Dear Team Polazzo - Why Matt Polazzo's Article Is Wrong

On my previous post I received a student commenter from Team Polazzo who asked me why I and other education bloggers believe that their teacher Matt Polazzo was wrong and misguided in his article in the New York Daily News last Sunday. The student was respectful and asked me why we attacked their beloved teacher for speaking his mind. I thought about it and believe that they deserve an answer. Therefore, here is my response.

First, your teacher flatly stated that all the teachers in the "rubber rooms" are "bad" teachers and the ATRs are incompetent. If he really understood the issues concerning the two groups he defames he would have known that Chancellor Joel Klein and his non-educator cronies caused both problems with their anti-teacher policy. The increase in "rubber room" teachers and the ATR mess were caused by closing down schools and cutting school budgets to the bone while encouraging principals to hire inexperienced and ill-prepared teachers to replace the experienced teachers in Tweed's "children last" program.

Second, the DOE brought in a fair student funding program that was not revenue neutral as the program was intended to be. This forced principals to hire the cheapest teachers to balance their budget and as a result many of the worst schools have little or no experienced teachers, just those "Teach For America" two-year wonders who couldn't teach to save their collective lives while experienced teachers languished on the ATR list.

Third, Chancellor Klein gave the Principals power to remove teachers they don't like and kick them off the school payroll in sixty days. The sevenfold increase in teachers in the "rubber room" is not about what is best for the students it is what is best for the principals, many of them with limited classroom experience themselves. For your information 90% of these so called "bad" rubber room teachers are sent back to the classroom after an independent arbitrator hears the case against the teacher.

Finally, the DOE practices age discrimination, both in the "rubber room" and the ATR ranks. I just need to refer you to last year's survey on the Queens "rubber room" as evidence to this. If you consider senior, experienced, and highly paid teachers as "bad" then you should work for Joel Klein's DOE.

I am sure Matt Polazzo is a great teacher and the students just love him and deservedly so. However, his knowledge of what really goes on in the "rubber room" and the ATR issue is sorely lacking. Therefore, his article is misguided, unfair, and inaccurate and he deserves the criticism that he brought upon himself.

The First Results Of PIP+ Is Finally Known And It Is Bad, Really Bad

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.

Its "D-Day" For The DOE Principals As All Vacancies Must Be Filled By Today

Today is the day when Tweed has threatened the principals with reducing their budgets if they do not fill all their teaching vacancies. However, the DOE is eerily quiet on progress to achieve their stated goal to reduce the ATR pool. The Daily News reported on the lack of information about Tweed's progress in reducing the ATR pool other than issuing a vague statement that more ATRs are being hired this week. The question is in this game of "chicken" between the principals and Tweed, who really won? The latest evidence is that it appears that both sides may claim a partial victory but it also seems that the ATRs lost. Wait a second, how could this be? Let me try to explain what I think has happened here.

Exemptions: Many principals who knew how to play the system were able to receive exemptions from hiring ATRs for their vacancies. The last number published by the DOE was 125 exceptions were issued. However, that was more than a month ago. I suspect many more have been issued since then. Didn't the four year clueless wonder Ariel Sachs write how her Principal found all 37 ATRs unacceptable for her vacancy? What makes Ariel Sachs more qualified than the 37 ATRs? My guess is that she is young and makes much less money than the ATRs rejected by her Principal.

Hiring newbie special education teachers: Some principals have already been caught hiring newbie special education teachers to teach mainstream classes by claiming them to be CTT or inclusion classes. If the newbie special education teacher has a multi-subject license, the Principal will claim the teacher is qualified to teach a subject in the middle schools and get around the hiring freeze.

Consolidating classes:, A select group of very savvy principals have found that consolidating classes which increases class sizes and reduces teacher vacancies can free up funds for other school uses. The money can be used for the Principal's pet projects, after school programs, and other per session activities controlled by the Principal. The redistribution of the budget may not benefit the students but certainly helps principals in allocating school funds.

As you can see Tweed wins because they did not rescind the hiring freeze and a few principals reluctantly hired excessed teachers. The principals won as they received exemptions to hire who they pleased or consolidated classes to free up school funds without losing money for vacancies that no longer exist. However, the ATRs lost as there are still more than 1,000 ATRs without a classroom as both the DOE and the principals found or provided ways not to hire them. As for the children? This is and never was about the children. "Children Last" continues.

Is It Important To Have An Open 3020-a Hearing? It Is Very Important

Under New York State Education Law 3020-a the tenured teacher can elect to have either an open or closed hearing. Both the DOE and UFT (NYSUT) do not want the teacher to have an open hearing because it is in both their interests to keep the hearings secret. I also suspect that the Arbitrator would prefer that the 3020-a hearing being presided over stay closed. The question then becomes why is it in the teacher's advantage to have an open hearing? TAGNYC and Rubber Room Reporter have always recommended that teachers should have an open 3020-a hearing but both never explained the advantages of having an open and public hearing. Therefore, I will try my best to explain why.

First: In the 3020-a hearing room the teacher will be overwhelmed , not to mention shocked, angry, and too busy writing responses and rebuttal notes to the slanderous attack upon his or her character by the DOE lawyer to adequately understand what is happening. The teacher may not pick up the context or ask the NYSUT attorney the proper questions for the NYSUT attorney to respond to the DOE lawyer's character assassination. By having another person to listen and observe in the hearing, the chances of something important slipping through becomes less likely.

