An ATR Open Letter To The DOE, Principals, And The UFT.

Dear fellow educators of the New York City School System I write this letter to tell you about my fellow ATRs you seem so determined to demonize, ignore, and refuse to hire,  We are experienced teachers that have a "passion for teaching" and "wanting to make a difference" by motivating our students to succeed in life.  However, we find ourselves displaced as teachers traveling from week to week to different schools and find our considerable talents wasted as "babysitters".  We come from closed and downsized schools or were accused of actions that were found to be false and as punishment we were excessed out of the classroom and sent to the ever growing ATR pool.

To the principals:  You should be falling over each other to hire ATRs, we are experienced, have good classroom management skills, and deep curriculum knowledge.   You claim you want the "best teachers", instead you hire untested "newbies" or inexpensive and usually not tenured teachers.  Instead of maximizing your students' academic potential they are simply "guinea pigs" for teachers that have not mastered the teaching skills and are subject to a steep learning curve themselves.  I ask you, would you have your child operated on by an inexperienced or new surgeon or an experienced surgeon with a good track record?

Yes, I know its primarily about the salary (age and seniority issues are also a factor) and that the misguided "fair student funding" formula makes it difficult to hire "quality teachers" but I need to remind you that your schools "student growth" scores will affect your own job performance numbers.  Its in both you and your students best interest to hire the "best teachers" available and not the cheapest if you want to keep your Principal's position.

To The Department Of Education:  Stop with the slogan "children first....Always".  Your actions speak for themselves.  You have cut school budgets by 14% since 2007 and your "fair student funding": formula makes it difficult for principals to hire the "best teachers". If you really want to help the students then have a separate budget line for teachers and make them a "unit".  Principals will be happy to hire ATRs knowing they are experienced and will improve student outcomes in the school.  In fact give the principals an incentive like the one in 2009 where the principals are paying the salary of a new teacher with the DOE picking up the rest.

It makes no educational sense to have over 2,000 ATRs and pay $160 million dollars while class sizes are the highest in a decade.  Finally, is it more important to maintain a faulty ideology and force schools to hire untested and teachers from alternate certification programs like the two year Teach For America wonders or the "one and done" Teaching Fellows than retaining and appreciating the experienced teachers necessary for the best student academic achievement?

To The United Federation Of Teachers:  Be pro-active.  Make sure students are being taught by teachers certified in that subject area.    Stop putting your head in the sand and pretend its not happening, we all know it is and having teachers teaching a subject they are not certified to teach only hurts the students.  Moreover, put the DOE's feet to the fire and threaten an age discrimination lawsuit.  Yes, Amy, there really is age discrimination even if you can't see it. How about spending our COPE funds on an effective commercial that show the DOE's policy of recruitment over retention restricts schools from having the "quality teachers" our students need. The union really needs to expose the DOE's "children first" policy as a fraud.

All three groups need to do the "right thing" and maximize the potential for student academic growth by putting the ATRs back in the classroom where they belong. Its about what's best for the children.  Right?  Right!

Education Is Being Downgraded At Cardozo High School Because Of Their Budget Problems.

In a previous post I wrote that one of the most sought after high schools in the City was found with a $400,000 shortfall and the DOE required that the school cut its budget to make up for the shortfall.  That resulted in the school excessing over 20 teachers and overcrowded and uncovered classrooms at the beginning of the school year. Tweed rather than make the Principal accountable for his poor financial decisions decided to keep the Principal and hurt the students of the school instead. 

By the October 6th deadline there were 385 oversized classes and 18 uncovered classrooms.  Since that time the school has scrambled to correct the situation at Cardozo with only about twenty overcrowded classrooms and two uncovered classes.  However, the cost to the student's education is significant.  Here are just some of the changes that hurt the student's academic achievement.

Science:  Living Environment, Earth Science, and Chemistry classes have been reduced from five instructional days and a laboratory requirement to four instructional days.  Unfortunately, for the students the State Regents is based upon five instructional days not four!  When the Earth Science instructional days were reduiced to four instructional days two years ago the Regents passing percentage dropped to 40% and was even worse last year.  The same thing is expected for Chemistry.

Advanced Placement:  All Advanced Placement courses were reduced from two sessions of instruction daily to one class per day.  This 50% reduction in instruction time will result in less college credit for the students who's scores are compared to the rest of the nation where the students take two classes daily.

Sixth Period Teaching:  Many teachers are teaching six periods and studies have shown that teachers who are overloaded with that many classes wear down and are not as "effective".  This is a bad time for teachers to take an extra class as their student scores will affect their own grade as a teacher.

Rotating Teachers: A few classes have no permanent teacher and weekly ATRs are being used to

provide supervision to the students who are suffering from unstable  conditions and academic neglect.  In one first period Math class a students told his parent that the few students who show up supervise themselves since no teacher has been assigned to the class.

When it comes to the DOE leadership at Tweed its their ideology first and "children last.....Always".

  Oh, by the way, the DOE did offer to add teachers to the school if the school was willing to take the students coming out of incarceration and suspension centers as part of the deal, I was told the school said no and I can't blame them.

My Impressions Of The Queens ATR Meeting

On Thursday October 10th the UFT held an informational meeting with teachers in excess at the Queens UFT headquaters.  The meeting started off with UFT Special Representative Dermot Smyth who told the approximately 100 ATRs that they should be appreciative to the union that thanks to the UFT, you are getting paid and have health benefits.  Mr. Smyth further claimed Mayor Bloomberg would have given them a contract if they agreed to impose an ATR time limit.  Interestingly, Mr. Smyth failed to mention it was the UFT in the first place who gave up bumping and seniority rights that caused the ATR crisis in the first place.  I guess he forgot to mention that small point.  He also stated that the ATR rotation system was to eliminate the 4,800 teachers the Bloomberg threatened to layoff,  Of course by then the City lost the "last in, first out" (LIFO) battle and he wasn't laying off his "newbies", so it was a bluff that the UFT, for their own reasons bought into.  Mr Smyth would be real good writing fiction or at least revisionist history.  Oh, by the way Mr. Smyth is the UFT person to contact if you are being abused as an ATR in the Queens schools.  Good luck on that.

