Friday, July 26, 2019

The Union Must Negotiate With The Chancellor To Eliminate Danielson

New York City is one of the few New York State districts that evaluates teachers by using the Charlotte Danielson rubric. This evaluation tool, when used appropriately by fair-minded administrators, the Charlotte Danielson rubric is an efficient teacher evaluation tool.

However, there are far too many incompetent and vindictive administrators who use Charlotte Danielson as a weapon to rate teachers who are effective as developing or ineffective.  Moreover, approximately 33% of the principals are graduates of the infamous " Principal Leadership Academy".  These principals are selected, not by talent, but who they knew who can recommend them.  Finally, these Leadership Academy graduates are told that they should run their schools as a CEO and not as the instructional leader.

These Leadership Academy principals are told they should demand staff cooperation and not collaborate.  In other words it's "my way or the highway".  In addition, due to tight school budgets and Fair Student Funding, these principals are sure to target senior teachers.  Since they can save money if they encourage the senior teacher to leave and replace that teacher with an inexpensive "newbie".  The difference can then be used by the Principal to put in his slush fund and use it as he or she sees fit.

Will the union push for the removal of Charlotte Danielson as a teacher evaluation tool?  Don't count on it since Michael Mulgrew and company are not in the classroom and are not subject to the Charlotte Danielson rubric. The union does not even try to remove these vindictive principals who make teaching a living hell in their school.


Anonymous said...

THANK YOU FOR WRITING THIS! The number one concern with teachers at my school is Danielson and the gotcha mentality of observations. I am hopefully optimistic that come September we will suffer a tad less knowing that tenured teachers will be observed twice. (Yes, admins "may" come as many times as they like but my guess is most wont) What is everybody's thoughts on how this is going to roll out in September?

Anonymous said...


DITTO! It is the ONLY issue of any real concern among the teachers at my school as well. The Danielson rubric is a toxic force for the destruction of a school. You will NOT find one teacher in my school who felt they were helped or "improved their practice" by anything written in a Danielson observation. The only thing Danielson has done is made people update their resumes and look to get the hell out of the school as quickly as possible.

Anonymous said...

2:00pm. It will be much easier for an administrator to low rate a teacher with only 2 observations. All you need is to bomb one observation. Also, it's tough to prove an administrator is out to get you based on only 2 observation, so I don't think the 2 observations are any better.

Anonymous said...

Two vs. 4 observations don't really matter than much. If an admin wants to get ya' they will. However, we still have MOSL scores to boost our ratings up. (In most cases, MOSL scores can help, but there will be cases where they do not) I am very curious to see how this all plays out come September as well.

ed notes online said...

Here's a simple solution. For fair administrators keep Danielson. But all admins must first pass a sanity test.

Anonymous said...

I have witnessed how some really bad, passive-aggressive, vindictive and corrupt admins have misused this rubric.

Teachers who are their favorites, even though they lecture, bore the kids to death or are so disorganized as to be embarrassing always get high ratings.

Teachers who are dynamic, knowledgeable and organized with great outcomes for he kids, but who are not butt kissers, get low rated, no matter what they do.

I personally always get mixed ratings, and the one who rates me has a reputation for having been a very poor teacher before he got into admin, but I do whatever he says without volunteering for anything so I get 3s and 2s and I end the year Effective. Okay by me.

But I have seen so many teachers reduced to tears of frustration from the three admins on my floor, who low rate them unfairly, just to push them out, torture them or to look 'tough' to their higher ups.

The problem with the Danielsons system is that, unlike the old S,U system, now the burden of proof of your competence is shifted on to the teacher. In the old system, if ad admin wanted to give you a "U" they had to show they did a lot of work to help you and there were so many things on the checklist besides just what is seen in ten minutes in a flyby observation - stuff like punctuality, professionalism, organization, etc.

Under Danielsons, now you are judged SOLELY by 'what they see' in the 10-15 minutes they pop in. And they can circle whatever they want on the rubric and it's their word against yours and theirs has more weight.

Charlotte Danielson was UNQUALIFIED to make an evaluation system for a system she never worked in. She was never a teacher of children, nor was she ever a school principal - just another pencil neck, control freak pushing a newfangled idea that does not have real world application.