Second: By having another set of eyes and ears in the 3020-a hearing, all parties will be more likely to follow the rules and not take liberties at the expense of the teacher who is usually unfamiliar with the process. Remember, the Arbitrator and the two lawyers (DOE & NYSUT) may work together for up to four years and the teacher becomes the outsider in the hearing and this may result in a decision different than if all the participants were strangers to each other.

Third: A sympathetic sounding board that gives the teacher and the NYSUT lawyer another point of view that might not have been considered as they prepared for the teacher's defense.

Fourth: The mere fact that the teacher wants people at the hearing tells both the Arbitrator and DOE lawyer that the teacher has nothing to hide and wants an open and public hearing to air out the allegations. Remember, most, if not all the allegations against the teacher are embellished, twisted, perverted, or not true and these allegations usually cannot stand up to the light of truth. By having an open hearing the light of truth shines that much brighter.


Finally: Remember, the DOE lawyer does not want you to have an open and public hearing and will do just about anything to stop you from having one. That should be the primary reason to have an open and public hearing.

The DOE's PIP+ Program Suffers A Severe Setback As An Arbitrator Throws Out Charges Against A Teacher Who Refused To Take The Program

In a little noticed decision an Arbitrator has dismissed a charge against a teacher who refused a Principal's order to take the Peer-Intervention-Program plus (PIP+). The Arbitrator rightly concluded that since the PIP+ program is voluntary, that the teacher had every right to refuse to take the PIP+ program. The teacher was leery of the PIP+ program and didn't believe the Principal was looking out for the teacher's best interest. Therefore, the teacher wisely chose not to participate in the PIP+ program.

For the uninformed, the PIP+ program is a program that was developed by the infamous Teacher Performance Unit (TPU) made up of retired principals and lawyers that allows the DOE to help document teacher incompetence by bringing in the PIP+ educator as an expert witness for the sole purpose to terminate the teacher in the 3020-a hearing. Because of the newness of the PIP+ program, statistics are hard to come by. However, the best information that is available show that only one in five to one in ten teachers who take the PIP+ program were found competent by the PIP+ educator. Very poor odds indeed. Both Betsy Combier and I have commented about the PIP+ program here, here, and here. The PIP+ program is simply a termination tool for principals to get rid of senior teachers and free up budget restrictions since the teacher, once removed from the school, is off the school's budget after only sixty days.

The union needs to reverse their position on PIP+ and must train their Chapter Leaders to recognize when their principals are targeting teachers for PIP+ and to inform them how to refuse the termination program. The union must stop burying their collective heads in the sand. PIP+ is not a fair or honest program. it is a tool for the DOE to terminate teachers. many of them senior teachers with good records.

Nicholas Kristof Scapegoats Reassigned Teachers As The Cause Of Our School System's Failure - Another Ignorant Journalist Who Believes Klein's Lies

Previously, I posted how these non-educators who are clueless of the New York City schools have these idiotic ideas how to fix them. Now we have a once respected journalist, Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times who makes a fool of himself as he writes an article that shows his ignorance of the New York City school system and his acceptance of the phony claims of Bloomberg and Klein that the schools are improving and would improve more so if they could only terminate tenured teachers more quickly. What is his solution? Glad you asked. More Charter Schools, no union rules, no teacher tenure. Interestingly, he failed to point out what educators believe are the issues that affects student academics the most. Like small class sizes, adequate school supplies, collaboration between administrators and staff, stringent student discipline codes, modern classrooms with smartboard technology, and most of all, experienced teachers. However, when you are ignorant of the education process, it is easy to blame scapegoats such as the teachers sent to the "rubber room". Mr. Kristof simply follows the script of history when unpleasant facts are presented to you, deflect it by finding a scapegoat to blame it on.

A little history lesson is needed here. When the Black Plague decimated Europe in the 1300s, the leaders simply blamed the "Jews" for bringing the plague onto the people. It didn't matter that Jews were dying too. Just don't let the facts interfere with a good story. When the Joseph Goebbels Nazi propaganda machine would report the same lies over and over again, it soon was accepted as the truth, even by people who should have known better. Now we have Nicolas Kristof believing the Bloomberg and Klein lies of great student achievement when even the media mouthpieces of the New York Post and New York Daily News have now questioned the alleged academic improvements under their leadership. A more intelligent person who understands the phony hype of the New York City school's boast about academic improvement can be found in Dianie Ravitch's opinion piece in the New York Post.

Fast froward to the present where Nicholas Kriistof has swallowed the lies of Bloomberg and Klein and accepted the now discredited New York State tests while ignoring the baseline federal tests that documented no improvement in academic progress. More ominously, he blames the poor teachers who have been reassigned to the "rubber rooms" throughout New York City as a deterrent for further academic progress and has proclaimed every one of them "guilty". No hearing in front of an independent arbitrator, no acknowledgement that many teachers might be innocent and were railroaded by vindictive administrators. Just like the Jews in the 1300s, according to Nicholas Kristof, being a "rubber room" teacher is guilt enough.