After hearing Dermot Smyth spinning the ATR crisis to the point that it made us all dizzy, I could swear that some ATRs were barfing in their napkins,  it was UFT Special Representative Amy Arundell's turn to make her case to an increasingly skeptical crowd.  Amy spoke effectively and for the most part factually as she explained how the ATR system worked, or at least should work.  Ms. Arundell repeated that the City was willing to give us a contract if we agreed to a four month ATR time limit, the UFT refused to even discuss it.  She stated the ATR time limit is a deal breaker and repeated that the union is not willing to agree to any time limit  (I guess they saw what happened in Chicago and Washington D.C.).  She also claimed that the DOE algorithm is based upon potential vacancies sent to the DOE and while its not perfect it was an attempt to match schools with skills, (how has that been working?  Not good if you ask me).

Ms. Arundell did explain that there is no hiring freeze and principals can hire whom they please and not hire ATRs if they so choose as long as they're willing to go through hoops and loads of DOE paperwork.  The only thing principals cannot do is to hire a per-Diem sub for a long-term position and if a principal tries to do it the UFT will inform the DOE of the violation and it will be quickly handled.  She also told the ATRs that they are only required to do the work the appointed teachers do that means that ATRs are not required to do hall or cafeteria duty if the teachers in the school don't do it.  Moreover, if an ATR is not left lessons then the ATR should use the lesson plan that is in their subject area even if the class is not say Art and the ATR is an Art teacher.  Amy also explained that if a school offers the ATR a long-term position (vacancies or leave replacements) the ATR cannot refuse the assignment.  Finally, Amy Arundell stated that its not only the salary but the seniority issue complicates ATRs from getting jobs since if a principal appoints an ATR to a position the ATR's seniority would leap over less senior teachers in the school if building excessing occurs.  That's why they came up with the "provisional contract".  Amy also said that all rotating ATRs will either get an "S" or "U" (usually for time and attendance).

Ms. Arundell touched on the future and is hopeful for a new direction for the ATRs. She told the ATRs that the union is going to try to convince the new Administration to eliminate the "Fair student funding" and make teachers a unit and not based upon actual salary.  This will probably eliminate the ATR crisis. I hope she's right.

Did Amy spin?  Yes, like the 50% retention rate by schools that offer ATRs a "provisional contract"  Anybody I know, and I know over 125 ATRs personally , only 2 ever received a position the next year after signing the "provisional contract".  For the principals its all about the money in that second year.  She also couldn't believe her own eyes that there were less than five of 100 hundred ATRs who were under the age of 40 at the meeting, no age discrimination in the ATR pool.  In fact, she seemed quite upset when I said it at the meeting and refused to acknowledge the obvious.but then I didn't expect anything different.  Finally, she explained that the DOE algorithm is a good thing since Principals were using ATRs for free for the school year without paying for them.  She forgot to add that "we decided to rotate the ATRs weekly and make their lives a living hell so that principals could not get free labor".  I guess that slipped her mind.

I must admit overall Amy Arundell was very effective, informative, and interesting and I guess I could handle the little bit of spin that was part of her presentation.  I'm glad I went.

Why Didn't The Union File An Unfair Labor Practice And A PERB Complaint On The DOE's Discrimination Of Senior Teachers? Its Because They Didn't Care.

Two of the questions I keep getting from teachers is "why didn't the union file an unfair labor practice?"  and "how come the union never filed a lawsuit?"when the DOE implemented the "fair (unfair) student funding" formula that discriminates against senior teachers?  The simple answer is that the union leadership didn't care that's why.

If the union had cared not only would they have filed an unfair labor practice with the NLRB and a PERB complaint with the State but would had taken the offensive against the Bloomberg/Klein/Walcott tyranny by going to the mass media by showing that their ideological policies were actually hurting the students.

For example, the union could have produced a commercial showing how important it is for students to have a "quality teacher" in the classroom and that many "quality teachers" find themselves without a classroom because the "fair (unfair) student funding" formula forces principals to hire the cheapest and not the best teachers.  Study after study shows that a "quality teacher" is the most important part of a student's academic development in school.  However, the consequences of the Bloomberg education policy and the  reduction of school budgets by 14% in the last six years requires schools to look for the most inexpensive teachers rather than the "quality teachers" that are needed for students to succeed.

If your child needed surgery would you want an untested surgeon in her first year in practice to preform the operation or a veteran surgeon who has done thousands of the same type of operations?  The answer is very obvious, the veteran surgeon!  The same is true for your child's education as it takes an experienced teacher to get the maximum academic achievement out of them.  We're sure you wouldn't want your child to be the educational  "guinea pig" by getting an untested and inexperienced teacher who is subject to a "steep learning curve"instructing them.

The fact that our union remains strangely quiet and has taken no action against the DOE policy of dumping senior teachers into the ATR pool while encouraging principals to hire untested teachers because they are cheap speaks loudly that our union is part of the problem and not the solution to this discrimination against senior teachers and the ideological policy of Tweed that results in a "children last" program for the New York City Public Schools.

The ATR Crisis, Oversized Classes, And Teachers Teaching A Sixth Period.

