At one of the 3020-a hearings a UFT official with detailed knowledge of the Peer Intervention Program plus (PIP+) has informed the Arbitrator presiding on one of the teacher incompetence cases that of the first 56 teachers who were given PIP+, 51 teachers were found incompetent by the PIP+ educators. That is a 90% failure rate! Astounding that our union allowed this program to exist at all. I was previously assured by a high union official that the PIP+ program was legitimate and it allowed targeted teachers a six month respite from the administration hounding them. However, it is apparent that the trade off was that in 9 of every 10 cases, the DOE now had an expert witness testifying against the teacher in the 3020-a hearing and an increased chance that the Arbitrator will either terminate the teacher or give more severe penalties than without the PIP+ educator's testimony.
Since the PIP+ program is voluntary, the union should be forcibly advising all Chapter Leaders and District Representatives that no teacher should agree to PIP+ under any circumstances. Remember, an Arbitrator has already ruled that that Administration cannot require the teacher to take PIP+ and cannot be charged with not taking PIP+. We all make mistakes in expecting the DOE to act fairly and reasonably. However, time and again Tweed does what is best for them and not what is best for the schools. Therefore, it is time for the union to admit failure in the PIP+ program and demand its discontinuance. Nothing less should be acceptable.
PIP + was one of the main reasons ICE opposed the 2007-09 Contract. We had a feeling it would be a stacked deck. Read what we wrote in 2006.
ReplyDelete"A second Peer Intervention Program in addition to the one we already have but the new program is not confidential and can be used against us in 3020A hearings?"
I believe that this issue needs to be brought up at the Chapter Leader meetings with the District Reps.
ReplyDeleteI came from Accountable Talk's blog. (It seems he might have used his admin powers to take it out- which is why I came here.)
ReplyDeleteIt might help us students understand why you (and others) believe that the current contract should not be torn up, especially for us students.
This would best be served by a blog post explaining yourself.
And please don't call shame on Polazzo for doing anything. The students acted on their own accord- it does not help quell anything (and might just set some people off). If our teacher tells us to stop, I have no doubt that we will.
And I understand where you are coming with your NYC classroom where vindictive Administrators, many with limited classroom experience, are filing false accusations to remove experienced teachers. point. But please do understand that this is why Polazzo wants a new contract; it may have not come out in the Daily News article, but as a student, I do believe that Polazzo wishes to give merit for teachers who teach well, protect educators from idiot administrators (trust me: he does not wish to give administrators absolutely power- forgive him if the article came out like that), and give students a say on how teachers are evaluated.
Well, I'll be waiting for a piece (or response) that would enlighten students on whats great about the UFT contract. Though, it would certainly be nice to see some of the bad parts that you notice about it too.