Has it ever occurred to Mr. Kristof that many of the 700 teachers currently in "rubber rooms" throughout the city might be innocent? Don't you think it is strange that before the Bloomberg/Klein administration the "rubber room" averaged 90 teachers on a yearly basis. What accounts for the greater than sevenfold increase? Better investigators? That's a joke read here for the real story about the DOE investigative process. Maybe it is poor screening of teachers? Teachers in the "rubber room" average over 15 years of service. That can't be it. However, the sevenfold increase in "rubber room" teachers is probably attributed to three things. First, the increase in power to the principals who have almost complete authority to remove teachers under false, frivolous, or embellished charges as they see fit. Second, the fact that once removed, the teacher's salary is taken off the school's budget after only sixty days. Third, the fair student funding formula encourages principals to file charges to balance the school's budget and to hire newbie teachers at half the cost. Both Accountable Talk and Rubber Room Reporter talks about this. No Mr. Kristof, the vast majority of the teachers assigned to the "rubber room" are there because of power crazy principals, budgeting constraints, and age discrimination and that is the truth as I see it.

Stop scapegoating the "rubber room" teachers and start writing about the phony education reformers who spin statistics with their fuzzy math and the abusive principals that now run many of the schools. Only then will you earn my respect that you once had but lost as you pandered to the mob of phony education reformers at the expense of the teachers.

Mr. Kristof, why don't you sit in on a complete 3020-a hearing, from start to finish. You might be "shocked" to see and hear how ridiculous some of the charges are. Stalinist Russian trials are the closest examples of how the DOE lawyer operates at the 3020-a hearing, realizing the weakness of the case against the teacher,the DOE lawyer resorts to character assassination. Little wonder 90% of the teachers end up back in the classroom. However, the collateral damage done to the students when the school cannot replace the teacher with an adequate replacement is real but then again don't let the truth interfere with a good story. Right Nick? Nick, are you there?

Tweed's Misplaced Priorities As They Terminate 530 School Aides And Hire More Lawyers And Other Non-Educators At Headquarters

Tweed's "children last" program continues as the DOE authorized the firing of 530 school aides while quietly adding to the central bureaucracy by hiring more lawyers and other non-educators. Many of the lawyers are being hired for the sole purpose to prosecute teachers and waste $250,000+ in the mostly vain attempt to terminate teachers through the 3020-a process. Since only 10% of the teachers are actually terminated, the DOE wastes over two million dollars for every ten teachers they file 3020-a charges on in their misguided attempt to go after senior teachers and fails at the task when it comes to termination.

The school aides are the lifeblood of the school system and are poorly paid, averaging $20,000 yearly. Many of the aides suffer with the low salary because of the generous health and welfare benefits that are associated with the position. The school aides, in many cases help run the school and do the most unattractive duties. In my school the school aids do the following:

• Lunchroom supervision
• bathroom monitor
• student escort
• hallway duties
• contacting parents when children don't show up to school
  
• discipline room
• checking student IDs
• Clerical work for the Administration
• Distributing books and other school supplies
  

I'm sure there are other duties that I have missed and without the school aides many essential services are delayed or not done which affects the school and the children. The lack of adequate school aides affects the proper operation of the school and weakens the learning environment of the students. Interestingly, The DOE blames the principals and their school budget not on Tweed's money burning no-bid consultant contracts and the fourfold increase in the Accountability Office at headquarters. To the non-educators at Tweed, it doesn't matter that the lawyers and public relations officials hired by them are of no value whatsoever to student academics and waste precious funds that could be used in the schools. "Children first"? Don't make me laugh it is "children last" when it comes to Joel Klein's DOE.

How To Survive The Corrupt Investigation Process That The DOE Perpetrates On The Teacher

One of the most corrupt process the DOE perpetrates on the teacher is the investigation process when allegations are made against the teacher. In almost all cases the investigation is biased and unfair and assumes the teacher is guilty. The DOE investigation process is to try to substantiate teacher guilt, no matter how frivolous the charges are. Credibility is assumed for the accuser, be it a student or an Administrator, while the teacher is presumed to be not credible. It is not about the truth for these investigators it is to "get the teacher" no matter what it takes. These investigators try their best to get teachers terminated and speaking with them just gives these investigators the tools to hang the teachers on their own words. Let's look at the corrupt DOE investigation process.

Principal's Investigation: This is the least serious and the most corrupt of the investigations if the Principal does not like the teacher. The Principal investigates incidents that OSI and SCI dump back to them since they are not considered serious enough for the two investigative units to waste manpower on. However, the Principal is not an experienced investigator and will intimidate students or staff when doing the investigation. Furthermore, the Principal is prone to ask leading or misdirected questions that lead to erroneous statements. An example would be as follows:

Principal: "Did the teacher threaten to hit you"?
Student: "No".
Principal": Did you think the teacher could hit you"?
Student: "Yes"
Principal: So you were scared that the teacher could hit you"?
Student: "I guess so".

The Principal then directs the student to write a statement that he felt threatened by the teacher with physical harm. Therefore, the teacher is removed and is charged with A-420 (corporal punishment). You think that can't happen? Think again, it happens every day as principals target teachers they do not like or want in their school. You can find my take of A-420 (corporal punishment)and A-421 (verbal abuse) here. Because the DOE lawyers know about the poor interviewing skills by the Principal, they usually try to settle with the teacher for a fine and a course or two rather than presenting the case to the 3020-a Arbitrator.