We all know there is an ATR crisis with over 2,000 ATRs not assigned to permanent positions throughout the New York City schools. What is probably more puzzling is with so many ATRs traveling from school to school weekly how can there be oversized classes?  In Queens Hillcrest High School has 400 and Cardoza has 385 oversized classes!  Throughout the City there are over 6,300 oversizred classes, the highest in over a decade.  Since 2007 the average school has lost 14% of their budget while charter schools increasingly gobble up more and more of the DOE funds at the expense of the public schools. The number of oversized classes even  would be higher if the schools didn't encourage teachers to take a "sixth class".  In my previous two schools almost 25% of the teachers were teaching a "sixth class" because principals found it to be more economical to pay a teacher the extra money than to hire another teacher.  In multi-session schools one of the tricks that principals do is to assign the teacher the "sixth class" at either the beginning or end of the teacher's schedule so they only have to pay the pro rated per session rate ($31.48) rather than the teacher's actual salary which would be near $50 a period for senior teachers, not including the 7% TDA interest contribution the City is required to pay.

At Cardozo High School the Principal has experienced an astounding $400,000 shortfall along with 18 uncovered classes (classes with no assigned teacher).  When the Principal requested ATRs to help reduce the overcrowded classrooms and uncovered classes, the DOE refused!   Yes the very same people who has the slogan "children first....Always".  Instead they told the hapless Principal to find another way.  The Principal had to do the unthinkable, after getting as many teachers as possible to volunteer to take a "sixth period class", he reduced the Advanced Placement classes from two periods, the standard in the country, to one period daily.  This freed up enough teachers to cover the uncovered classes but has put the students looking for college credit in a terrible academic position or as the late comedian Heni Youngman stated "its like a one legged man in a butt kicking contest".  These students will be at a competitive disadvantage when compared to their peers and few will get the scores necessary to earn college credit for the course.

Why didn't the DOE assign the ATRs to the school?  The reason is simple, the DOE wants the school
to pay for the extra teachers on their galaxy budget since they are not filling vacancies or long term leaves.  Of course the school is broke and already is in a $400,000 hole.  It doesn't matter that the school had already reduced one period of Earth Science and Living Environment weekly by making it a 4-1 course  instead of a 5-1 program it was intended to be nor does it matter that the school reduced the  two period Advanced Placement courses to one period daily. For the DOE it's not about what's best for the school's students its what's best for the ideology coming from from Tweed that drives the stringent and unfair budget requirements that lead to the crowded classrooms and unreasonably high class sizes.  Even a public demonstration by Cardozo students, parents, and teachers failed to move the DOE to help the school.

You would think if the Principal was at fault they would simply replace him and provide the extra funding needed to help the school meet this crisis.  But no, the DOE would rather hurt the students then provide the necessary resources to meet the budgetary crisis.  For the DOE and their leadership at Tweed it's "children last.......Always".

Update:  Thanks to NYC Educator who wrote me that  ESL, Science, and Special Education teachers who pick up a sixth period have that period  paid for by the central office and does not even come out of the school's budget.

Joke Of The Day When It Comes To Education.

Mayor Bloomberg:

• "I am the education  Mayor".

• "Teacher experience is not necessary"

• "We can double class sizes and reduce teachers by a half and improve student academic performance".

Chancellor Dennis Walcott:

• "I'm independent minded"

• "I can be a fair arbitrator for teacher misconduct cases".

• "We only want the best teachers for the City's students".

Tweed (DOE):

• "It's children first......Always".

• "Public school teachers cannot grade their own tests but Charter school teachers can".

• "School budgets are adequate and increasing class size and overcrowding is not a problem".

Ex Chancellor Joel Klein:

•  "Poverty is no excuse".

•  "I grew up in poverty".

Ex Chancellor Cathie Black:

• "I have the ability and experience to run the NYC schools".

• "Can't they just use birth control and stop having children"?

Education Reformers:

•  "A quality teacher is more important than the socioeconomic conditions in which a child is brought up in".

• "Class size is not a factor in student learning".

Teach For America:

• "Our teachers are quality teachers after completing a five week training course".

 NYSED Commissioner John King:

• "The New York State Teaching Evaluation System is a great way to measure a teacher's effectiveness".

Campbell Brown:

• "All teachers accused of sexual misconduct are guilty and should be fired".

Educators 4 Excellence:

•  "We represent teachers and want to improve the teaching profession".

Bill Gates:

• "High stakes testing is what's best for the student learning".

• "Standardized tests are the best indicator for teacher quality".

 Daily News and New York Post:

• "We publish fair and well-researched articles on the New York City schools".

Leadership Academy Principals:

•   "Experience in the classroom is not necessary to be a school leader".

Arnie Duncan:

• "I underatand what the challanges are in the classroom". 

• " High stakes standardized tests are a fair method to evaluate student learning and teacher effectiveness".

UFT President Michael Mulgrew:

• "The NYS teacher evaluation system is a win for our teachers".

The Collusion And Inaction By The UFT And DOE Is The Major Cause Of The ATR Crises.

We all know that the deal between UFT President Randi Weingarten and Chancellor Joel Klein that resulted in the infamous 2005 contract resulted in the ATR crises that has lasted for seven years.  Randi's "deal with the devil" has resulted in over 2,000 teachers being displaced, ever larger class sizes, and more overcrowded classrooms throughout the City.  When you hear from the UFT leadership they claim that once Mayor Bloomberg leaves office, the ATR crises will disappear.  However,  I am not entirely confident that the UFT leadership can be trusted to do the right thing.

Over the last couple of years I watched how principals failed to hire ATRs even when there are vacancies in their schools.  These principals would rather hire teachers who are not certified in the subject area rather than hire an ATR.  I will give you two examples of this.

Example 1:  Queens Vocational High School had four Earth Science openings in the 2012-13 school year but according the Principal she could only find one teacher to hire.  Really?  I did apply to Queens Vocational High School that year on the Open Market Transfer System and NEVER RECEIVED A RESPONSE!!!!  My colleague told me that he never received a "mandatory interview request" from Queens Vocational during the school year as he traveled from school to school.  for the 2012-13 school year.  How do I know that the school needed four Earth Science teachers, the Principal Melissa Burg admitted it to New York 1!!!! 

