Campbell Brown Fails To Understand How The Teacher Discipline Process Works And That's A Shame!

Failed journalist and pseudo-reform advocate, Campbell Brown can't seem to understand that when teachers are accused of misconduct that they have "due process rights".  These "due process rights" include a 3020-a hearing in front of a State Arbitrator that is approved by both the DOE  and UFT.  That's right!  The DOE must approve the Arbitrator before that Arbitrator is allowed to hear cases against New York City teachers, something Ms. Brown fails to mention.  Every year Arbitrators must be approved by both the DOE and UFT and if one or the other is unhappy with the Arbitrator's decisions, their annual contract is not renewed.

Had Campbell Brown did some simple investigations of the 95 teachers she said should have been fired, she would have found that many of the best and most experienced Arbitrators, after carefully, weighing the evidence, or lack thereof, found that these teachers were not guilty of what the DOE charged them with.  In fact, many of these Arbitrators are still hearing teacher misconduct cases as the DOE has renewed their contracts year after year.

What do Arbitrators look for in the 3020-a hearings?  Here is a list I wrote previously.

• Did the DOE meet the "just cause" standards?
• Were the witnesses credible?
• Did the evidence correlate with the charges?
• Did the defendant appear credible?
• Did the defendant show remorse and sorrow about the action?
• Were there extenuating circumstances?
• What was the defendant's disciplinary and educational record prior to the charges?
• Did the DOE meet the "preponderance of evidence" standard?
• What was the quality of legal representation (both sides)?

The  bottom line is that the arbitrators want to see "relevant preponderance of evidence" before they

will uphold the DOE charges of misconduct and that is a much lower standard than the "reasonable doubt" used in the courts.  Therefore, for arbitrators, it's about real evidence and supportable hearsay for them to find in favor of the DOE charges.  However, in many cases the DOE investigator's job is not to find evidence to support teacher misconduct but simply provide the rumors, unsupported hearsay, and gossip to substantiate the allegations that result in the DOE charges.  Maybe if the DOE investigative process would be fair and unbiased, the 95 school employees would never have been charged in the first place since the DOE did not have the evidence or supported hearsay to make their case.

The DOE's Corrupt Investigative Process.

What does Mayor Bloomberg his poodle, the clueless Chancellor Dennis Walcott, and the failed journalist, Campbell Brown have in common?  They all believe that real evidence of teacher misconduct is unnecessary as long as the DOE investigators substantiate the accusation,  no matter how weak the case is. That's right, if the DOE investigators can substantiate even the smallest incident and the Principal wants that teacher out of the school, look for 3020-a charges to follow.

Time and again in my blog I have identified how the various DOE investigative units, Special Commissioner of Investigations (SCI), Office of Special Investigations (OSI), and Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO), will twist, pervert, and embellish the most innocent of actions as misconduct. Rather than rehash the points you can read these posts here, here, and here.  They will tell you how the flawed and biased DOE investigative process works.

There are two constants for all DOE investigations that lead to 3020-a charges.  The first is having a Principal target you.  In almost all cases that lead to 3020-a charges it starts with the Principal.  These principals will make"mountains out of  molehills", or even when there are no hills to get the teacher subject to an OSI or SCI investigation.  These principals understand that the DOE investigators  do their best to substantiate the most trivial of actions to rid the Principal of the teacher they don't like or want and even lie just to get the teachers removed.  Yes, investigators are caught in lies. However, it's of little consequence since their job is to show guilt and not the truth.
  The second, is the investigator's presumption that the teacher is guilty of something and it's their job to find that guilt even if it means substantiating the unsubstaintiated hearsay or gossip associated with the accusation.  Real evidence is unnecessary and is only a problem at the 3020-a hearing, not for removing the teacher from the school and the investigators know that.

Sure, some teachers commit real misconduct and should be terminated.  However, its important that teacher "due process rights" allow for a fair and independent hearing on the 3020-a charges and that should include the DOE investigative process which presently, is a "stacked deck" against teachers and is used by pusedo-reformers who want to destroy the teaching profession.

Finally, never, never, never speak to these investigators.  Let your lawyer or union advocate speak with them.  They will take your most innocent statement and change it to make you look guilty of the allegations. 

Michael Mulgrew's Knockout Of Campbell Brown

I am usually critical of my union for allowing Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his cronies at Tweed to poison and disrespect the teaching profession, especially, the classroom teacher.  However, there are times when the union does step up and do the right thing.  One of these events was when UFT President Michael Mulgrew responded to failed newscaster turned pusedo-reform advocate Campbell Brown's complaint that the union protects sexual predators in the schools.  The exchange between the two can be found here.

Ms. Brown asked Mr. Mulgrew if he would take a pledge and renegotiate the teachers' contract to allow the Chancellor to fire teachers accused of sexual misconduct, citing 128 DOE employees that she claimed did commit sexual misconduct and only 33 were  fired.  Mr Mulgrew responded in one of his best moments of his tenure by telling Ms. Brown that he does not pledge to her and that her definition of sexual misconduct cannot be  based on a mere accusation.

Mr. Mulgrew then went on to lecture Ms. Brown about how her allegations are misleading and how the system actually  works.  Mr. Mulgrew explained to Ms. Brown that the union agrees with the DOE that a simple allegation is sufficient for a teacher to be removed from having contact with children if a Principal so wishes it and if an Arbitrator finds that the teacher committed any sexual misconduct they must be fired.  There is no discretion by the Arbitrator on this.  He also told Ms. Brown that the reason the 95 DOE employees were not fired is because the charges of sexual misconduct were not proven to be true.