We need to push to go back to the old system, rather than create some new type of Danielsons Disaster. Otherwise people will continue to flee the classroom.

Anonymous said...

12:23 Said
"I personally always get mixed ratings, and the one who rates me has a reputation for having been a very poor teacher before he got into admin, but I do whatever he says without volunteering for anything so I get 3s and 2s and I end the year Effective. Okay by me."

For the last 30ish years I have noticed that teachers who have the greatest difficulties in the classroom move to administration. While the general public may generally recognize that the strongest teachers tend to continue teaching (in the same manner that the best college profs don't move to college admin and the best doctors don't move to hospital/med school admin) I don't think the public realizes that it is the very worst that tend to move to educational administration.

That accounts for much of the wacky practices, rubrics, and observations produced by the sad administrative cadre. Beyond that, they tend to be a bit jealous/mystified of teachers who have great success.

Shady said...

Does it really matter how we get observed? Whether it Danielson or Farting Farina or Clueless Carranza - it is all the same. If they like you then you get a good rating. If they hate you then you will suck and get a bad rating. Observations are opinions. Same lesson could be effective or ineffective, u-rated or satisfactory.

DeShawn tells me he has never been a classroom where a teacher received a satisfactory rating. The UFT had requested that DeShawn can't be in a classroom where an observation is taking place. If you have Asians and whites in your classroom the chances of being highly effective increases by 45 to 48 percent.

Do you guys remember Mr. Weinstein? Five years ago he was sent to the rubber room for paying Asians to pretend they were in his classroom during a lesson. We thought that was funny but that's our reality.

Anonymous said...

Our union can't even get us Decemeber 23rd back- you think they're getting rid of Danielson for us?

Caped Crusader said...

Very well said by anon 12:23

I just retired, 55/30

The faves who couldn't teach scored way better than the pro lifetime teachers w talent.

Danielson never worked for special ed and art. When the change up occurred ten years ago my AP used it as a weapon. She was too stupid to see its innefectiveness.
The principals don't understand it and the aps use it to create fear.

I hope it changes. It hasn't helped. It only creates tension and mistrust. The absolute worst teachers with nice cleavage and blonde hair always had better ratings.

Fire Carranza now. Protect yourself with all the tools you can muster if u want to survive the chaos.

Keep your eye on the prize if you are tier 4.
Retirement is a fantasy turned reality. Trust me.

Retired and lurking chaz blog as I have for a few years now. I'm cheering you teachers on as you cross the Finish line.

I'm out for now.


Anonymous said...

@ shady I was at that UFT meeting on duhhhhshawn. what was said is they need him in a class that is so dumbed down that he can excel and give the teacher a chance at a satisfactory rating. he is scheduled go to a pre-k class for the observation. the lesson will be nap time strategies, even duhhhhshawn should do well!

Anonymous said...

I shared my story many times on this blog, but I was one of the teachers fired over Danielson. I was given all effective ratings by another AP during my third year which was the first year of the Danielson implementation in the DOE back in 2013-2014. The following year the principal wanted to get rid of me, so he instructed a newly hired AP to rate me as "ineffective" on every single component of Danielson. My HEDI score dropped almost 45 points within one year. Since that time I went on to a school that also uses Danielson, but of course my ratings were once again "effective." It is obvious that this system is a complete joke. I can't understand why any rationale or reasonable human being (UFT leadership) would agree to such an atrocious way of evaluating teachers. As many people have pointed out the obvious, if they want you they'll overlook any flaw of the lesson and give you effectives. If they don't want you, the will ignore all the good and just focus on the negative for the lesson. It doesn't matter how minuscule or petty the flaw is, they will only focus on that since the evaluator has a black check to do whatever the hell they want. They can pick and choose whatever evidence they want to support their findings thus completely cheating the system out of it's intentions. The old S/U system was far from perfect, but at least the old system evaluated the teacher on "professionalism" (attendance, punctuality, cleanliness, room appearance, etc). IMO professionalism is just as important as pedagogy. Professionalism is harder for an administrator to manipulate since it is less subjective.