The question is if there were between 12 to 15 Earth Science classes without a certified Earth Science teacher teaching the students, who taught them? My best guess is that it were Living Environment (Biology) teachers and this summer when I marked the Earth Science Regents I met one of them and he told me that they only had one licensed Earth Science teacher and that the other teachers had to split their schedule between the two sciences.  Is Queens Vocational High School an exception?  I fear not, its more common then you might think.

Example 2: Richmond Hill High School during the 2011-12 school year had 16, yes 16 Earth Science classes being taught by teachers not certified in Earth Science.  In fact two Living Environment teachers were teaching full Earth Science programs with a math teacher given two classes of Earth Science!

In the second example I notified two bloggers who also are Chapter Leaders who passed this information to both the District Representative and the UFT Leadership.  The result?  No action whatsoever.  Did the union leadership even bother to alert the DOE that these schools were violating the collective bargaining contract?  Maybe they did, or maybe they didn't bother?

 It matters little because our union seems to be in collusion with the DOE and violations of the contract results in no
action or remediation as the over 2,000 displaced teachers are sent weekly to "babysit"  for absent teachers while "uncertified newbies" are gobbled up by principals who care more about their budget then having a properly certified and quality teacher in the classroom..

"Children first"?  not according to these principals who rather have inexpensive "newbies" than quality teachers.   Why does the UFT and the DOE ignore  the apparent violations of the collective bargaining contract,  you need to ask them.

The ATR Bill Of Rights

Being one of over 2,000 teachers in the Absent Teacher Reserve (ATR) is not the most pleasant of positions.  The "ATR Agreement" is bypassed whenever possible by the DOE and our union seems powerless to enforce it. The ATRs must travel weekly to different schools within their district and are treated with disinterest or outright contempt by the school they are assigned to.  The ATR program consist of senior and higher paid teachers as principals refuse to hire them due to budget constraints imposed by the DOE using the "fair student funding" formula that discriminates against senior teachers.  Over the years I have heard many stories from the other ATRs I have encountered.  Therefore, this post spells out the "rights" that the ATR has as they go weekly to the different schools in their district.

First, and foremost an ATR has the same rights as any appointed teacher in the school that they are assigned to.  That means that the ATR is required only to do the duties the teachers are allowed to do by contract.  They are as follows:

• Classroom instruction.
• One period of hall or cafeteria duty but not both!
• Other circular 6 duties (one period) when not given hall or cafeteria duty.
• Attendance or Library

Any other duties such as secretarial or administrative duties are not appropriate and can be refused if you don't want to be assigned to it.  Contact the school's Chapter Leader if you believe you are given an assignment that is not part of the teacher's contract.

Many schools try to give the ATRs six classes.  The only time this is appropriate is when the teacher's schedule is a block schedule when every other day is a sixth period.  However, the school should give you a four period schedule the next day to compensate for it.  If the school insists that you cover six classes, let the administration know that you will be glad to do it if they pay you for the sixth period and threaten to file a grievance if they refuse,  This is enough for the school to take away the sixth period class.

In multi-sesson schools the ATR should be given one time period.  Insist that the schools adheres to the one time period.  If the school requires it, but most don't, you are to attend teacher meetings during the professional period.  However, you are required to attend open school night.

During the school year you will be contacted by various schools for a "mandatory interview" for a leave replacement or vacancy.  You are only required to attend a "mandatory interview" if its in your school district.  However, be polite and e-mail the Principal back that you are not interested in leaving your school district.  If you take a position outside your district, you have only one year to ask to be reinstated to your old district.

 All ATRs should have a bathroom, classroom, and elevator key and if the school has a parking lot, the ATR has the same rights as appointed teachers to use it if it's " first come first serve".  Moreover, if the teacher's room is locked a key should also be provided to the ATR by the school. Additionally, no ATR assigned to a scanned school should go through scanning, even if school safety insists. Finally, the school must provide a safe location for the ATR's belongings.

In some cases you will be provisionally appointed to a vacancy and at the end of May the Principal will call you into a meeting and tell you that they will not offer you the position after all.  Over 90% of the ATRs that sign these provisional agreements find themselves back into the ATR pool.   The reason being that in the first year the ATR's salary does not affect the school's budget but if the school decides to keep the ATR, assuming the ATR agrees to stay at the school, the ATR's salary gets put into the school's average teacher salary and reduces the Principal's budget.  Therefore, its goodbye to the ATR and the DOE points to this lack of retention as their basis of their false clam that the ATRs are "bad teachers".

There are many schools that the ATR should not go to.  I listed those Queens High Schools here. 
While the union will insist you have no choice but to accept a position offered to you in your district.  A simple e-mail or phone call to the Principal informing him or her that you believe that you are not a good fit for their school is sufficient for the Principal to look for another ATR.  It doesn't always work but its worth a shot.

In a year where the badly flawed teacher evaluation system is a "work in progress" when a simple state test can make a quality teacher "ineffective" because of the "high needs" students assigned to the teacher and the unworkable Danielson Framework just adds to the already stressful classroom environment, its good to be an ATR so try to enjoy your time traveling to the different schools in your district and get your satisfactory rating at the end of the school year.

Have a nice year.

ATRs Should Not Accept Positions In These Queens High Schools.

Lately the New York Post has been turning away from bashing teachers and have been  identifying some really bad principals, here and  here.  However, as a Queens high school ATR, I thought it's time to list the schools where the staff have reported a hostile work environment on the latest school learning environment survey.  Therefore, In other words a "do not apply" list.  This post will identify these schools based upon their poor numbers.  The lower the number, the higher the negatives.  All schools with an overall score of  69% and lower is associated with a hostile learning environment at the school with the Principal the major culprit,  are listed below.