Finally, Mr. Mulgrew ended his response to Ms. Brown by telling her to get her picture taken by the Daily News and stopped any further discussion on the matter as he proved his point that the union does not protect sexual predators.  For people unfamiliar with the teacher contract here is what it says on page 120 of the latest edition of the teacher contract.

  In 3020-a proceedings, a mandatory  penalty of discharge shall apply to any tenured pedagogue a) found by a hearing officer to have engaged in sexual misconduct or b) who have pleaded guilty to or been found guilty of criminal charges for such conduct.


I must say that the exchange between Michael Mulgrew and Campbell Brown was a one-sided boxing match and the winner by knockout was Michael Mulgrew.  Good job Mike!

The DOE's Scarlet Letter

Only in the bizzaro world of the New York City Department Of Education (DOE) does a teacher who was found innocent of charges still is guilty of those charges.  Yes, it's true!  The DOE has flagged all teachers who were charged under 3020-a even when those charges were found to be untrue!  In other words, the DOE will put a discipline flag on a teachers file if the accusation results in 3020-a charges regardless if the accusations were proven to be true or not.

If you're a reader of my blog, you know that I have written extensively about the City's 3020-a process and how biased and flawed it is.  However, what is little known is the discipline flag that the DOE places on a teacher's personnel file making it virtually impossible for those teachers to get an interview for vacancies.  In other words the DOE has placed a "Scarlet Letter" on their files when principals and only principals can see when they access the teacher's file.

Previously, I wrote an article about the discipline flag the DOE was going to do but I didn't realize that they actually went ahead and did it anyway.  How could the DOE impose a discipline flag on a teacher's file if it's found that the teacher did not commit the misconduct that the DOE accused the teacher of doing?  The reason is that they don't care what the evidence shows, as long as the DOE investigators substantiate the accusation.  That brings me to the DOE investigative process. If you believe that the DOE investigators conduct a fair investigation then please read my posts on corrupt investigations or the Fairy tale. For anybody subject to these DOE investigations they all know its all about how the Principal feels about the teacher that dictates the tone of the investigation.  If the Principal does not like the teacher it is almost guaranteed that the investigators will substantiate the accusation no matter how flimsy the evidence is.

The UFT has filed a PERB complaint about the unfairness of attaching a discipline flag on teacher files when an independent Arbitrator found that the DOE charges for the stated misconduct was not upheld.  However, it appears the union is not pushing their complaint with any urgency while in the meantime all those teachers who were found innocent of the DOE charges of serious misconduct have the dismissed charges on their teacher file as if the charges were found to be true.  In other words, in the bizzaro world of the DOE, once charged you are automatically guilty no matter what the evidence shows at a 3020-a hearing.  Now that is real serious misconduct.

My Interview With A Disgruntled Education 4 Excellence Member.

During the summer I was contacted by a teacher who wanted me to hear his story about joining and eventually leaving Educators 4 Excellence (E4E).  I suspect his story is similar to many other disgruntled teachers who have joined E4E only to realize that this organization is a tool for education reform organizations and not what's best for the schools and the students.  To protect him I will call him "David".

David was graduating from a Midwest college when he was recruited by "Teach For America" (TFA) to teach in a low income urban school.  He always wanted to go to New York City and got his wish.  After receiving his five week training he was assigned to a school in the South Bronx in District 7 where he was greeted by the Principal.  The Principal explained to David and the seven other TFA teachers that his school is the "proving ground" to see if you have the ability to survive the demands of teaching in New York City.  On the first day, I was introduced to the "Chapter Leader" who told the staff that over 40% of the teachers we had last year are gone from the school.  At the time I didn't understand why there was such a turnover of staff.  However, I soon found out why.  Many of the teachers left because of the challenging student population, lax discipline, and Administrative demands that required teachers to take up extra duties on an unpaid basis. Many teachers stayed to 6pm just to complete the paperwork and prepare for the next day, all for $46,000.

Within the first week, I received a flyer in my mailbox that invited me to join an organization that represents the views of the teachers who are new to the school system.  At the time I thought this was simply part of the union and I eagerly joined this organization (E4E) since they claimed to want more pay, better working conditions, and a say in education policy.  It was easy to convince me after E4E plied me with booze and food while pitching their program at a get-together at a local bar..

During the first semester, I was contacted weekly by E4E to volunteer my time to convince other teachers to join the organization and to come to meetings about supporting the Bloomberg Administration's policy on eliminating seniority rights, and the evolving teacher evaluation system.  At first, I believed everything E4E was advocating and it helped that my school had many E4E members and the Principal actually supported the organization by giving them access to the school. It was only near the end of my first year did I slowly realize that E4E was a small group, even a cult, that had only a handful of schools represented and these schools were staffed by TFA teachers and experienced high turnover rates, just like my school.

With the summer off and time on my hands, I started to read the education blogs and blogger posts about E4E and was shocked and disappointed how the bloggers felt about E4E.  They called them tools for Bill Gates, and Eli Broad, a fifth column, and how many of the E4E leaders were not even classroom teachers!  I decided to start asking questions to my E4E coordinator once I started my second year and quickly realized that they were uncomfortable with me questioning them.  At the first meeting in my school where E4E welcomed the next batch of TFA teachers the Principal had recruited (we had a 30% turnover rate, less left because of the recession).  At the meeting I asked why E4E is not working with the union on common issues of interest?  You would have thought I asked them to commit suicide. Their response was hostile that E4E represents the views of the 21st century teacher and not the old and stringent contract requirements that the union represented.  I stayed as a E4E member but did very little work on behalf of the organization.  The more I knew about E4E, the less I wanted to be part of the group.

