School?

Its obvious the DOE "double standard" continues when disciplining staff and administrators.

The Field Assassins Are "U" Rating ATRs.

It has become increasingly obvious that the ATR field supervisors are "U" rating ATRs and preparing many of them for their 3020-a charges that inevitably will follow.  In some cases if the ATR didn't go to the Professional Development or committed a minor misconduct, the DOE will file 3020-a charges with only one "U" rating, if they believe they can convince the arbitrator that the teacher is both "incompetent and dangerous to the students".

You may ask how can the union leadership allow these phoney "flyby observations" to be used as a basis for terminating a teacher?.  Unfortunately, our disconnected union leadership doesn't seem to care.  Just look at what our union leadership agreed to with regard to the ATR in the last contract.

• Reduced ATR "due process" rights.
• Failure to allow for a Chapter Leader for ATRs
• No mutual consent in positions
• Mandatory interviews and terminated if ATR fails to appear.
• Expedited one day hearing for problematic behavior"
• Failure to fight against "fair student funding"

Now, our union leadership looks the other way while these field assassins observe ATRs in strange classrooms, with no information on the student abilities, not teaching in their subject area, and penalizes them for lesson plans left by the teacher that are not "rigorous" enough.

The DOE with our union leadership's blessing, is trying to reduce the ATR pool, not by putting the ATR back in the classroom where they belong, but instead by thinning the herd  with these "flyby observations" and unfairly giving the ATR a "U" rating.

While I watch the very obvious love affair between Chancellor Carmen Farina and UFT President Michael Mulgrew, the love does not extend to the teachers and especially the ATRs as the Chancellor is determined to terminate them and the UFT President ignores their demands for fair treatment and representation.

While its too late for this school year, please post the ATR field supervisors that "U" rated you in the last two school years. Knowledge is power and knowing which field assassins to avoid will help all ATRs in the next school year.

Teacher Inequality In Poor And Minority Schools Cointinues In New York State

Despite rhetoric from the Governor, NYSED, and the Chancellors of NYS and NYC, teacher inequality continues in the poor and minority schools of New York State.  In a report by the State conclusively shows that the poor and minority schools suffer from higher teacher turnover.  Moreover, these schools are staffed with inexperienced teachers, teachers not certified in the subjects they are teaching in, and have lower evaluation ratings than other schools.

The report goes on to show the familiar socioeconomic and racial disparity that the Race to the Top (RttT) was supposed to eliminate with an influx of $700 million dollars that is now all spent by the State with little educational result. Most disturbing is how teacher inequality continues in the schools with the highest percentage of poor and minority students, especially in the big cities.  In a takeaway from the report is the following statement.

In a quarter of schools with the highest percentage of poor and nonwhite students, more than 7 percent of teachers were in their first year, compared to less than 2 percent at the whitest and most affluent quartile of schools in 2013-14. And while less than 1 percent of teachers in those schools were deemed “not highly qualified” — because they lacked an appropriate college degree or teaching license — that rate was between 6.9 percent and 8.8 percent in less affluent schools.

How can these schools close the student academic achievement gap when these schools suffer from not only funding issues but staffing issues?  In fact, the report was able to link schools with a large percentage of "high needs" students with low-rated teachers (of course the teachers may have been low rated because they have high needs students based upon the junk Science of the Value Added Method),  According to the report, blacks are twice as likely to have "ineffective" teachers than white students. 

The report recommended that school districts recruit top-rated teachers to work in the lowest performing schools.  Good luck achieving that goal.  In New York City, the DOE is willing to give a teacher a measly  $5,000 and I believe no top rated teacher is willing to give up a position in a good school for such a small sum of pocket change and be exposed to an "ineffective" rating based upon the junk science of VAM for teaching "high needs" students. 

With a teacher shortage looming and few top college recruits willing to be a career teacher, look for the racial/income student academic achievement gap and teacher inequality to continue as the few top quality teachers will only work in the most academically sound learning environments that can only be found in the higher achieving schools.

The 4% Withdrawal Rule Works In Retirement Under Any Scenario.

 Most retirees try to stay conservative in their investments and don't want any downside surprises therefore so much of their retirement income are in more stable income producing investments like CDs, bonds, or money market funds.  However, in this decade of low interest rates, where a  three year bank Certificate of Deposits gave you a paltry 1.2% and the ten year treasury bond gives a meager 2%, what is a saver to do for stable income?  Many financial planners are worried that with low interest rates, the 4% rule is no longer safe and are telling their clients that they may have to live on less retirement income to preserve their savings.  There is one planner who stated that a retiree cannot take out more than 1.8%, with inflation adjustments, yearly to ensure a 100% confidence that he or she will not run out of money.  In this doom and gloom environment is the 4% withdrawal, with inflation adjustments, still conservative enough to ensure that the retiree will not run out of money before they pass away?  The answer is yes!