Office Of Special Investigations: (OSI) Occasionally, the allegations of corporal punishment or verbal abuse is serious enough that OSI will do the investigation. The first question the OSI investigator asks the Principal is: "How do you feel about the teacher"? If the Principal does not like the teacher, the OSI investigator will substantiate the most frivolous of incidents as serious and ask for the teacher's removal. An example of this can be found in Betsy Combier's blog here and here where the OSI investigator, Dennis Boyle, lied when he substantiated the phony corporal punishment charges on teacher Glenn Storman. A subset of OSI is the Office of Equal Opportunity (OEO) and they investigate discrimination, gender bias, or sexual orientation issues. Usually the only time they give a fair investigation is when it is teacher vs. teacher.


Special Commissioner Of Investigations: (SCI) The most serious investigation is by SCI who have the ability to arrest the teacher. SCI is called in when allegations of a criminal or sexual nature is reported. The SCI investigators are semi-independent of the DOE. However, they are paid by the DOE and are listed in the DOE payroll by the City here. While, few teachers are actually arrested, these ex-police officers can show up unannounced at the teacher's residence, school, or vehicle hoping to get the teacher to talk. More about SCI can be found here and is required reading. The SCI investigators assume teacher guilt and will go to great lengths to substantiate teacher guilt. An example of how far SCI will go is the case of Teddy Smith where the SCI investigator substantiated the impossible. In other words he lied! You can find the shocking details here and on Betsy Combier's blog.

The Union Position On Investigations: The UFT position on investigations are as follows:

Meet with the Principal and a union representative (usually the Chapter Leader) about the findings of the Principal's investigation. Answer questions and follow the lead of the union representative in crafting your response.

Meet with the OSI investigator and a union representative (usually a retired union member, sometimes the District Representative) and answer the questions simply and directly unless the union representative tells you otherwise.

Never speak to an SCI investigator without a UFT supplied lawyer. If you are a tenured teacher, your lawyer will tell SCI not to contact you again and you will never talk to them under any circumstances.

My Position On Investigations: Give only simple yes/no answers to the Principal about the allegations leveled against you. If you choose to explain the allegation, make sure it is what you will also say in front of the 3020-a Arbitrator. Any inconsistency in statements by you can lead to termination. Remember they can lie but you can't!

As for both OSI and SCI? "Do not talk to them at all"! These investigators are out to get the teacher, truth and justice are irrelevant. Therefore, any defense you mount can and will be used against you by the investigators. Furthermore, the more you say the greater the chance you will give the investigators the ammunition they need to get you. Again, "do not talk to investigators"!

What the union must do to ensure fair and impartial investigations: Once a Principal calls in one of the investigative units, the union, by contract, will provide an independent investigator who will join the investigation and be allowed to ask any witnesses the same questions the DOE investigators ask. If the independent investigator agrees with the DOE investigators that the charges are serious and true enough for the teacher to be removed. then 3020-a charges can be issued. However, if the independent investigator disagrees with the DOE investigator, the teacher cannot be removed from the classroom and no 3020-a charges can be filed. However, a mediation panel can be used to determine a lesser penalty, if any, for the teacher. Of course the mediation panel should have no ties either to the DOE or the UFT .

In no case can a Principal be allowed to remove a teacher when the investigative units have dumped the allegations back to the Principal. The maximum punishment the Principal can do is to give the teacher a letter to the file as a result of the accusation.

Until a fair and independent investigation procedure is put in place, teachers are just target practice for the DOE firing squad.

From The Hall Of Shame To The Hall Of Fame

Many of the Principals that graduate from the so called "Leadership Academy" have brought down the profession and have worsened morale in the schools they control. However, I must bring up one of these principals that have turned the corner and in his second chance to be a Principal has made my Hall of Fame as he worked hard to become a quality Principal . The Principal is Carleton Gordan who's first assignment after graduating from the "Leadership Academy" was given a Brooklyn school with a challenging population to turn around. Like many of the "Leadership Academy principals" he only made things worse by blaming staff, caused a high teacher turnover rate, and allowed student discipline problems to go unchallenged. He was eventually removed and this might have been the end of his career as a Principal in the New York City schools. However, Mr. Gordan was given a second chance and in 2004 he become Principal of IS 59 in Queens. In the next few years he took the school from confusion to collaboration. He was credited with working with the staff to improve the school culture and morale. Parents, students, and teachers all sang his praises and few teachers left the school.

How respected was the Principal? Teachers would not take a union representative with them to meet with Mr. Jordan (not a good idea by the way). Furthermore, he investigated any allegations in-house and took appropriate action when necessary without calling in the anti-teacher investigative units that could result in unfair teacher removals and a loss of instruction to the students. For him the collaterial damage to students due to a loss of a good teacher was the most important factor not how he felt about the teacher.

A few years ago in a special education high school class a substitute teacher overheard a conversation between two students about a teacher in IS 59. The substitute teacher reported the conversation to the high school Administrator who called in OSI to investigate the teacher. Despite obvious flaws in the investigation, gross inaccuracies of time and place, and Principal Gordan's insistence that they were barking up the wrong tree, the Office of Legal Services sent the teacher to the "rubber room". The investigation ended up with the teacher being arrested and stood trial. After the jury heard all the evidence and inconsistencies, it took the jury a full 22 minutes to acquit the teacher. Yes! You have read it right 22 minutes! The Principal not only testified about the teacher's character, but explained the obvious inaccuracies of the student statements and allegations of the situation. When the prosecutor realized that the Principal was not answering the questions the way he wanted, he asked why the Principal was dong this. The Principal's response was to say "do you want me to lie? This is about the truth right"?