By the end of my second year, I became so disillusioned with E4E's increasing demands and rhetoric for its members, that I quit the organization.  However, I found out "that once you're in, you can't get out". They wanted us to go to other schools and network with new teachers to invite them for food and drinks to encourage them to join.  I was unwilling to waste my time doing that and I noticed that many of the E4E leaders were no longer classroom teachers and had no classroom assignments.  When I asked one who I was particularly close to in my school how did he get out of the classroom and into a job as a "coach" in his third year of teaching.  He smiled and said that the E4E leadership encouraged the Principal to make him a "coach" to reward him for his loyalty and recruitment success to the organization.  Yes, it seems my Principal not only hired TFA teachers but was one of the select schools that encouraged teachers to join E4E and rewarded them for doing so.

In my third year, I went on the Open Market Transfer System and received many job offers, since I

was inexpensive and not tenured.  I took a position in Manhattan and decided to no longer be an active participant in E4E.    This did not stop E4E from contacting me repeatedly to help them recruit and keep including me as a member.  I finally, cut all ties with them when they refused to run a slate in last year's UFT elections and I soon realized that they were a fringe group that is not supported by teachers but is propped up by outside education reform groups that want to deprofessionalize teaching and make it a temporary stopover on one's path to a real professional job that can support a family.

I will be starting my fourth year in teaching and hopefully receive tenure as I now realize what a dope I was in thinking E4E cares about the teachers in the trenches (classroom).  Rather they are a tool for outside interests that want to destroy the power of the teacher unions and make the teaching profession a low wage, temporary job.  Finally, I have realized that the goal for many of the mid-level E4E members is not what is best for the students but the quickest path to achieve an education policy position and leaving the classroom as fast as possible.

Why I Believe It Will Be A Bill de Blasio/Bill Thompson Runoff.

After watching the Democratic mayoral debate, I am more and more convinced that it will end up to be a Bill de Blasio/John Thompson runoff.  The poor showing by Christine Quinn and her high negatives show that the majority of Democratic voters will not vote for her.  In fact, she probably lost the "Bloomberg Democrats" with her support of the elimination of some of the Mayor's enforcement initiatives.

By contrast, I thought that Anthony Weiner was on the top of his game and had a good grasp of the issues.  John Liu also came out well and I suspect that the downward slide in the polls by Weiner has ended and I predict both Weiner amd Liu will see an upward bump in the next set of polls.

Bill de Blasio and Bill Thompson held their own on stage and except for a brief stumble by Thompson on giving municipal workers "retroactive raises", they did a good job presenting their case.

Unfortunately, that left Christine Quinn who spend most of the debate trying to ignore the "third term issue" and the relentless attacks on how she "aided and abetted" the Mayor in overturning the will of the people by eliminating "term limits" ,her failure to pass legislation,  and  her continued insistance in  talking past her allotted time while gnoring the moderator's attempt to go to another candidate or question. Below are the grades I assigned the candidates.
travesty, 

Anthony Weiner................................A
John Liu..........................................A-
Bill de Blasio.....................................B
Bill Thompson...................................B-
Christine Quinn.................................D+

How did the rest of you see it?

Mayor Bloomberg's Legacy Is That The Achievement Gap Is Wider Now Than When He Came Into Office.

Well, the results are in and the academic achievement gap between Asians and Whites on one hand and Blacks and Hispanics on the other  is now wider than in 2002 when Mayor Bloomberg took office.  Yes, that's right, not only has the Bloomberg Administration falied to close the academic achievement gap for the New York City students, but it has widened!

Based upon the 2013 State tests the academic achievement gap  between the Asian and White students and Black and Hispanic students has widened dramatically.  While all groups dropped,  It was schools that are in high poverty areas with an almost 100% minority population that dropped the most.  For example District 7 saw a drop of 64% in English and 75% in Math.  Citywide, black and Latino students showed a drop of 56% in English and over  a 60% drop in Math compared to an average of a 37% drop in English and a 50% drop in Math for all students.  That means that the drops for Asian and White students were much lower.

Overall the New York City 2013 proficiency levels are as follows.

English.............................Math

48%.................................61%............................Asian
47%.................................50%............................White
16%.................................15%.............................Black
16%.................................19%.............................Hispanic

That is an achievement gap that shows that Blacks and Hispanics are three times less likely to be proficent than Asians and Whites.

 In 2002, the proficiency levels were as follows:

 English............................Math

71%................................76%............................White
39%................................41%.............................Black
38%................................45%.............................Hispanic

Minorities werer less than twice as likely not to be proficient as Whites.

For the Mayor who has demonized teachers, ignored parents, disrespecting communities, and only cares about the 1%, his legacy in education is a failure with a wider student academic achievement gap when he leaves office then when he started,  The education Mayor, yeah right.



.

.

To The Education Reformers. It Really Is About Community, Family, And Poverty.

The revised New York State tests came out and as predicted, every school district saw drops in the passing rates.  In the well-to-do school districts scores dropped by an average of 25% while the poor school districts saw drops of well  over 50%.  In looking at the data it's very obvious that community, family, and economic status are the major factor in the achievement gap between minority and non-minority school districts.  In this post I will compare two Long Island school districts only 7 miles apart that showed why the student academic achievement gap persists and its not the teachers!

