Saturday, May 22, 2010

Even The General Publc Dislikes Chancellor Joel Klein

The latest Quinniapiac Poll has shown that Chancellor Joel Klein's approval ratings from the general public has plummeted to an all time low of 30%. Even the public realize that Joel Klein and his not-so-merry band of non-educators that surround him at Tweed are not good for the education of their public school children. If passing is 65% then our angry Chancellor should be given a well deserved grade of "F". Despite the ever continuing propaganda coming out of Tweed and their mouthpieces at the New York Daily News and New York Post, the general public just sees from their own children the inequities and favoritism that Tweed practices when it comes to charter schools vs. the public schools.

Even many of the school-based administrators (principals & assistant principals) have grumbled about how clueless Tweed is in running the school system. In one case they give the principals more authority to run their schools and then cut their budget as Tweed increases their own headcount of non-educators (8 Deputy Chancellors at $192,000 for a total of 1.5 million dollars just an example of the increase) at the expense of the classroom. As for the teachers, except for this group here, I suspect that Chancellor Joel Klein would be in the low single digits when it comes to approving his job performance. Why is the Chancellor almost universally disliked? I would like to say that our union did a magnificent job in demonizing the angry Chancellor. However, our union has been pretty much inept and only now is trying to ramp up opposition to Tweed through the media. No! The real reason is the misguided policies by the Chancellor, be it school closings, charter schools, budget priorities, and the increase in test preparation at the expense of a total education are a large part of the problem.

It is about time that people realize that Chancellor Joel Klein and his group of non-educators are the problem and not the solution for the New York City Public Schools as Tweed continues their "children last" and "education on the cheap" policies.


Anonymous said...

I often resist the implication that Klein is the problem (and we can deal with Bloomberg).

In fact, I think Bloomberg is horrendous, the whole direction in education (K-12) is horrendous.

But even among awful leaders and administrators, Klein stands among the worst of the worst. Removing him won't solve our problems. But it would be a good step.


reality-based educator said...

Unless Bloomberg's rating gets down to that level, it doesn't matter much. Klein is the face for Bloomberg's ed deforms, so he is going to take the popularity hit. But if some of that damage starts to hit Bloomberg - who IS running for president in 2012 with $150 billion to drop on the race - then you will see millions of dollars dropped on p.r. to "repair" the damage.

So far, with the newspapers all in BloomKlein's corner on education, with Wall Street and the hedge funders dropping millions to demonize the teachers unions, and with the UFT and the NYSUT happy to let the hedge funders and BloomKlein and Obama/Duncan frame the education debate and demonize teachers as the problem, it is ALL going in the ed deformers favor.

So I doubt either Klein or Bloomberg lose sleep at night over Klein's Q numbers. But if Bloomberg's head south (as they could with all the budget cuts coming down the road...remember, the last time he was below 50% approval was during the last recession when he slashed the budget and city programs), then they will do something about it.

Though that something will probably just be double down on the p.r. And with the help of the shills in the media and the jivesters running the ed blogs, it just might help.

Anonymous said...

Klein is an anathema to education period. The real culprit and the one who is against the will of the people and true democratic principles is Bloomberg. His end run around term limits and the current Grand jury into his part in election fraud are reason enough to make his name MUD in the history of our city/country. The efforts should be to urinate on his legacy as the accountable mayor..

Michael Fiorillo said...

When Bloomberg fired the PEP members who disagreed with his policies on social promotion, he explicitly stated that they worked at his pleasure.

So too with the Chancellor; he is charged with implementing the mayor's policies, and sems to be doing so to the mayor's satisfaction.

And, given their behavior and their ideology, why should they care a bit about the opinions of mere teachers, parents and citizens?

Chaz said...

I agree with you all about Bloomberg. However, he is the billionaire mayor who can buy his way into any office he wants. The weak link is Joel Klein and we should continue to go after his anti-teacher and parent policy that only hurts the public schools and the students.

Esteban said...

Imagine Klein as Secretary of Education. Ugh!

Anonymous said...