Anonymous said...

The real problem with Danielson, as everyone here has eluded that it doesn't evaluate quality teaching. I have no faith that a teacher's rating by Danielson means "anything." The public needs to know this. If you told me that a school has all "highly effective" teachers as rated by Danielson, that means NOTHING. I wouldn't feel any more confident enrolling my child in that school. If you told me the school has all "ineffective" teachers as rated by Danieslon,..I'd have no confidence that all the teachers are bad either. It's USELESS for the purpose it was supposed to be used for...replacing S or U as a better way to identify "good or bad" teachers.

Halabi said...

Charlotte Danielson did not want her work used for evaluation, although she eventually agreed. No, the heroes of this system were working at 52 Broadway.

Doubt they will show any interest in deimplementation.


Anonymous said...

Chaz, the DOE has blocked your webpage as unsafe.

I had to go in with the /2019 link from google.

Shady said...

@7:36 you are too dumb to have been at that meeting - your principal doesn't allow you to meet with any parent. Plus, my DeShawn might be dumb but he is still 5 times smarter than you. You are the laughing stock of the DOE then you wonder why you are ineffective and hated. My DeShawn runs circles & squares around idiots like you. This is why I change my phone number and email once a week. Talking to you makes me realize how shitty some teachers can be.

Anonymous said...

Chaz, the NYS Education Department needs to be convinced to remove all versions of the Danielson Framework from its list of approved teacher practice rubrics.

The following Google searches should be examined for articles about the insights of Ted Morrissey and Alan Singer regarding Charlotte Danielson:“Ted+Morrissey”+”Charlotte+Danielson”“Alan+Singer”+”Charlotte+Danielson”

A number of the articles highlight significant concerns regarding Charlotte Danielson’s credentials and the Danielson Framework.

Anonymous said...

If you look at the rubric for Danielson, 75% of it is based on what the students are doing and not what the teacher is doing. If you have a good class or you're in a good school, you have a much greater chance of getting rated highly effective. I was at a great school last year as an ATR and most teachers got highly effective. To me a highly effective teacher is responding to what your students need. If the students need review that is highly effective but according to Danielson that's a developing lesson. If you are rated highly effective, it's only highly effective according to what one woman thought highly effective was.

Anonymous said...

@shady that's funny you said that. I asked duhhhshawn to run a circle and a square around me and he just ran in a zig zag right into the wall! that's when the pre-k's burst into laughter along with me. then duhhhshawn pissed his pants. I put a note in his backpack explaining how doing his homework with his parents is always important, and being different isn't so bad. typical, I never received a response from anyone.

Anonymous said...

Danielson turned the profession to shit. Admins use it to bully. That's it.

I worked when the framework began. Didn't work for me so I didn't use it. Still rated effective overall. Its an old system and they don't want to change it because then they don't have the iron fist over the educators.

Shady said...

@3:23 pm Pathetic loser teachers like yourself will never receive a response from parents. Once idiot parents realize you are dumber they will lose respect for you. I am usually very supportive of teachers but I am very sorry to say "you are one of the most pathetic teachers that I have ever met." I mean that in a good positive way.

As far as DeShawn goes - he is going to play in the NBA. He told me that last night again. I asked him how will he play without passing classes and being on a team. He said he has plans and a contract. That's my DeShawn. Always thinking big. I am going to buy him another du-rag tomorrow if I don't get any negative phone calls tonight or tomorrow. By the way, I changed my number again this morning to ensure I do not hear from anyone.

As far as teaching summer school - it has been rough. Only 30 percent of the students are showing up but we have to pass everyone on roster.

Anonymous said...

@ shady

1. proof your a loser parent, you keep responding!

2. Duhhhshawn could be in the NBA but he will have a MOP in his hands.

3. Your grammar is that of a 6th grader in NYC 1st grade in Westchester.

4. I hope you have been working on circles and squares with Duhhhshawn, also work on potty

Shady said...

@1:21 p.m. You must not be able to read. DeShawn said he is going to play in the NBA. You must be rated unsatisfactory or ineffective. You are so upset with DeShawn.