The Jericho school district is considered one of the top school districts in the nation while seven miles to the southeast is Wyandanch school district, one of the worst in New York State.  What are the differences between the two school districts?  Easy its about the community, family, and economic status.  Let's compare the two school districts.

Demographics:

Jericho..........White..........Asian..........Black..........Hispanic
                    61.3%........34.3%.........2.1%...........1.5%.

Wyandanch......0.6%..........2,2%........66.6%.........32.6%

Obviously, the demographics are opposite of each other as Jericho has only 3.6% of minority students. Moreover, 40% of the white student population are Jewish.  On the other hand, Wyandanch has only 2.8% of its student body is made up of White and Asian students. 

Economic Status: Slightly more than 64% of school age children are economically disadvantaged compared to only 8% of the students in Jericho.  While the official poverty rate of Wyandanch is 12% compared to 4% in Jericho, the poverty rate is concentrated in families that have school age children, that's why there is such a large percentage of economically disadvantaged students in the Wyandanch schools.

Single Family Households: Related to the economic status is the preponderance of single family households.  In Wyandanch he percentage is an astounding 43% of all families compared to Jericho where only 8% of the population have a single parent household. Is it little wonder that the annual household income in Jericho is over twice the amount in Wyandanch?

That brings me to the 2013 test scores how did the two school districts compare in passing the tests?

Jericho....................English...............Math............Drop from 2012
                              70.6%..............72.6%.................20%

Wyandanch               6.2% .............. 5.6%..................80%

While the education reformers can keep speaking the lies that "poverty is no excuse" the facts speak for themselves that the community demographics, the family unit, and the social-economic status are the main reason for the racial/income academic achievement gap and not the teachers they love to demonize are the blame for the abysmal test scores in poor minority school districts.

Why The Open Market Transfer System Is A Joke.

Today is the final day for teachers to look for vacancies under the Open Market Transfer System (OMTS) and just like the last few years, the OMTS is simply a joke when it comes to veteran teachers.  Only young and inexperienced (especially untenured) teachers are hired through the OMTS.  With few exceptions teachers with ten or more years experience have little or no chance to even get an interview for these vacancies.  Many of my colleagues applied to various positions only to get no response from the schools except for the required notification that the school received the application.

I spoke to a friend who is an Assistant Principal and he told me that the principals are encouraged by the DOE to hire "newbies" whenever possible to reduce their staff  budget costs and to find any reason possible not to interview ATRs.  Moreover, the DOE and the UFT has done little to enforce the ATR Agreement and that has added to the problems for veteran ATRs.  It matters little how effective a teacher is, its all about how much will the teacher cost the school and that is reflected in the OTMS hiring practices.

Even in hard to staff shortage areas like Special Education,ESL and Earth Science, the DOE allows the schools to bypass the available ATRs and hire "newbies", some not even certified!  Yes that's true, the Assistant Principal I spoke to told me that he was instructed by his Principal to do just that.   Why does our union leadership stay silent when the DOE continues to abuse the process?  I wish I knew but its obvious that the union leadership considers the ATR issue a low priority and they have other issues on the table to deal with.

The DOE's motto is "children first.....Always" but in reality its not about whats best for the students but pure and simple discrimination against veteran teachers who were excessed.  In effect its really "children last" as principals, with the encouragement of the DOE, rather hire inexperienced "newbies" than "quality teachers".

Teaching New Americans In Summer School. It's A Pleasure.

I must admit I wasn't looking forward to teaching high school science to recently arrived students to the country.  Most of them had limited English language skills and some none at all!  My students come from many countries, Spain, Ecuador, Columbia, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Greece, Russia, Korea, Burma, and China.   The few students who speak passable English help the students by translating what I say and I have put them in groups to help their transition to an American education.  One of the most important lesson that I have learned is how eager these students are to read and speak English to me.  In the almost one month that I have had them, all of the students will read a sentence to me in English and try to answer questions in English.  To tell the truth, I am very impressed with their efforts and proud of their progress.

I also would like to point out that these "new to America" students are well disciplined with no serious behavior issues, despite struggling with the English language.  Moreover, they meet me at the door with smiles and greetings when they enter the classroom and many seemed generally happy to be in school.  Despite our language differences we have connected and I get little presents like Chinese tea, a Jello snack, or a candy bar, no, no apples, from the students as their way of saying thank you.  To the Tweedies, nothing over $2!

The appreciation goes both ways as I will do anything reasonably possible for these students to navigate their way in New York City's confusing maze of regulations.  I find myself as a tour guide on how the students can take a subway to their various consulates in Manhattan and to the immigration offices downtown or what they must do to work. Furthermore, I  have gained their trust and respect and when they are having issues or uncertainties with their situation (homesickness is common), they confide in me and I try to reassure them that in a couple of years they will be fluent in English and become a productive citizen of this great country.  It seems to work as their frawn becomes a smile and they seem to try even harder to please me.

Teaching "new to America" students has been a real pleasure and I hope I get that chance again to make a difference to those students entering the New York City school system since we both learn a great many things being in a classroom together.

Why It's Important To Be In A Good School With The Teacher Evaluation System. Unless You Want To Be Terminated.

Looming on the horizon is the New York State teacher evaluation system that will be a "house of cards" and eventually collapse,  Unfortunately, when this does happen (2016-17?) the damage to the teaching profession will have been . done.  Many veteran teachers, eligible.to retire will leave the school system and the "newbies" will realize that teaching is no longer their calling and leave for a less stressful and more rewarding professional office position.  Worse, I foresee a large increase in experienced teachers who will be rated "ineffective" and get terminated, not because of their teaching ability but because of the "junk science" used and the student population they inherit.