I agree the “education on the cheap” is not the answer but neither is education on the expensive. Being young does not disqualify you from being a quality educator and being experienced is not the only requirement for being a quality educator. The sooner the Union realizes this and works with Klein on a solution the better. Continuing to protect all tenured teachers at all cost should not be the Union’s goal. The Union should work with Klein to ensure the best quality educators are in place to support the students no matter what their age or experience level.

Obviously in most cases the best quality educator will be the experienced educator but it is not true in all cases. The Union refuses to acknowledge that it is possible to have less experienced teacher be a better quality teacher than a more experienced one. As I said, I most cases this is not true, but the Union’s refusal to acknowledge that it is possible hurts the public’s opinion of the Union.

Anonymous said...

Klein said; "Teachers are professionals, and they deserve to be treated the way professionals in almost every other line of work are: evaluated based upon their work. Especially with our children’s future at stake."

He also said; "Our students deserve to be taught by the most talented, dynamic, and effective teachers possible—whether they’ve been teaching for three years or thirty years."

I couldn't agree more with what he is saying.

susan said...

If you are a good young teacher, you will be a better veteran teacher. Take the anti-tenure garbage elsewhere.

It takes YEARS to be a good teacher. The trend is now not to even give teachers a chance since they are a dime a dozen.

Anonymous said...

If it takes YEARS to become a good teacher why is tenure granted after only three years of teaching in most cases?

Chaz said...


First, it takes between six to ten years to become a quality teacher. Therefore, with all other factors being even, the eight year veteran teacher will be better than the two year teacher.

Second, because Joel Klein cut the school budget by 4.9% and the "fair student funding" formula. Principals are pressured to do what is best for their budget, not what is best for their students.

Finally, you assume all principals are qualified, That is a leap of faith. Many of the "Leadership Academy" principals are clueless what goes on in the classroom and they are poor judges of what makes a quality teacher.

Susan is correct in her analysis.

Anonymous said...

Once again you refuse to admit that it is possible to have a young teacher that is better than an experianced teacher. Thank you for proving my point.

Chaz said...

I see you have a lot to learn about teaching. If you read my comment you would see that it is the exception and not the rule when inexperienced teachers are better than a veteran teacher.

Furthermore, you fail to understand the politics in this but then again as a "newbie teacher" you have so much to learn. Thanks for proving my point.

Anonymous said...

If you read my comments you would see that I agree that it is the exception and not the rule. The difference between you and I, is that you would fire the young teacher for being young even though the teacher was better. I would base everything off the performance of the teacher not their age.

FYI, I am NOT a newbie. This is my tenth year teaching in the south Bronx. Working in the south Bronx I work with many young teachers and I am devastated to see that we are going to lose some of the teachers. I work with 2 superstar teachers with 2 or 3 years of experience that I would put up against any teacher in the district. Losing these 2 teachers does nothing but hurt the students.

It is the old angry teachers like yourself that are stuck in the past the hurt the education system.

Anonymous said...

I would, of course, do everything possible to avoid lay-offs. You should, too. Have you called your representatives? Faxed them? Gotten your colleagues to, as well?

Bloomberg/Klein are budgeting against teachers. It is a disservice to all of us to allow them to reframe this as teachers scrambling against teachers.

And it would be better if none of us conflated lay-offs (budgetary) with firing (with or without cause)

Chaz said...


How do you define performance? The Principal? You are a ten year veteran? Yeah right! You write like a newbie and your views are as a newbie. Protest all you want but seniority is here for a reason and that is that political decisions don't affect the process.

Don't worry newbie you will be rehired after Bloomberg gives the senior teachers the buyouts.

Anonymous said...

I have been teaching for 10 years but I am still young enough to know what is right for the STUDENTS.

You are old, miserable and have forgotten about students. Please continue to pretend that all teachers are good teachers. You have been teaching for decades and you can’t honestly say that all experienced teachers are good teachers. I can’t honestly say that most teachers are good teachers, experienced or not.

You should stop fighting to keep an old outdated system and start fighting to correct the old outdated system.

There are some great teachers with lots of experience and there are some horrible teachers with lots of experience. The same thing goes for young teachers. Unfortunately, many young poor performing teachers get tenure after three years and will continue to be horrible teachers for the remainder of their careers. This is true for teachers that started 30 years ago and teachers that started three years ago. Some people are not meant to be teachers! Some people are not good teachers!