The origin of the 4% withdrawal rule came about in a famous Trinity study in 1996 and updated in 2011 that showed that an inflation adjusted 4% withdrawal rate, with the proper asset allocation will allow the retiree to not run out of money during his or her lifetime.  The 4% rule is based upon the  running of over a hundred 30-year simulations from 1926 to 2014  and found that in the worst case scenario that a 4% withdrawal rate, adjusted for inflation, would last a lifetime, with a proper asset allocation.  The 4% withdrawal rate was established as a floor not as an average withdrawal rate and represents the worst case scenario.

For some reason, many financial planners forgot that the 4% withdrawal rule was the floor and in this low interest rate environment was telling their clients that they need to take less (3%) to ensure that their money does not run out.  Therefore, many retirees will probably end up living way to frugally and have three to five times their initial savings when they pass away.  In fact, an article by Michael Kitces showed that the average withdrawal rate for the entire scenarios is close to 6.5%!

As teachers with a TDA that gives us a fixed return of 7%, the low interest rate scenario is actually beneficial since inflation is only 2% (actually 1.29%) and that means that our TDA is appreciating.  However, in the long run we do need equities, be it mutual funds, ETFs or stocks to combat the eroding effects of inflation.  See my post on that Here.  Therefore, make sure you have asset producing equities as part of your retirement portfolio.  The suggested asset allocation is between 50% and 75% in equities.

Finally, if you see that your retirement fund is getting too large, say over 50% of the initial fund at retirement, it might be a good idea to ratchet up your withdrawals by a percentage point or from 4% to 5%, unless you want to leave an oversized inheritance to your heirs.  Its a good idea to check your portfolio yearly and rebalance it to ensure you are following the right path in your retirement journey.

Bringing Back The Neighborhood High Schools Is The Only Answer In Improvimg Our Struggling Schools.

 

Mayor Bill de Blasio and Chancellor Carmen Farina have a program to improve the struggling schools called the School Renewal Turnaround Program.  They include targeted funding, better oversight, and more programs for the high schools to turnaround them academically.  However, there are some very serious problems associated with these schools that the De Blasio administration has failed to address and I question their prospects for success, especially when it comes to the DOE's misguided school funding policy known as "education on the cheap".. Let's look at the major problems facing the Mayor's renewal high school program.

Student Population The renewal high schools have a very similar student population distribution.  A poor minority student cohort with a high percentage of "high needs" students.  These "high needs" students whether they are homeless, special education. English language learners, or behaviorally challenged,  are associated with low academic achievement.  How does the Mayor's renewal program address that problem?  If you were a parent of a high achieving student, would you send your child to one of these schools?  I think not.

Enrollment:  Many of these renewal schools are under populated and struggle to keep enrollment up.  In a previous post, I showed how many vacant student slots are available in these schools.  The less students, the less money is available to the renewal schools to add courses, services, and hiring quality teachers. Limiting the "over-the-counter- students" for these schools is a double edged sword since less enrollment means less funds for the schools.

Fair Student Funding:  The renewal schools are still subject to the 800 pound gorilla in the room and that is the DOE's ill advised  "fair student funding" and that ensures that the principals will still be forced to hire the "cheapest and not the best" teachers for their students.  That means high teacher turnover and an unstable learning environment.

Small Schools:  There are just too many small schools that offer limited courses, few extra curricular activities, and suffer from poor leadership.  Worse, these schools are always experiencing high teacher turnover with too many "newbie teachers" who may not have the pedagogy or classroom management skills to be an effective teacher.  These schools are always competing for enough students to fill their schools and many should not exist as a independent entity.  The result is too many schools are competing for a dwindling amount of academically preforming students not selected by the better schools.

Class Size:  Most schools, to save on money and hire fewer teachers have class sizes near the contract limit of 34 students.  This is much too large for proper learning in these struggling schools but for the DOE its always been about the budget and not about what's best for the students.

Longer School Day:  The renewal schools will have a one hour longer school day.  However, the DOE and UFT have not decided on the payment rate for teachers who work the extra hour.  Furthermore, how will the extra hour affect the mandated Professional Development requirements?  In other words, its still a work in progress to schedule the extra hour and how to incorporate it into a daily schedule.