Worse, is the new discipline policy that is being implemented which will further erode teacher authority as school administrators will find any excuse not to suspend a disruptive student and lay the blame on the teacher for poor classroom management.  Moreover, in schools with large percentages of special education students and English language learners, add the high poverty associated with many of these schools and the poor discipline codes, the result will be that many of these teachers will be under fire and rated poorly under the flawed teacher evaluation system.  This is especially true where student discipline is a school wide issue.  For example please read Marc Epstein's insightful article on the school discipline issue among other school problems under Mayor Bloomberg that has resulted in the destruction of many schools by loading them up with "high needs" students until they eventually close

It's obvious to me that unless you are in a good school with supportive administration, an educationally sound student body, and engaged parents who provide adult supervision and support for their children, the teacher will be in big trouble under the teacher evaluation system.  So think twice before accepting a position in a school that does not meet the three criteria listed above.  Under no circumstance should you accept a position in a school that fails to meet any one of the three criteria, especially if a "Leadership Academy Principal" is in charge unless you want to be terminated in two years.  Its not about better teachers, its about getting better students if a teacher is going to survive the badly flawed and rigged teacher evaluation system.

Why New York City Is Not Detroit.

I read the article by "Ed the Apple" and must disagree that the bankruptcy in Detroit is a warning sign for New York City when negotiating with the unions.  The differences between New York City and Detroit are like "night and day" and here's why.

Per Capita Income:  New York City has a per capita income of $31,500 compared to only $14,200 for Detroit.  More importantly New York City's average household income is $56,009 compared to only $25,000 for Detroit.  This shows that New York City has more income to spend and is less reliant on government assistance.

Poverty Rate: While the New York City poverty rate is at an all time high of 21% under Mayor Bloomberg, the Detroit poverty rate is an astounding 36% and the unemployment rate is 18%, compared to less than  9% for New York City.

Unfunded Liabilities:  Detroit has billions of unfunded liabilities and when 38% of the budget pays

for legacy costs (retiree pensions and health care), it does not leave much for existing City services.  By contrast New York City, while under pressure, is only 12% of the City's budget. In addition, New York City has been able to cover the ever escalating legacy costs while Detroit cannot. In fact, New York City has shown a budget surplus every year since 2005.

Economic Future:  New York City has experienced an economic boom with tourism at an all time high and the financial industry, while still losing jobs, providing the engine to power the City's economy.  Detroit, on the other hand is an economic wasteland with rows oi boarded up houses and long abandoned factories. Furthermore, New York City has a low crime rate and a booming technology sector while most small businesses are fleeing Detroit with its high crime rate, the highestin the nation, where it take an hour for the police to respond to calls for assistance.  In the misery index, Detroit finds itself one or two nationally, depending on the methodology.

Vibrant Middle Class:  New York City fared fairly well in the recession and are seeing many poverty ridden areas attracting middle class families and singles into the area.  Despite the ever widening wage gap under the Bloomberg Administration, the City has maintained  diverse middle class communities and has seen housing prices rise that has attracted ever increasing number of middle class families to the City.  Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for Detroit.  The middle class is almost non-existent.  "White flight" after the 1967 riots was followed by the auto industry leaving and along with them the black middle class.  Left was the poor minority class with high unemployment and low wage jobs, many of them living off government benefits to survive.

Public Services:  Say what you like about the Bloomberg Administration's policies, "good or bad", for the most part City services for the residents are top notch.  Good schools, police, fire, and sanitation are a hallmark for the City.  By contrast, city services are almost non-existent as police, fire, and sanitation is cut to the bone and response times are counted by the hours not the minutes.  As for the schools?  Over 75 schools are closing and the new schools are staffed by TFA recruits, the two year wonders, will take their place.  Will the Detroit  schools get better when TFA recruits replace the experienced teachers laid-off by the school closings?  Yeah when it snows in the Caribbean.

Comparing the problems in Detroit with New York City is like comparing "apples and oranges".  While they are both cities, one is losing population while the other is attracting more people, many with the skills that make them productive citizens in a vibrant City like New York.  The problems in Detroit should not and will not affect contract negotiations with the City.

Why Teacher Tenure Is Important.

In today's New York Daily News there is a sympathetic piece about a teacher who was pressured to resign from his $75,000 per year teaching position because he was seen with his shirt off.  The article shows a very ripped Stefan Serie who explained that he was an extra on a Bravo show Jewish-American Princesses and at a "pool party" he was seen with his shirt off.  According to Mr. Serie he was summoned a week later and told that his pending tenure will be revoked and told to resign, which is what he did.

What gets me is that many after school sports activities on school grounds will have male athletes practicing without their shirts.  This is called "shirts and skins".  Even female athletes will go with "sports bras" in real hot weather.  Yet this suburban school district decided to terminate Mr. Sire for simply not having his shirt on at a televised "pool party".  Unbelievable.

Interestingly, Mr. Sire is an eight year teaching veteran and untenured which is a major problem when  it comes to Long Island schools.  These school districts are notorious for hiring teachers for a year or two and not give them tenure.  Therefore, the teacher probably had been teaching in other school districts and finally found one willing to give him tenure.