You and I both know teachers who do not like what they do but have tenure and they have decided to ride it out for the next 20 to 30 years until they can retire with a good pension. I can honestly say that I didn’t hit my peak performance as a teacher until my 6th year, but I had already had tenure for 3 years. Please tell me what sense that makes.

The major issue with the education system is that most teachers are granted tenure after three years, good or bad. Tenure should only be granted to strong performing teachers after 10 to 15 years and the seniority system should not apply to anyone without tenure. During layoffs the Principal and Superintendent should have their choice off which teachers (without tenure) they want to keep.

PLEASE stop lying to yourself and pretending that all teachers are great teachers. I am a firm believer that experience turns good teachers into great teachers. I am also a firm believer that experience turns bad teachers into bad teachers with more experience.

South Bronx

Chaz said...


Name calling is not my game. That is for the young and clueless "newbies" like you. I will be thinking of you when your "Leadership Academy Principal" lays you off.

Anonymous said...


I have not called names and thank you for ignoring all my comments. It just shows that you can't face the truth. Please continue being angry and not supporting the progression of our profession.

South Bronx

Anonymous said...

10 year teacher,

Just who do you think would make the decision to fire you if they had a dislike for you or wanted to give the job to a relative? It would be one of those Nazi Academy types.

Without tenure you can be fired at will.

Tenure is not job security. Tenure is the right to "due process" which really means that at the whim of any shake and bake child principal, you can be sent to the vanished gulag and then have to go through a kangaroo court.

It amounts to a shakedown. Your constitutional rights would be violated and you will suffer untold damage.

That is what tenure is. In addition, the moment you get tenure, it is a red target painted on you as an undesirable type, ripe for the picking.

This system is run by and for crooked lawyers. The idea to pit teachers against each other is brilliant.

Stop attacking each other and go after the true problem. A system that has devolved into a reign of terror run by a dictator who bought the election.

Go after the shit dues harvesting operation that has directly caused the current situation. Go after a union that obviously rigged the vote.

The last time I heard numbers in the 90 percent range, they belonged to Saddam Hussein.

There is no democracy in the Union and there is no democracy in NYC or for that matter in the US.

We are living in savage times.
They have plenty of money for no bid contracts, deputy chancellors and all sorts of graft, theft and corruption.


Angry Nog

The Veteran NY Teacher said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

You and I both know failed teachers that have moved to the administrative ranks to save their pensions. A great many of the newer principals had great difficulty in the classroom. Why on earth would their pedagogical judgments be trusted? Only a newbie only a newbie.

Anonymous said...

South Bronx . . . unfortunately, the way the game is played now, it is a scorched earth game being played by Klein and Bloomberg, so there isn't any room for the compromise or reason you seemingly are applying to this equation. Bloomberg knows one thing - complete and utter anhililation of his opponents, in this case teachers. This is how you acuumualte 20 BILLION DOLLARS, ALMOST THREE TIMES THE AMOUNT HE CAME TO CITH HALL WITH! ! ! How does this relate to this discussion? Simple. Klein often and has stated in the press that the ATRS are "bad teacher" because they are unhired. This is a boldfaced lie in most cases. S.Bronx, ALL of the ATRs are "bad?"In my campus school OVER 90 PERCENT OF THE TEACHERS ARE BRAND NEW TEACHERS ! ! ! So , therefore, according to Bloomberg's ACTIONS, not words, ONLY new teachers are good teachers. Where is the balance that you speak of, where some young people are good teachers, AND some older teachers are good teachers? Why do the reorganized schools retain less than 5 percent of the existing staff S.Bronx? These are ALL bad? This is an ageist extermination based on age and salary, and will only get worse if they get there way. There is no compromise with these people. I hesitate to believe you are who you say you are, since if you truely had 10 years in the system, you would feel as threatened as anyone else. Perhaps you aren't directly threatened, you are not an ATR, or maybe you are good at kissing some APs or Principal's ass. If you were seeing things accurately, you would realize that we are in for the fight of our lives, and are being FORCED to be as extreme in our defense as our opposition is in destroying us.

Anonymous said...

Anyone have good comedic material to submit to "Joel Klein's Joke Line"?