and that they have a good relationship with the teachers union and teachers in general. The truth is the classroom teacher finds the DOE the enemy and for good reason.
First, the DOE continues to impose Fair Student Funding on schools that penalize schools who hire veteran teachers and forced principals to"hire the cheapest rather than the best teachers for their school".
Second, the DOE only funds the schools at 90% of their fair funding. While the bloated bureaucracy continues to eat up precious funds.
Third, the DOE continues to target veteran teachers through the 3020-a process as the numbers are as high as in the Bloomberg era.anti-teacher Danielson program to evaluate teachers and insists on four observation per year.
Rather then the DOE being a correlative partner, they are considered the enemy of the classroom teacher and for good reason.
We had a district rep at our school a few days ago for a routine visit. I mentioned to her that the Danielson's rubric was awful and that it was used as a tool to terrorize teachers. I am not kidding, she said it was a great system and so much better than the old "S" and "U" system.
ReplyDeleteI pointed out that under the old system, if the principal wanted to "U" rate you for the year, they had to show a lot of proof and check off a lot of boxes on a form that could be challenged. She looked at me with a mixture of not understanding and incredulity.
It was right there that my last straw of faith in the Union was broken.
Our Union by not negotiating in good faith has impacted that a group of teachers called ATRs are treated in a different way under rules that were not voted, and are denied a fair chance to find permanent jobs because they are in disvantage with respect to new teachers. The ATR pool was never created to be a dumping ground for the most experienced teachers. Therefore we require a new agreement with the input, and vote of ATRs in compliance with the Roberts Laws. We also require a new agreement that prevents any targeting, harassment, or abuse from any type of supervisor with the sole purpose of terminating ATRs. Observations should not be used in a arbitrary, and capricious way to penalize or to terminate an ATR.
ReplyDeleteThe DOE and the Legal Department are engaged in systemic age discrimination, while our Union is remaining silent.
ReplyDeleteThere are many supervisors that are not acting in good faith, and our Union is not in the business of defending its members.
ReplyDeleteField supervisors have a blank check to go after ATRs, they know that the UFT will not challenge any type of observations on ATRs, or unfair circumstances. Out of license, in a bad class, students the ATR just met, ATRs having close to 8 days absent or excessive days absent.... Everything even unfair observations, and circumstances are good to terminate an ATR. Any reason is good to make an ATR uncomfortable.
ReplyDeleteAs long as these field supervisors can carry their dirty agenda on high expectations that are unreachable everybody is happy. At the same time they need to hire new inexperienced fellow teachers to replace all those experienced teachers that are becoming ATRs. It is a perfect plan designed by our leaders and Union. The plan is to make ATRs useless, overwhelmed and discouraged.
For the ATRs its bad enough that the DOE wants to terminate us but it seems the UFT leadership is helping the DOE thin the ATR herd by stabbing us in the back. That is why the DOE and UFT agreed to the field supervisors in 2012 as another chance to make the ATR problem go away. Again everybody is happy. Our Union knows everything is fine.
Many Principals are making older teachers ATRs, so they can hire cheaper teachers. And the UFT? Do not count on them.
ReplyDeleteThe DOE is serving teachers termination papers without the signature of PEP, violating the due process.
ReplyDeleteNYSUT lawyers need to step up to the plate.
DeleteNYSUT lawyers should impose the due process otherwise they are not in our side.
DeleteLike I said on another thread the Danielson as a measuring instrument is both in accurate and imprecise. Ex : the teacher tries to address student behavior with mixed results ( how can that ever be accurate ).The number of observables in a lesson is so large and varied such that the observer can evaluate only the negatives ( if he so chooses ). How can an instrument with so much observer bias be precise. This piece of shit reminds me of a cheap ass bathroom scale you buy at the 99 cents store. Today you weigh 140 tommorrow 160 and the next day 110.
ReplyDeleteThe 3020A is being manipulated, and a lot of teachers are being served the papers without a PEP vote. NYSUT lawyers need to step up to the plate.
ReplyDelete