Why did the School District deny tenure to Mr. Sire on such an innocence action by him?  It's because they can!  Tenure is important because it protects teacher from frivolous actions by school administration and false  accusations by vindictive students.  This disgusting action is just another example why tenure is important for teachers.,  In this case one person saw a problem with it and the poor guy now has no job.

That is why teachers cannot allow one person who does not know the facts to decide the fate of a teacher.  Like giving the clueless Dennis Walcott the right to terminate teachers accused of "sexual misconduct" without real evidence and the equally clueless Campbell Brown that cannot even get her facts straight when it comes to how independent arbitration and "due process" works.

See nyc educator blog for another take about this story.

The Real Story On What An ATR Costs A School's Budget, Assuming The Fair Student Funding Program Is Not Fully Implemented.

In my last post I received a comment from a high union official who claimed that I was not being factual on how much a higher paid ATR would cost a school.  In my post I stated that a school would be responsible for picking up the difference between the school's average salary and the salary of the ATR.  Well, the union official is correct to a point.  At present, the DOE has not fully implemented the "fair student funding formula" and has a "hold harmless provision so that schools with experienced staff do not lose funding.  Therefore, a school picking up a senior ATR will not be charged any more money for that year and only show a small increase in the "average teacher salary" next year if the ATR remains at the school.   I previously wrote an article that showed how it works in a school budget here.   However, this is the "average teacher salary" so taking the small school example in my post the "average teacher salary" goes up $2,000.  That means the school must pay $40,000 extra for the total teacher salaries. For the large schools in comes out to $25,000 extra. This may not seem significant but don't tell that to the principals who are stuck with very stringent budgets and must pay their CFN's out of their budget. Unfortunately, even this is a temporary measure and compounding the money problem is the UFT agreeing with the DOE that recently excessed ATRs have first crack at any vacancies that further makes it nearly impossible for long-term ATRs to fill a vacancy despite having seniority.  Is it any wonder that many senior teachers have been ATRs for five or six years?

As you can see, from my post back in October of 2011 even in a small school with an untenured teaching staff, a higher paid ATR would cost only $2,000! However, when the "fair student funding program" is fully implemented and teacher salaries will count for 100% of the school's teacher budget.  There will be no more "average teacher salary" calculations, the "fair student funding formula" will be based upon actual teacher salaries and no Principal can trust the DOE from sticking them with a budget that reflects the actual salaries retroactively.  In fact, the DOE has stated their intention of doing so in the future.


 While our union leaders reassure us that this will not be the case.  The principals either do not trust the DOE or use this potential uncertainty as one of their reason for not picking up senior ATRs.  Therefore, the result is that ATRs who are higher salaried are left without a job, even when they are excellent teachers and proved it during a long term assignment at a school. 

The question is why won't principals pick up ATRs?  The answer is that almost all principals are afraid that Tweed will eventually implement the full "fair student funding formula" going back to the 2008-09 baseline and leave the principals holdiing the bag. 

If the union wants to help ATRs they should make it a priority to eliminate the "fair student funding formula"  that penalizes senior teachers and require all excessed teachers to be placed in their district before any teachers can be hired from outside the DOE.

The City Pulls All Stops To Get "Select" Newbie Teachers Hired While Trying To Kick ATRs To The Curb.

The DOE has shown once again how they will go to great lengths to get "newbie teachers" hired while making it difficult for schools to hire better qualified ATRs.  In today's Gotham Schools there is an article that showed how the DOE welcomed these "newbie teachers" with cookies, drinks, presents, and put them on the top of the list for vacancies. The DOE even brought in a musician to serenade these "select newbie teachers".   Many of these teachers may have graduated high in their class but can they teach?  Obviously, many, maybe a majority of these "select teachers" will be long gone from the New York City schools in five years and the City will be forced to find and train replacements at the expense of the students.

On the other hand, there are over a thousand ATRs floating around the NYC Public Schools and few are offered positions , except as long term replacements in hard to staff areas like science and special education.  The ATRs who do get jobs are usually the untenured or ATRs that have less than five years experience and are relatively inexpensive.  As for the highly experienced and relatively more expensive ATRs?  They have a less of a chance of getting a vacancy then a snowstorm in April, thanks to the "fair student funding fiasco".  This is especially true in the Bloomberg small schools where most of the teachers are recent hires and the average teacher salary is $55,000.  Therefore, for a Principal to hire a teacher making $85,000,  He or she would need to come up with the $30,000 difference. Is it any wonder that Principals would be reluctant to hire a teacher who is going to put a dent into his or her budget?  While some of the best schools have an average salary of $80,000 or more, many schools run by "Leadership Academy principals" experience massive teacher turnover and cannot afford or want an ATR "quality teacher", even if it's what's best for the students. Just last year, the ATR job fair was a joke with few schools represented and even fewer administrators with the authority to offer positions.  In one case, a school sent a Secretary to take names of ATRs to screen them for a possible interview.  What a joke and a disgrace!

It's too bad that the DOE is so shortsighted that recruitment is more important than retention to them. When I keep reading that the DOE puts "children first", I must laugh because the real truth is that the students of the school is put last when it comes to hiring qualified teachers.

Principal Alison Coviello's Motto. "Do As I Say Not What I Do".

I have been reading South Bronx's running account of his problems with the Principal at P.S. 154, Dr. Alison Coviello.  According to South Bronx Ms. Coviello is an "elitist" who believes in perfection from her staff.  That in itself is not a problem.  However, when it comes to Dr. Coviello actions, perfection is not necessary. She doesn't see a problem breaking the rules for her favorites or for herself for that matter and embellish problems against teachers she doesn't like or want in her school.  If she doesn't like your tone of voice, that's insubordination but of course she can use the same tone of voice on the staff and that's acceptable in her world. 