Believe it or not the teacher is still in the "rubber room" facing 3020-a charges on the same incident and one of the DOE's star witnesses against the teacher is? You guessed it Principal Gordan. Good luck DOE you are going to need it.

Tweed Protects & Supports Bullying Principals And Allows ThemTo Remove Teachers As They Wish

The DOE claims that they take bullying very seriously and in the newspaper Gay City News , claim that they have strengthened the "Respect For All" program. However, the truth is that while the DOE tries to strengthen anti-bullying policies for students they are doing the opposite when it comes to teachers. Under non-educator Joel Klein's tenure, principals, many of them with little or no classroom experience, have been abusing their staffs and bullying them with threats of removal if they complain.

I have spoken to some Chapter Leaders (CLs) about the bullying of staff and they told me that the Principals seem to think they are empowered to do as they please in their schools. For example, one Principal assigned a "newbie teacher" two lunchroom monitor assignments despite the union contract. When the CL confronted the Principal about it he told the CL that the teacher volunteered to do the assignments. Of course this was untrue and when the CL tried to get the "newbie teacher" to grieve it she said that the Principal threatened to fire her (she's untenured) and needed the job. Another CL informed me that she was told that the Principal was not paying teachers to stay after school and participate in a late dismissal bus program that extended the teacher's day an extra 45 minutes. Under the previous Principal this was a per session job and many of the teachers shared the responsibility. However, the old Principal was forced to retire and a "Leadership Academy Principal" took her place. This "Leadership Academy Principal" with less than two years in the classroom, forced untenured teachers to volunteer to work the late dismissal program without compensation. The CL did grieve it but the DOE is delaying hearing the case and in the meantime the program is in effect without compensating the teachers.

Under Joel Klein's tenure, Tweed has always took the administrator's side when they bully the teachers. Tweed is known to find ways to violate teacher rights in the contract. You just need to look at the many grievances the union has to file on the same issues that are clearly stated in the contract. However. our union must be more aggressive in going after Principals that bully and
abuse the school staff. That means that the District Reps (DRs) must be given both the authority and the means to intercede with the Principal and let them know that abusing and bullying a staff member is unacceptable and will result in serious consequences if they do not stop it. Presently, many of the DRs seem either not to care or are unable to get bully principals to stop abusing school staff.

Finally, the union collects 140 million dollars from our dues. Some of that money should be spent on independent investigators who are called in by the union when an investigation of a teacher is started. Presently, there is no independent investigation process that is fair to the teacher and without an independent investigation, more and more teachers are subject for removal from the school simply because of an allegation, true or not. More about unfair investigations in my next post.

Will Joel Klein Give In And Remove The Hiring Freeze So That Principals Can Hire "Newbie Teachers"?

It has been two weeks since the citywide ATR job fair has been held and I do not know of any ATRs in Queens who were offered positions for the vacancies that number over a thousand citywide. Some of these ATRs are great teachers and should have been snapped up. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that the principals are just going through the motions by interviewing ATRs for their vacancies and claiming that the ATRs are not appropriate for the teaching positions. It is quite obvious to me the principals are hoping that before the October 30th deadline when the money for the vacancy is removed from the school, budget one of three things will happen.

Exemption Waiver: Many of the principals showed up to the ATR job fair to only reject the ATRs and use those rejections to apply for an exemption and obtain a waiver to hire a "newbie teacher". Over 125 such waivers have already been approved by Tweed and more are being considered daily. This was first reported by Anna Phillips of Gotham News and the ATR job fair is the first step for a Principal to obtain an exemption.

Newbie Special Education Teachers: The hiring of "newbie" special education teachers and using them for mainstream classroom teachers. It appears some principals have hired "newbie" special education teachers, where there is no hiring freeze, and are using them as long-term subs or even as mainstream classroom teachers. How widespread this is is now being investigated by the UFT. I will be very interested in the union's findings.

Hiring Freeze: Many principals are still holding out hope that Joel Klein will end the hiring freeze in October and there is some reason to believe that this is not just wishful thinking. However, given the economy and budget restraints, there is probably less than a 50% chance of the hiring freeze being lifted. There is a better chance for the freeze to be lifted for math and foreign language teachers in specific locations before October 30th..

Time will tell how successful the principals will be in getting Tweed to allow them to hire who they want. Remember it is not about the children, it is about the Principa's power. Children last continues going strong.

My Union Hero And Villain

As many of my readers know, I have complained about our union leaders since they seem to have lost touch with the members in the trenches they represent. For example, I have never had a union leader ask me my opinion of issues of importance to the teacher (except those stupid surveys that nobody in the union takes seriously). However, in the sea of uncaring and clueless in he classroom union leaders there are some shining stars. One of these shinning stars is Amy Arundel who has time and again went out of her way to help teacher due process rights. Amy is a special representative headquartered at 52 Broadway and tackles some of the more complex issues that cross her desk. Presently, she is looking into principals that skirted the DOE hiring freeze by hiring special education teachers for mainstream classes or long-term subs. All Chapter Leaders need to contact Amy if your Principal is guilty of hiring special education teachers for regular education classes. While I have had no personal experience with Amy Arundel, I Had heard from numerous teachers how helpful she has been in dealing with their issues. She is not beyond making calls to the DOE to work out potential problems and does not hesitate to file a grievance if the DOE refuses to work out the problem.