School.......................................Overall Score..........Negatives

Math, Science, Research Magnet.......37%.......................61%
Young Women's Leadership School......38%.......................63%
Fredrick Douglas Academy VI.............39%.......................66%
Pan American International l..............43%.......................51%
Queens Preparatory Academy............48%.......................48%
William Cullen Bryant .......................49%.......................47%
Newcomers High School....................51%.......................43%
Business, Computer Applications ........54%.......................41%
Queens Gateway Health Sciences.......54%......................37%
Civic Leadership Academy..................61%......................35%
Law Government And Services............62%......................27%
Queens Collegiate.............................64%......................25%
Bayside High School..........................65%......................24%
High School Of Const Trades..............69%......................22%
Flushing High School.........................69%......................21%
Frank Sinatra High School..................69%......................21%

While the overall score of below 70% shows that the school's learning environment needs great improvement, the negative scores are more instructive of the hostility of the working conditions at the school and that reflects almost entirely on the administration, especially the Principal.  Interestingly, the lowest overall score was at the Campus Magnet school with Jose Cruz as Principal.  He was previously cited by the Daily News for giving the most "U" ratings than any other high school Principal in the city..

Being an ATR this year may be a blessing in disguise since the ATRs are not subject to the badly flawed teacher evaluation system or the "junk science" associated with it.  Further, the difficult Dainelson framework cannot be used for the ATRs unless they take a provisional vacancy or long-term absence. For those ATRs thinking of taking either a provisional or long-term position, please do not apply to the school listed above....unless you want to get terminated!

Thanks to JD2718 for supplying me with the list of Queens high schools.


.

The Real Reason That There Is A Lack Of Arbitrators In The 3020-a Hearing Process.

Friday on his radio show Mayor Bloomberg blamed the UFT for the glacial pace of the 3020-a hearings.  A seemingly frustrated Michael Bloomberg went on to say that the teachers union refused to approve arbitrators and that the agreed upon 39 arbitrators are now down to 19!  The result is that, according to the Mayor, there are 400 educators awaiting an arbitrator to hear their case.  If only he had the authority to fire them all.  The City has now filed a lawsuit that the teachers union is violating the April 2010 "rubber room" agreement.

President Michael Mulgrew responded by saying that the DOE's failure to use the mediation process to settle many of the cases is a major cause for the delays. In addition, he pointed out the oversized legal unit at the Office of Legal Services is the primary reason why the DOE fails to use the mediation process since they need the work to justify their positions.  He also stated further that the DOE has recommended many unsatisfactory candidates as arbitrators and the UFT after carefully vetting the DOE endorsed candidates, has refused to accept them on the panel.  Finally the UFT has claimed that the agreed to timelines once a hearing starts are being adhered to,

 Both Mayor Michael Bloomberg and UFT President Michael Mulgrew failed to identify the major culprit for the long delays and lack of arbitrators, New York State.  The State has failed to pay the arbitrators for up to three years with one arbitrator being owed $200,000!  Is it any wonder that many senior arbitrators have quit the panel?  Furthermore, the State's Tenured Teacher Hearing Unit expects a shortfall of a  $2.03 million dollars  for the 2013-14 school year.  Therefore, many of the present arbitrators will be waiting years to be compensated for their work.  Moreover, the State has reduced the daily fee for arbitrators from as much as $2,100 to $1,400 per day, still a godly sum but significantly less than before 2010 and has resulted in many of the best people not wanting the highly stressful arbitration position.  The lower payment and long delays getting paid has resulted in many long-standing arbitrators to quit the panel.  Apparently, many of the recommended replacements are not qualified and therefore only 19 arbitrators are currently on the panel or 11 less than what the DOE and UFT wanted as a minimum (30).


While both the DOE and UFT have no control on the State's failure to pay the arbitrators, the DOE can use the mediation process to bypass the lengthy 3020-a hearing process.  However, under Mayor Bloomberg the DOE only wants to terminate these 400 educators not settle no matter the time and cost.  this is the DOE who rather waste over $40 million dollars in keeping the 400 cases in offices doing little or no work  rather than the classroom than use  mediation to resolve the cases.  Yes, the very same DOE that is wasting $160 million dollars annually on 2,000+ ATRs rather than putting them in the classroom to eliminate overcrowding, uncovered classes, and reduce the largest class sizes in over a decade.  What else is new.

"Children last"....Always.

Principals Abuse The Credit Recovery Program To Achieve Artificially Higher Graduation Rates The Data Shows.

The Department of Education released figures on how much "credit recovery" increased the citywide graduation rate.  According to the DOE the graduation rate increased by 1.7% due to "credit recovery" (Gotham Schools found it to be 2.6% for schools who had a credit recovery program}.  However, a closer look at the numbers showed that dozens of high schools had over a 5% increase in their graduation rates due to "credit recovery". 

One of the most egregious examples of the abuse of the "credit recovery" system was at the Mott Hall V in the Bronx that reported that an astounding 46% of the credits earned by the ninth graders in 2011 came from "credit recovery" and in the latest data from 2012  an astounding 26% of the school's high school students obtained credits from "credit recovery" programs, third highest in the City. The Principal blamed the budget for not having enough teachers to give the students the classes and students abusing the system to earn easy credits.  Maybe had he tried to hire experienced ATRs rather than the "newbies" he so dearly loves to employ and whom ended up leaving the school during the school year, it might have been different but that's a story for another time.