In addition, she practices desperate treatment against staff members that she doesn't like.  Just read South Bronx's running account here, here, here, here. here, and here.  If you demand perfection then you must be the role model for that perfection and not just demand it.  That means when a teacher asks you to "model the lesson" you do it!   Obviously, the  Principal does not "practice what she preaches".

She also apparently broke the rules by not hiring an ATR for a common branch position.  Instead she hired a teacher from the outside the DOE that did not have a common branch license.  Listed below is the advertisement to the Teacher's college newspaper.

Yes, she apparently broke the rules and ignored the DOE/UFT ATR agreement by hiring a teacher outside the DOE!  Was she punished for this?  Of course not.  Moreover, as a graduate from the infamous "Leadership Academy" she believes she can do as she pleases and if that means harassing senior staff, or ignoring the hiring rules, so be it. Having a hostile work environment seems to be a recurring problem for all these "Leadership Academy principals" and Dr. Coviello appears to be no exception to that view.

It's just another case of the old "double standard" practiced by the DOE.

Randi Weingarten's Legacy That Has Made Teaching In The NYC Classroom A Minefield.

There is little doubt that teaching in the New York City classroom has become an increasingly hostile experience under Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Chancellors Joel Klein, Cathie Black, and Dennis Walcott.  However, much of the blame must be laid on the doorstep of our ex UFT President, Randi Weingarten.  The great appeaser.  Under her destructive tenure as head of the UFT she eroded the rights of her members and allowed the DOE to impose programs that were damaging to the classroom teacher.

Let's start with the erosion of teacher "due process rights" under 3020-a  for teachers accused of
incompetence.  Until 2000, a teacher accursed of incompetence would go before a three member arbitration panel to determine the penalty.  The result was the teacher would usually get a compromise verdict and keep their job.  However, Randi Weingarten negotiated with the DOE and agreed to have only one Arbitrator review the incompetence charge and many teachers found themselves terminated. Moreover, in the same 2000 agreement the teacher had no choice in the assignment of an Arbitrator while teachers in the rest of the State have the right to refuse the first Arbitrator offered to them.  In 2002 she allowed the Bloomberg Administration to have Mayoral control of the schools that has resulted in a "rubber stamp" PEP that echos the Mayor's  policy.


Then there was the terrible 2005 contract that further reduced teacher "due process rights" and caused the ATR crises. Rather than describe the problems associated with the 2005 contract.  Included,  is a legacy of the awful "givebacks" that Randi negotiated for us:  Here, here, here, here, and here!  This contract was an unmitigated disaster and was considered a "sellout" by many of the rank and file.

In 2006 the Bloomberg/Klein Administration imposed a "fair student funding formula" on the NYC public schools.  Had Randi sued or brought the issue to PERB, she would have won.  Instead she remained silent and combined with the elimination of seniority transfer rights have resulted in older and more experienced teachers not being able to get a permanent position. Hence the ATR crises. She also allowed the co-location of charter schools, which was a shock to Joel Klein she since she could have stopped it in its tracks but failed to do so.

Even in the 2007 contract she allowed the voluntary but union endorsed, PIP+, the termination program for incompetent teachers and expanded the list of actions that fell under serious misconduct and ending up with a 90-day suspension without pay or health benefits.  It was during this time that the "rubber rooms" exploded with a maximum of 744 reassigned teachers awaiting their fate.

In 2009 Randi remained silent as Mayor Bloomberg and Christine Quinn overturned term limits that resulted in the disastrous third term and an increase in vilifying teachers that result in the Bloomberg "last in, first out" bill.

Finally, her parting gift to her members in 2009 was to reclaim the two days before Labor Day that she gave up in 2005 but at what cost!  We had to give up 1.25% interest in our TDA funds (8.25% to 7.00%).  If the average member puts away $15,000 annually for twenty years, the members lose about $10,000!  More, if you put in more.  Interestingly, we actually owe the City 0.58% when we get the next contract in 2014.!

Now Randi works on destroying member rights in other school systems.  Washington D.C., Baltimore Maryland, and now Newark New Jersey.   Interestingly, the Chicago teachers told Randi Weingarten to "butt out" and won.  Who can forget she invited Bill Gates as a keynote speaker at her AFT conference who's main idea is high stakes testing and video surveillance of the classroom. Goodbye and good riddance Randi, you have done enough damage to your members in New York City.

.

What Is The Most Important Characteristic of A Quality Teacher? Connecting With The Students.

Everybody agrees that all classrooms should have a "quality teacher" instructing the students.  However, when you ask the various education reform groups what is a "quality teacher"?  You get vague and unrealistic answers.   If you are Mayor Bloomberg a "quality teacher" to him its a "newbie" that will be a "Teach for America or Teaching Fellow" that cost the least amount and who we leave the profession before getting a pension or retire health benefits.  If it's Bill Gates it's all about being held accountable and under video surveillance.  Especially if it requires the use of "junk science".  If it's ex-Chancellor Joel Klein, it is a teacher that will come in at 7 am and not leave until 7 pm, while not asking for per session.  Finally, to Michelle Rhee a "quality teacher" is one willing to be an at will employee for a few dollars more in their paycheck.In my book a "quality teacher" must posses the following characteristics:

• At least five years of teaching experience.
• Good classroom management skills.
• A deep knowledge of the curriculum.
• A caring and supportive attitude.
• A sense of humor
• A positive connection with the students.