The solution is to reimpose high school zoning, recombine the small schools, have significantly smaller class sizes (20-25 maximum), and bring back the large comprehensive neighborhood schools.  This will allow for more course selection and a better learning environment.  Moreover, eliminating the "fair student funding" will free up the schools in hiring the "quality teachers" necessary to improve student academic achievement.  Finally, each school should have a program magnet that attracts the academically performing students back to the school and provide the school with a solid foundation for attracting experienced teachers to the school and reduce the unacceptably high teacher turnover in the renewal schools.

Lew The Loser Gets It Wrong Again In His Fox Editorial.

Well, here is another wrong headed editorial by the anti-teacher and pro deformer Lew Lone. Vice President of the local New York station otherwise known as "Lew the Loser".  He opposes the renewal schools program and cites the Independent Budget Office report that believes hundreds of millions of dollars will be wasted by keeping the schools open.  Instead, Lew the Loser claims that the Bloomberg method of closing the struggling schools and open small schools was a proven success.

Lew the loser goes on to claim that the De Blasio administration is only keeping these 94 schools open to placate the teachers union and keep teachers employed. He claims that the short timeline, the dwindling enrollment, and the existing school performance makes it extremely difficult for these schools to turnaround and show measurable improvements by 2017.  Therefore, its best to close these schools now.

Lew the Loser of course has his own recommendations and they come right out of the education deform playbook.  They are:

• Close the 94 schools and open small schools, with smaller class sizes, and effective teachers.
• Open charter schools and eliminate the charter cap.

The first of Lew the Loser's recommendations has a real problem since the Bloomberg small schools that were created are not successful after the first few years when the DOE withdrawal the extra funding, the smaller class sizes, and the exclusion of "high needs" students to these schools.  Just take a look of my list of schools to avoid in my previous post.  Many of these schools are small schools that came from the closing of the large high schools at the old school Campus.  As for effective teachers?  Give me a break!  Most of the Bloomberg small schools suffer from poor leadership with "Leadership Academy Principals" running those schools and selecting a teaching staff based on cost not ability.  Many of these small schools have untenured staff with  high teacher turnover and no institutional memory.

The second recommendation is to open up more charter schools is simply a ploy to eliminate public education and destroy the teacher unions while making teaching an at will employee.  Just read this!  The problems with charter schools are too numerous to discuss in this post.  Suffice to say that most charter schools struggle academically and financially, take few "high needs" students, and suffer from extremely high teacher turnover.

While I am no fan of Chancellor Carmen Farina or Mayor Bill de Blasio's education policies, they are preferable to what Lew the Loser and his education deformer buddies have in mind for the New York City public schools.

Queens High Schools That Students And Teachers Avoid.

There are quite a number of high schools in Queens that students and teachers are avoiding at all costs.  Many of these schools are having enrollment problems and cannot attract academically proficient students.  The result is that these schools struggle to keep up their numbers and must accept the many "high needs" and the "over the counter"students who are academically behind their grade level.  Thanks to the Bloomberg Administration policies, we no longer have community high schools and these schools cannot attract the type of student necessary to raise the school's standards. One Principal of a struggling school stated the obvious.

“Enrollment is a big issue for us,” he said. “When your numbers are so low, it affects the money you’re bringing in, what you can do, your programs, your class size.”

After the first round of selections for the high schools by the 8th grade students, here is a list of schools that still have numerous vacancies because no student listed them in their top 12 choices.Topping the list are August Martin and John Adams high schools, along with the two remaining Campus Magnet schools not slated to close.

School...............................................Vacancies
August Martin.........................................580
MSRT Magnet.........................................186
Humanities and Arts Magnet......................150
John Adams............................................415
Grover Cleavland.....................................245
Long Island City......................................205
QIRT.....................................................105
Fredrick Douglas Academy VI......................85
Martin Van Buren....................................170
Newtown...............................................135
Queens Preparatory Academy....................115
Rockaway Collegiate.................................90
Rockaway Park.......................................130
Excelsior Preparatory Academy...................75
Flushing................................................115
George Washington Carver.........................75
..

 Many of the schools listed are the Bloomberg created small schools that were carved out of the big comprehensive schools that were forced to close due to the DOE deliberately dumping a high concentration of "high needs" and "over the counter" students to ensure that they fail. By contrast, many of the sought after schools like Forest Hills, Francis Lewis, and Cardozo have no vacancies.  The entire citywide guide is Here.

Unless the De Blasio Administration reverses course and allows the high schools to become once again community based schools, the schools listed above, will always struggle to attract capable students to their schools. Combine that with the new teacher evaluation system, look for few quality teachers willing to work in such a challenging classroom environment.