On the opposite side of my spectrum is Leo Casey, the "Unity" spin mister and apologist for the terrible 2005 contract that has doomed many a teacher and has made the classroom a more hostile environment. Apparently, Leo has not been in a classroom since the great flood and it wouldn't surprise me that it was Leo Casey who told the Unicorns that the rain coming from the sky was just a shower and continue playing rather then board Noah's Ark. This is the same Leo Casey who told us how wonderful it was that seniority transfer and bumping is no more and now is strangely quiet as the ATR population exploded into the thousands as a result of it. Most of them senior teachers. Yes, and it is the same Leo Casey who thought the probable cause section of the contract was a great idea since it will eliminate the pedophiles and perverts from the system. However, it also allowed the DOE to charge any teacher with it merely based upon Hearsay, and when the teacher is found not guilty of sexual misconduct, the Arbitrators never gives the teacher back the money they lost while being suspended for up to three months without pay and benefits. Further, Leo seems more interested in Durfur and Mexico than the overcrowded high schools that he is supposed to represent. To understand Leo Casey you just need to go back to his infamous Edwize article of October 20, 2005 where he defends the indefensible 2005 contract and insults teachers in the process.

When it comes to the UFT, my hero is Amy Arundel. My villain Leo Casey, who else?

The Union Finally Wins A Small Victory On Corporal Punishment - How About A Big Victory On An Independent And Fair Investigation Process?

The NY Teacher reported that an Arbitrator sided with the union on language used for corporal punishment investigations. The union filed the grievance after the DOE changed language in the Chancellor's Regulations that made it easier for the DOE to charge members with Corporal Punishment and also allow the accusers not to be identified. Further, the arbitrator also ruled that the word "perceived" be deleted from the revised regulations since this word can be abused to claim a member interfered in an investigation simply by the Principal saying so,

While I am happy the union has finally won a small victory on the Corporal Punishment Regulations A-420, a much larger victory is needed. That is the elimination of the catch all phrase

"NO CORPORAL PUNISHMENT SHALL BE INFLICTED IN ANY OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, NOR PUNISHMENT OF ANY KIND TENDING TO CAUSE EXCESSIVE FEAR OR PHYSICAL OR MENTAL DISTRESS. VIOLATION OF THIS BYLAW SHALL CONSTITUTE GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL".


This vague phrase allows the DOE to charge a teacher with Corporal Punishment who has any sort of physical contact with a student, regardless if she was defending herself. Moreover, almost every member knows that when an administrator targets a teacher, the OSI investigator will substantiate the charges and file Corporal Punishment charges against the member. Without a fair and independent investigation the member is as good as charged. It does not matter that the physical contact was initiated by the student, or the teacher was assaulted, defending oneself can and will lead to Corporal Punishment charges based upon the Chancellor's Regulations if the teacher is targeted by an administrator.

The UFT must push for fairer and more evenhanded language and investigations when it comes to Corporal Punishment.

The Dirty Little Secret That The Media Refuses To Report. How Principal Quality Has Deteriorated Under Bloomberg & Klein

In the pre Bloomberg/Klein tenure almost all Principals rose through the teaching ranks and didn't forget their roots in the classroom. Sure, there were exceptions to this rule (my ex-Principal was one, more about him in another post) and some principals did forget their classroom roots. However, the vast majority of principals worked their way up the ranks. First, as a classroom teacher with over ten years of experience. Then as an Assistant Principal for five years with both administrative and classroom duties. Finally, after mastering both the classroom and the administrative functions, the person is now ready to become a Principal. Many of these Principals had long ago learned to collaborate with other people in the school to get things done. These lessons were never forgotten by the old Principals and any problems in the school were usually resolved in the school. Only those teachers accused of gross incompetence or criminal actions were removed from the school to face 3020-a charges. During these times the total amount of teachers removed from the school were usually less than a hundred throughout the City since removing a teacher from the school was a last resort because of the collateral damage done to the teacher's students and for maintaining staff morale in running a successful and smoothly-running school.

Under the Bloomberg/Klein tenure things have changed drastically. As the old Principals retired, or were forced out. New "Leadership Academy principals" took their place. Many of these "Leadership Academy principals" had limited classroom experience, some never even set foot into a classroom as a teacher! Further, these principals didn't know how to collaborate with heir staffs on what was best for the schools. Some of these "Leadership Academy principals" are in their 20's & early 30's and are not mature or experienced enough to handle the Principal's position but were given the position anyway. However, worst of all is that these "Leadership Academy principals" are taught that "it is your school and do whatever it takes to run it the way you see fit". The result has been a disaster to the parents, students, and teachers alike. No collaboration only domination when it comes to the school staff.