While most education reformers will ignore these requirements publicly, privately they know the above characteristics are necessary to achieve mastery of the classroom.   However, they also know that "quality teachers" require an adequate workload, supportive Administration, and the freedom to try different methods to maximize student learning.  Consequently, this eliminates charter schools, where teacher burnout and turnover is high and in most schools the entire staff is gone in three years.  It also eliminates schools with inexperienced Leadership Academy principals who have limited time in the classroom and are clueless to what good teaching is, and the Bloomberg small schools who are inhabited by untenured staff and burdened with rigid curriculum requirements.  Is it any wonder that the Mayor hates experienced teachers?

Just look at the higher achieving schools, what do most of them have in common?  Right an experienced staff and a supportive Administration that allows the teachers to find the best teaching techniques that allows students to reach their academic potential.  In the school I was in all year, I saw all aspects of good teaching.  A supportive Administration, a stable and experienced teaching staff, and freedom to do the right thing for the students.  When I asked my students what makes a "quality teacher" they almost all said the same thing that the teacher likes and cares about them.  That's right, almost all my students wanted the teacher to connect with them and understand their needs and problems.  One thing they didn't like was for the teacher to be unsupportive or trying to "friend" them.  Both type of teachers turned the students off to learning.  As one girl said to me "I have enough friends. I don't need a teacher to be my friend".  Furthermore, many inexperienced teachers do just that and the students simply walk all over them and these teachers will never master classroom control.  On the other side of the ledger was the teacher who required it to be "my way or the highway attitude".  This type of teacher over controls the classroom , is inflexible, and is resented by the students. Therefore, based upon my many years of experience and discussions with my students while the other factors I listed are important, the most important factor is connecting to the students.  By connecting with the students you gain their respect and give them the confidence that they need to reach their academic goals.

A "quality teacher" is a teacher who can related to the students and guide them to maximize their academic achievement.

Just Another DOE Double Standard When It Comes To Punishing Principal Minerva Zanca For Alleged Racist Misconduct.

Here we go again!  The DOE fails to take any action against a Principal of a closing school who allegedly made racist remarks about Black teachers in her school and then terminated or excessed them.  According to numerous reports Principal Minerva Zanca of Pan American High School which is scheduled to close made racial epithets against her black teachers and got rid of them at the end of the school year.  Read the story here. Ms. Zanca worked under and is a protege of the infamous Principal Jose Cruz at the MAST school in Campus Magnet who has a reputation in "U' rating more teachers than any other Principal in the City.

There is now a petition against the Principal and a protest at Tweed scheduled for noon Monday July, 8th by teachers to have Principal Zanca removed.  The question is why hasen't the DOE done it already? 

The answer is the old DOE "double standard" when it comes to alleged misconduct by administrators.  For the DOE administrators are "innocent until proven guilty" while for teachers it is "guilty and never proven innocent". The same rules should apply to all educators not different rules as the DOE presently employes.  If you are in the City and not teaching summer school, please  show up and tell that hypocrite Chancellor Walcott to terminate Minerva Zanca immediately.  Campbell Brown, Ben Chapman, Fox news, and the Daily News where are your outrage?  Oh, I forgot she is not a teacher so its not newsworthy.

The DOE's Idea Of Academic Excellence Is Different From The State And The Colleges Know It When It Comes To Science.

I was always wondering why the State's and the City's idea of academic excellence were somewhat different.  So I decided to look at what differences are there in Science and to my shock I found out that the City was allowed to quietly water down the Science requirements.  No wonder, that the City would always report different results than the State.

For example, two years ago the City DOE quietly changed the academic requirements metric for Science by allowing schools to get two years science credit for a one year Regents course.  That's right, by quietly changing the standards the DOE enabled some principals to give double credit for a Regents Science course as long as they gave double periods or made it a two year course.  One school in particular went as far as giving their students a two year "Living Environment" course and then take a non-Regents course in Earth Science, Chemistry, or Physics to satisfy the Physical Science laboratory requirement. If this sounds like shortchanging the students and fooling their parents, it certainly is to me.  However, the CUNY and SUNY colleges are not fooled one bit and one recruiter told me that when they see no second Science Regents, the chances of the student getting into her college is diminished.  The recruiter went on to say that the City and State colleges are aware of the watering down of the City's Science curriculum and  their Admissions Office investigate more closely the student's transcript.  Finally, the "college readiness" scores for the NYC high schools showed that most of the "college and career ready" students (50%) came from only a few schools (10%). The watering down of the Science curriclumn will not help the scores any.

This is not happening only in the struggling City schools but in schools that are solidly middle-class and high achieving.  In one case, the Principal of this high achieving school has decided to have his students skip Earth Science altogether and give a double period of Chemistry.  While it will take a year to see the results, the Science staff is not optimistic since many students cannot handle the Math and advanced scientific concepts that are required in Chemistry.  For many of the students it will be a wasted year of frustration and failure. 

While I cannot say anything about the rest of the core subjects, the DOE is apparently allowing principals to dumb down and narrow the science requirements at the expense of their student's academic achievement and this is a problem for many students and their parents who expect academic excellence and not shortcuts or watered down requirements that will hurt their chances of going to a four year college.

The DOE should be ashamed of themselves for their "watering down" and narrowing the Science curriculumn and allowing principals to practice "education on the cheap" at the expense of their students academic success..