Since the 2012-13 school year "credit recovery" has been restricted and under the new regulations the principals can no longer abuse the program, or so they say (seeing is believing).  Is it little wonder that the college remediation rate is so high for our students and what value is there for a New York City diploma for those schools where "credit recovery" artificially boosted a school's graduation rate and  where credits only required a student to sit on a computer for a week and answer some multiple choice questions?

Will these principals be punished for abusing the credit recovery program?  Don't bet on it.  It's "children last"....Always.

Hypocrite Chancellor Dennis Walcott Hires A Man Who Was Found Guilty Of Harassment And Retaliation To Be Principal Of Troubled Flushing High School

The hypocrite Chancellor has done it yet again.  He proclaims that there is "zero tolerance" of teachers accused, but not found guilty of sexual misconduct but gives his managers and administrators a pass when they are accused.  Now we find that the Chancellor has hired a man, James Brown that was sued for sexual harassment, bullying.  racist comments and retaliation against a female dean at a Baldwin middle school who won the lawsuit against him.  Notice, this was not just an accusation but a lawsuit where the preponderance of evidence presented showed that Mr. Brown was found guilty of such behavior.  The story can be found here.

Mr. Brown was removed from the Baldwin school in 2009 and was sent to the District office, away from the children, until he resigned in 2012.  Mr. Brown was also accused of saying sexually inappropriate comments. While at Baldwin, Brown was accused of remarking on the tightness of a female student’s pants, said a federal lawsuit against him.  He also said to the female dean to make a school report “tight as a virgin’s, well, you know what is tight on a virgin,” she reported. Yet our so-called "zero tolerance" clueless Chancellor hired him to be a Principal of an already troubled Flushing High School, unbelievable!

Chancellor Walcott has, once again, has been exposed as a hypocrite and practicing a "double standard" when it comes to teachers and administrators.  Remember these stories  here and here?
It seems our clueless Chancellor does not "practice what he preaches" when it comes to selecting and disciplining the DOE administrators.  Thank goodness we only have 99 more days of his inept and terrible leadership of the New York City schools.  Tick, tick, tick.

Mayor Bloomberg's Legacy Is His Contribution To The Widest Wealth Inequality In New York City Than In Any Other City In The Nation.

One of the more obvious and at the same time, disturbing results of Michael Bloomberg's tenure as Mayor of New York City is the "wealth gap" that he leaves the next Mayor to try to solve.  Under Mayor Bloomberg's policy of "what's good for the rich is good for the city" the disparity between the rich and poor in the City is the widest in the nation. The statistics showed that the top 20% of city residents had an average income of $222,871 while the lowest 20% was $8,993 or 25 times less than the top 20% and almost 50 times lower than the top 5% ($436,931).  While Mayor Bloomberg can't be totally blamed for this "wealth gap", his policies certainly contributed to it.

As for poverty, the latest numbers show the highest poverty rates since the Mayor took office at 21,2% meaning that 1.7 million people live below the poverty level.   Moreover, 31% of children 17 years old or younger lived in poverty which is very disturbing..  In addition,  the unemployment rate rose to an unacceptable 8.6% last month.

I have written previously how Mayor Bloomberg's education legacy has been a failure.  Now you can add the outrageously wide "wealth gap" to the failures of the Bloomberg Administration. The arrogance of the Mayor's policy of "what's good for the rich, is good for the masses" resulted in his disconnecting with the people of New York City.  A prime example was his selection of the inept Cathie Black as Chancellor of the New York City Public Schools simply because she was part of his wealthy social circle of friends.  Under Mayor Bloomberg's tenure there is definitely a "tale of two cities"  His arrogance can be seen in his refusal to negotiate a contract with the municipal unions, many of them working class and making modest salaries, with some unions working without a contract for over 4 years!  Yet he seems to spend billions on high-priced consultants, some of them crooked (Citytime, 911 etc.).

Is it any wonder that the anti-Bloomberg candidate, Bill de Blasio received over 40% of the vote in the Democratic primary while Christine Quinn, his choice received only 15%?  Most New Yorkers are sick of Mayor Bloomberg and his policies that shows disrespect for the masses and tries to impose his own preferences to remake the city in his own image.  Michael Bloomberg's legacy is a mixed bag with his destructive education policy, the ever widening "wealth gap", and his disrespect of his municipal workers overshadows his stewardship in bringing New York City through many crises in good shape.

Diane Ravitch's Book Exposes The Education Reform Agenda As A Hoax.

Diane Ravitch's new book, "The Reigin of Error" exposes the education reformer agenda as being flawed and not in the best interests of the students.  She goes on to tell how the education reformers are simply trying to privatize the schools and to reduce the teaching profession to an "at will employee".

Ms. Ravitch points out how the education reform movement ignore the many issues associated with poor student academic achievement and blame the poor performance on school educators, especially the teachers.  She writes in her book how the education reform movement ignores the most important predictor in a child's academic achievement and that is poverty. Almost all studies show that a child's social-economic environment is the major factor (80%) affecting  the student's academic achievement, yet the education reformer will claim that "poverty is no excuse", as if it's the school's fault.  Ms Ravitch exposes the education reform "no excuses" as a fraud.  She shows how children in poverty lack many of the basics that allow for academic achievement.  Dysfunctional family life, unsafe community, and negative peer group pressure are ignored by the education reformers as if they don't matter.  Moreover, Ms. Ravitch shows how the lack of resources, large class sizes, and high teacher turnover are a major factor in a student's academic achievement yet the education reform movement never mention these issues.  Instead the claim a "quality teacher" is the only thing necessary for a child's academic achievement.

Her book points out that in struggling schools in deep poverty have frequent turnover of teachers and many of them leave the classroom before they even get tenure.  As she points out,  these schools need experienced teachers and a stable school environment.  Instead the education reformers see no problem with high teacher turnover and the "Teach For America" two year wonders and still expect the students to excel academically.What a fantasy.