Joel Klein and his non-educators have given the principals complete control over the schools and that means that principals are allowed to remove teachers they do not want. These principals know that the DOE, despite the July 2, 2008 Rubber Room Agreement signed with the UFT, will not interfere with the Principal's decision to remove a teacher from the school. Furthermore, Tweed made it even easier by allowing the Principal to remove the teacher's salary from the school budget sixty days after the Principal removed the teacher. Finally, Tweed's use of the "fair student funding" formula encouraged principals to remove senior and highly paid teachers from the school's budget on trumped-up charges of misconduct or incompetence so that they can hire a "newbie teacher" to replace the reassigned teacher and still have enough money to use for other school functions. The result was an explosion of "rubber room" teachers (750) and the rise of the ATR population of 1,600 teachers.

The real problem in the City Public School System is that the quality of Principals are eroding as more and more inexperienced "Leadership Academy principals" take over schools and lack the necessary social skills to work with their staffs. The result is low school morale, staff mistrust, and quality teachers fleeing the schools. While the phony education reformers talk about quality teachers there is silence when it comes to the deterioration of the principals that run the schools.

For the "Leadership Academy principals" it is not about the children, its about their control over the schools. "Children Last" continues.

How Some "Principals From Hell" Still Screw The Reassigned Teacher

I have a very good friend who was reassigned by her Leadership Academy Principal for alleged incompetence (the charge is false. Her crime is she is over 40 and not the same religion & culture as the "newbie teachers" that she hires). This "Principal From Hell" also known as a Principal-In-Need-Of-Improvement (PINI) by the UFT has limited classroom experience (less than three years) and poor management skills. In addition, over 50% of the teachers she inherited when she was made Principal less than six years ago have left the school for greener pastures.

This Principal had wanted the teacher to resign but the teacher refused and was reassigned to the "rubber room". When the teacher's 3020-a hearing was starting, the Principal had to testify and was grilled by the NYSUT lawyer for the teacher and now no longer in control, the Principal's testimony was evasive, and uncertain. Further, the Principal now had the tables turned on her as she was defensive, uncomfortable, and couldn't remember many of the charges she logged against the teacher. By the time the Principal was allowed to leave the 3020-a hearing (after three days of testimony) she was a mess.

This should have been the end of the Principal's interaction with the teacher, except for one thing. The Principal still had to sign off on the teacher's annual rating sheet which includes the attendance. It doesn't matter that the teacher has not been in the school for years. This vindictive Principal decided to violate protocol and not pay the teacher for attending her 3020-a hearings or meeting with her NYSUT lawyer even when the teacher is no longer on the Principal's budget! Hopefully, the union makes sure that not only will the teacher be paid for those days she was docked but that the union goes after the Principal with the same vengeance that the Principal did to the teacher. If the union allows the Principal to get away with this, what stops other Principals from doing the same? Nothing of course.

Our union makes $100 million dollars on member dues and it is time that some of the money be used to go after Principals that abuse teachers. No more talk, just take some real action.

Has A New Contract Been Negotiated With The Bloomberg Administration?

There are persistent rumors that at Wednesday's Delegate Assembly meeting a tentative contract will be presented to the delegates. This was first written about by Ed Notes Online last week who reported that the Chapter Leader meeting was suddenly replaced by the DA assembly meeting to discus the contract negotiations and in articles in Gotham Schools and the New York Times. In addition, I have always suspected that a contract was nearly complete as far back as June and I have previously posted an article about it . The broad parameters of a contract were already agreed upon between Randi Weingarten and Mike Bloomberg and it was up to the Mulgrew gang to dot the "i" and cross the "t" to finalize the contract.

It is too bad that there haven't been any leaks about what, if any, "givebacks" the union has agreed to. I assume that if there were any real "givebacks" the non-Unity factions on the 300 person negotiating committee would have leaked it out like the dissidents did in the Washington D.C. teacher negotiations. However, the damage has already been done to us in the previous contracts and that if the union does not obtain " takebacks", the situation for the teacher will only get worse. As of Friday, the New York Post said there were 1,600 ATRs still in the system, despite 1,300 vacancies not filled! This intolerable situation can be blamed on the previously negotiated contracts that eliminated seniority transfer and the placing of excessed teachers before hiring "newbie teachers". I hope the union has learned their lesson and requires that all ATRs be placed before "newbie teachers" can be hired.

As for the monetary part of the contract assume that we will be getting two 4% raises for the two years of the contract, minus the 0.58% that Randi negotiated with the Mayor to get back the two days before Labor Day. However, it is possible that the contract may be more than two years if there are additional items included in the agreement. An example of this would be enhanced health and welfare benefits, a reduction in workloads, etc. Presently, these items don't appear part of the new contract but things can change.

Finally, no matter what the new contract will say it is time for the union to become pro-active and file PERB complaints when the DOE abuses teacher due process. Under Randi that did not happen. Let's see an aggressive change in the union position on teacher rights. Time and again the UFT negotiates with the DOE and when the DOE reneges on the agreement the UFT has failed to take action. This must stop and time limits must be adhered to by all parties not just one.

Despite A Shortage Of Science & Special Education Teachers The ATRs In These Areas Are Still Not Being Hired. Look At Ageism As The Reason

In August the DOE, citing a shortage of Science and Special Education teachers, rescinded the ban on hiring "newbie teachers" for these subject areas. However, many Principals and DOE service centers still continued to hire inexperienced teachers despite having ATR teachers available to them in those subject areas and Tweed just turns a blind eye to this terrible practice. In a New York Times article Many of the Principals interviewed for the article admitted that they are circumventing the hiring freeze by various means. Below is what the principals said.