Finally, she shows how most charter schools do no better than the public schools and how these schools are segregated and take resources from the public school system. She also states how these charter schools discourage the most needy of students from applying and staying in the school.  She points out how "high needs students" like special education, English language learners, and behaviorally challenged students are discouraged from attending the charter schools and will not provide services for them.  Instead they are counseled out of the school  by the lack of services, a more stringent discipline policy, and the threat to not promote the student to the next grade.

Reading "The Reigin Of Error" exposes the education reform movement as a hoax and is a "reformer policy first, children last" policy.

To Be A Quality Teacher, One Must Have A Passion For Teaching.

I am sick and tied of reading articles by so-called "education reformers" and charter school supporters who claim that "newbie teachers" are "quality teachers".  To be a "quality teacher", one must have these characteristics.  They are experienced, a deep knowledge of the curriculum, good classroom management skills, a connection to their students, and most of all a passion for teaching.

While a "newbie teacher" may have enthusiasm and a commitment to help students, the steep learning curve in their first three years in the classroom makes it virtually impossible to achieve what most educators know what makes a "quality teacher".  In those first three years most teachers are just fully understanding the curriculum, developing good classroom management skills, and deciding if the classroom was the right profession for the teacher, almost 50% decide it isn't.

Which brings me to what stands out as the hallmark of all "quality teachers" and that is a passion for teaching.  The best teachers connect with their students and this student/teacher connection develops when the student soon realizes that the teacher has deep curriculum knowledge, keeps a peaceful classroom, and is caring and nurturing.  However, the best of these "quality teachers" have one other thing in common and that is a passion for teaching.  When the students see that the teacher really enjoys teaching them, they inspire the students and buy into the subject the teacher is teaching.  Time and again, first, as a student and now as a colleague, the best teachers in the school all were passionate about teaching their students.  They didn't think of it as simply a job but a calling.  By contrast, it is a crap shoot when a "newbie teacher" is assigned to a classroom and since half of them will leave before they get tenure, I certainly wouldn't want my child being a guinea pig in a class where the teacher is subject to a steep learning curve and unsure if their future is in the classroom.

The education reformers and their media friends can spout their lies that "newbie teachers" are "quality teachers" but educators know the truth.  Just ask a parent would they expose their children to an untested "newbie" or an experienced veteran?  The answer is obvious.

The Real Losers In The Mayoral Primary Are Michael Bloomberg And Christine Quinn.

The Daily News published an editorial today that stated that the losers in the Bill de Blasio victory was Anthony Wiener and UFT President Michael Mulgrew.   While Anthony Weiner's collapse to less than 5% was significant, he was a long shot to be Mayor without union support.  While its true that the UFT backed the wrong horse in Bill Thompson, it hardly makes the UFT a loser since many teachers voted for Bill de Blasio and the UFT will eventually support his Mayoral bid.

By contrast, the real losers were Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and Christine Quinn who only received 15% of the Democratic party primary vote.  Worse for the Mayor were that the voters in the primary wanted to see a change in the Mayor's policies, especially in education.  Every news media showed that the voters in the Democratic party primary for Mayor were sick of Michael Bloomberg's imperious reign and his micromanagement of the City.  The widespread dissatisfaction of the Mayor resulted in Christine Quinn coming in a distant third and many voters blamed her for Bloomberg;s third term and rightly so.

Who were the real losers in the Democratic party mayoral primary?  It was Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Christine Quinn of course. I say goodbye and good riddance to the two of them.

Why Doesn't The Union Tell The ATRs That They Are Not Subject To The Teacher Evaluation System?

I was reading the union propaganda rag, the New York Teacher, and noticed that the paper published an article that said who were and who were not subject to the flawed teacher evaluation system.  Absent from the list who were exempt were ATRs.  Was this omission deliberate?   I think it was, why else would our union ignore over 2,000 teachers?  I guess they don't want people to know the truth.

Let me clarify the issue.  ATRs who are not in the classroom the entire school year will not be evaluated under the new system since no pre-test or post-test baselines can be established for them.  Therefore, if a teacher takes a long term leave position say after November 1st or leaves before the end of the school year, they can only be evaluated under the old system "S" and "U".  A much better system for teachers.

If the ATR is unlucky and takes a long-term leave position in a school that does not meet the following criteria, I wish you all the luck in the world because you're going to need it.  The criteria is listed below.

1. Administrative quality.
2. Student body
3. School tone/discipline policy

Good luck and best wishes for a successful year,

Chancellor Dennis Walcott's Teacher Approval Ratings Are In Cathie Black Territory And That's Bad, Real Bad.

Well if there is any question how teachers feel about Chancellor Dennis Walcott, the 2013 Learning Environment survey certainly clinched it.  Gotham Schools published the findings on how teachers felt about Dennis Walcott's tenure   In the survey a question was asked "Are you satisfied with the job the Chancellor is doing"? What was reported is as follows:

Satisfied..............................................Dissatisfied
 27%                                                         57%

What's surprising is that 27% of the teachers are satisfied with the Chancellor, what planet are these teachers from?  Certainly not the planet Earth. How does Chancellor Walcott's rating stack up with the scores of the last two Chancellors?  Let's compare them.

...............................Satisfied............................Dissatisfied

Joel Klein....................30%....................................48%

Cathie Black................27%....................................54%

Dennis Walcott............27%....................................57%

That's right when compared to the incompetent and unqualified Cathie Black, Dennis Walcott's 
percentages are actually worse!  There are more teachers who were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied
(57%) with Dennis Walcott than when Cathie Black was Chancellor (54%).

While its obvious that the three Chancellors under Mayor Bloomberg have been unpopular, Dennis Walcott was supposed to bring with him a kinder, and gentler supervision.  Instead Dennis Walcott has alienated teachers with his advocacy for punitive measures, especially against teachers in the classroom.  Let's look at the issues that have made the Chancellor so unpopular with the teachers.

• His lack of independent thought from the Mayor's anti-teacher crusade.
• The Chancellor's advocacy on the "LIFO" repeal.
• Ever increasing class sizes and tight budgets.
• A total failure to connect with the teachers in the trenches.
• A lack of accountability at the top and an ever widening achievement gap.
• The closing of schools and more money going to charter schools.
• His demand to overturn arbitration decisions on charged sexual misconduct cases.
• The continuation of failed policies and meaningless graduation statistics.
• The "fair student funding" formula that stops principals from hiring the best teachers.
• The continuation of the ATR crises. 
• The "double standard" when it comes to disciplining teachers and Tweed managers.

As a teacher if I had 57% of my students dissatisfied with me, I would be a failed teacher and should be terminated.  However, the Chancellor is not held accountable for his poor scores. but the good news come January 1st, 2014, Dennis Walcott will be gone and just a bad memory.  Hopefully,. the next Chancellor will be an educator and discontinue the failed policies under the Bloomberg Administration.

Back Into The ATR Pool For Me.

Well, I am back into the ATR pool, complete with weekly assignments, administrative abuse, and student disrespect.  Normally, I would be upset that I am not teaching but this year is very different than any other year.  You see ATRs are not subject to the badly flawed teacher evaluation system!  The Danielson rubric and the use of Common Core without a road-map or resources. That's right, ATRs will be rated under the old "satisfactory/unsatisfactory" system since the DOE cannot account for the "student growth" component that is incorporated in the "junk science" equation developed by the State.  Moreover, I look forward to travel throughout the Queens high schools and evaluate the three components that makes a school good or bad for teachers and you will find it on the resurrected "Traveling ATR blog". .

The three criteria I will use to evaluate and grade the schools I will pass through are as follows:

1. Administrative quality.
2. Student body
3. School tone/discipline policy

The quality of the administration is of primary importance for a school's success or failure.  Last year I had the pleasure of being in a school the entire year where the administration worked collaboratively with staff and had an experienced teaching staff.  In this environment the students thrived academically and there was little fear of vindictive reprisals against effective teachers, even if they are outspoken since it's  "what's best for the students" .  By contrast beware of the Bloomberg small schools with "Leadership Academy Principals".  The staff is usually inexperienced and are required to work extra assignments without compensation.  These schools are  dangerous to the long term survival of a teacher.

The student body is extremely important as the "peer effect" affects the overall student learning. A diverse and engaged student body will lead to a successful school like the one I was in last school year.  On the other hand, if the student body is disengaged and unruly, the "broken window theory" will come into effect and the school will fail. The "peer effect" will make or break a school's potential for success.

Finally, school tone is very important and is usually a deal breaker for a school. The "peer effect" if it's a positive influence on the learning environment, the school will be successful. On the other hand, many schools are trying the restorative approach to student misconduct which allows the student to continue to disrupt the classroom time and again which interferes with student learning.  While restorative approaches have their good points for the misbehaving student, it ignores the needs of the vast majority of students who follow the rules and want to learn but see that there is little consequence for student misbehavior.  The school-wide restorative approach adds to the "broken window theory" and makes a successful school an impossibility for a school's academic success.  A zero tolerance policy against student misconduct will eventually lead to a successful learning environment and go along way to make a successful school.

In summary, if you are an ATR and a school calls you for a long term replacement, check out the school on insideschools and schoolbook to get an understanding of what the school environment is.  Without the necessary information about a school, I suggest you think really long and hard about taking a long-term leave replacement.  I certainly will, especially with the badly flawed teacher evaluation system and the punitive Danialson rubric that will damage the teaching profession for years to come.

Why Teaching Experience Counts. My Story.

I was appalled by the New York Times inaccurate "puff piece" on charter schools and why teacher experience is unimportant.  In fact some misguided Administrator claims that teacher experience is a drawback.  How unreal. You can read the NYT article here.  Moreover, look at the rebuttal article from a retired teacher and the overwhelming response here. I can tell you that when I look back to my first couple of years teaching, I made plenty of mistakes, didn't fully understand the curriculum and my classroom management skills were atrocious. Yes, my enthusiasm was  boundless and I was willing to work with my students on a moment's notice.  However, overall, I was no better than a developing teacher who had much to learn.    I looked to the more experienced Science teachers to help me overcome my many teaching deficiencies, especially when it came to classroom management. 

The two teachers that mentored me had a combined experience of 46 years in the classroom and when I went to observe them, I saw a peaceful classroom with many students engaged and asking rapid fire questions with the two teachers carefully explaining how things worked.  Both teachers didn't teach to the test, what they did was to show how everyday items were employed and applied it to Science.  Furthermore, they also taught in an interdisciplinary matter incorporating history, math, and other Sciences to give the students a total education that lasted through their adult years.

Here I was, a newbie teacher, requiring a steep learning curve and  "teaching to the test". My poor students weren't given the opportunity to ask in depth questions nor could I have answered them in my first year of teaching.  Is it any wonder that my student's Regents scores were lower than the other two teachers?  I felt bad that I let my students down.  However, by my third year I had the experience to seamlessly incorporate the very lessons that my two mentor teachers were using and my students Regents scores improved, finally by my fifth year reaching the scores of the students my two mentors obtained.   As I gained more experience, I saw a gradual increase in my students Regents scores.

I now am in my 20th year and I can tell you that each year I learn more and more and refine my teaching style to make it comfortable and exciting for my students.  In my early years I felt sorry for my students that they had an inexperienced me as a teacher but now I am impressed that my students only have good things to say about me that it was a pleasure having me as their teacher and that makes me proud. 

Ask the students if experience counts!