Several principals — who did not want their names published for fear of angering the administration or the teachers’ union — said they were circumventing the restrictions by offering new teachers jobs as long-term substitutes or hiring them as specialized teachers but placing them in regular classrooms. Some said they planned to eliminate open positions from their budgets rather than take on teachers they considered undesirable, and others said they were holding out in the hope that Mr. Klein would lift the restrictions.

I also wrote about the Principal's intent not to hire ATRs as long as possible Here. Now I have been informed of a specific case dealing with how a DOE organization refused to give a highly qualified special education teacher her job back, despite glowing letters by the two principals she worked with.


The story starts with the veteran special education teacher with 20+ years in service being loaned to the DOE organization because of their need for an experienced special education teacher to work with two schools who were in desperate need of resource room services for their special education students. Since the teacher was an ATR, Tweed was responsible for her salary not the DOE organization she worked for. This year the teacher was told to report back to the DOE organization and she hoped that with the glowing written recommendations she received from the two principal and the other administrators of the two schools, would allow her to continue doing the job she was given the previous year. However, to her shock and dismay, the supervisors of the DOE organization refused to consider her for the position she had previously and instead hired a "newbie teacher" who had no experience with the children, Why would the DOE's organization supervisors hire a "newbie teacher" over a highly-qualified teacher when they would cost the same to their budget (ATR agreement)? The answer is simple its about the age. See the highly-qualified teacher is over 50 and when the supervisors say jump, she is likely to say "why". While the 25 year old "newbie teacher" responds by saying "how high"? To add salt to the wound, the supervisors asked the now jobless ATR to train the "newbie teacher" on what she needs to know and do at the two schools. If that wasn't bad enough the DOE organization is busy interviewing other "newbie teachers" for more special education jobs and this teacher was not even given a courtesy interview for these jobs. Just disgusting.

Age discrimination is rampant throughout the ATR population and hiring practices are dictated by insecure administrators that are best for them rather than what's best for the children with special needs. DOE's "children last" continues.

For Teachers Who Have Been Targeted By Their Principals - Here Are TheThings Teachers Should Not Do.

As the 2009-10 school year starts on Tuesday, many teachers are already being targeted by the Principal for either incompetence and/or misconduct. The end result is an eventual 3020-a termination process. There are many reasons that Principals want to terminate teachers ranging from ageism, salary, personality, unionism, and retaliation. Granted, 10% of the teachers charged under 3020-a probably deserve the charges. However, the other 90% do not. Unfortunately, teachers are easy targets when it comes to filing charges since teachers' skills are based on their caring & nurturing of the students. However, when it comes to legal issues, teachers are basically clueless on how to fight the charges against them. Therefore, the targeted teachers rely on either overworked NYSUT lawyers who far to often pressure the innocent teacher to plead guilty and pay a hefty fine or suspension or pay large legal fees to have a private lawyer represent them in the 3020-a disciplinary hearing. Consequently, many a targeted teacher ends up taking a deal and returning to school as an ATR without a classroom or building seniority.

What are the things that teacher should not do? Here is my list,

First, if the Principal or any other administrator offers you the "Peer-Intervention- Program" plus, known as PIP+, don't accept it under any circumstances. The latest statistics show that anywhere between 75% and 90% of the teachers fail PIP+. Its little wonder since the DOE pays the PIP+ vendor. Furthermore, the PIP+ educator is required to testify against you in the eventual 3020-a hearing making it easier to terminate you. Better to refuse PIP+ than have an expert teacher testify against you.

Second, never have a meeting with the Principal without the Chapter Leader present. There have been numerous instances where the Principal has called in a targeted teacher and offered the teacher a chance to resign and have the previous annual"U" ratings changed to "S" until the end of the present school year. Since the meeting is not disciplinary in nature, the Chapter Leader is not asked to be present. In some cases the Principal demands an answer immediately and a few teachers are pressured to resign. Under no circumstances should a teacher be threatened into resigning.

Third, if the Special Commissioner Of Investigations (SCI) wants to talk to you, don't you even consider it. Make sure you contact the union and they will arrange for you to be represented by a lawyer who will tell you not to talk to them. These investigators are biased and unfair and they are only out to "get the teacher" not find out the truth. The SCI investigators are notorious for substantiating the most frivolous events as serious misconduct.

Fourth, if it is the Office Of Special Investigations is doing the investigation then the union's position is to talk to them. However, the OSI investigations are also "biased and unfair" and I strongly recommend that the targeted teacher not speak to the investigator since the typical union advocate is worthless and are of little help in your case. To them it is just an extra union paycheck and they are more concerned in keeping good relations with the OSI investigator rather than advocating for the teacher.

Fifth, never respond immediately to a Letter-In-File (LIF) given you. Pen your response after calming down and assume it will be used against you in a disciplinary hearing. A month would be a good time to pen your response to a LIF after you have had time to look at it calmly and talk to people you trust and respect. Never give a full explanation in your response since you will be stuck with that explanation at the 3020-a hearing. Just write your denials of the charges and save the details for your 3020-a disciplinary hearing.

Finally, write up all events, either in a diary or notebook, including all conversations with administrators. They will be very important in your 3020-a hearing since after two years people can't remember many of the specific charges leveled against you but you will be able to have it written down for review and comment.

I am sure there are commenters that have additional ones to add to my list. Let's see them.