Join the GOOGLE +Rubber Room Community
Showing posts with label Elentuck v Green. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Elentuck v Green. Show all posts

Sunday, April 16, 2017

Prohibit The Department of Education Lawyers From Using The Danielson Rubric For Observation Reports and 3020-a Arbitration

ok, enough is enough. We have to get our New York State legislature to put a stop to the use of the Danielson rubric to charge teachers with criminal conduct if, during a 15-minute observation, there isn't a perfect teaching performance and if all the little - or big - student angels are not sitting in their seats glued to the lesson materials, learning everything.

Anyone who has ever read my blog, this one, or posts to my website Parentadvocates.org, know that I firmly believe there is something very wrong with the way teachers are observed, rated, and charged with 3020-a for incompetency (as well as misconduct, but that is another article).

Using the 15-minute informal observation to create a paper trail of incompetent teaching which are solely hearsay and/or opinions, is, in my opinion criminal and opens the DOE to lawsuits. The 15-minute observation is, as a helpful tool, ok, but DONT ALLOW A RATING!!!!!

The strange phenomenon I have followed all these years is the creation of so-called 'factual evidence' from an observation report written by a principal with malice towards the teacher (who is simply too pretty, too good at what they do, too outspoken, knows too much, too expensive, etc. to keep on the school budget) and "sees" incompetency in the 15-minute observation allowed in the Danielson Rubric. I've heard that even Charlotte Danielson herself is pretty upset with the use of the rubric in the manner that the DOE is using it:

Danielson Framework criticized by Charlotte Danielson

Tedmorrissey.blog

Charlotte Danielson
The Department policy is, a teacher must show the gamut of each section perfectly, 100% of the time, no exceptions, in 15 minutes. Absurd.

Who are they kidding?

The 2016 "Who Are You Kidding Award" Goes to Carmen Farina (for the Second time) and Mayor Bill de Blasio





We need to stop the rating of teachers after a 15-minute flyby. A teacher should be observed, and evaluated. But must be done according to fair rules and honorable intentions. I suggested in 2010 that the UFT set up a process of using video twice a year, in September/October and May/June to see exactly what a teacher's skill set is, in order to set up a tailored plan to improve the areas least efficient. We really do not need to criminalize a spanish teacher who does write lesson plans but cannot write in English when given a full year as a science teacher. Do we?

Principals say that if they saw it, it is a fact. And, as I've said and written here before, see below, when an Arbitrator believes that what the principal saw is the fact of the case, that's the problem with these hearings.

Kings County Supreme Court and the Second Department Appellate Division say, an observation has no facts and is simply an opinion. My very good friend Harvey Elentuck's case still controls this "fact": observations are opinions and have no data or statistics:

See Elentuck v Green, Supreme Court, Second Appellate Division, 202 A.D.2d 425; 608 N.Y.S.2d 701; 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1956 (1994))

Thus no one may obtain observation reports under the Freedom of information Act (FOIA) nor are observations business records. So, DOE Attorneys, stop submitting these reports at 3020-a as facts, or as business records when you dont bring in the person who wrote it and want someone else to testify about the content. Yucky, very yucky.


Why Observation Reports Should Not Be Used To Terminate a Tenured Employee by Betsy Combier


The NYC Department of Education Teacher Observation Scam 


Observations are Now Punitive, Replacing Rational Conclusions of Fact







USEFUL RESOURCES FOR OBSERVATIONS AND EVALUATIONS

Thursday, April 13, 2017

The NYC Department of Education Teacher Observation Scam, Redux

The NYC Department of Education Teacher Observation Scam 
by Betsy Combier, Editor, Parentadvocates.org. (original posted 2013)
LINK
        
In the United States, there is very little respect for public school teachers and their abilities, and even less respect for tenure rights. For many years, the media painted a picture of a person with tenure as sitting in a classroom asleep, reading a book, knitting, etc, because they had a "job for life".

UFT Contract: Shackling Principals

Politicians and media went on the offensive to end tenure.

One of the biggest changes that were seen in New York City was the criminalization of what the New York City administrators called "incompetency", by setting up a panel of arbitrators and attorneys whose job was to put on trial an educator who forgot a lesson plan, whose skills at engaging students was less than 100% perfect, and/or the educator was not able to control the little angels in his/her class. This group, created in 2007, is called the Teacher Performance Unit ("TPU") and handles all cases where an educator is charged and served 3020-a arbitration papers for incompetent service.

What all the characteristics of "incompetency" have in common is that these are subjective judgments and opinions, not facts. (See Elentuck v Green, Supreme Court, Second Appellate Division, 202 A.D.2d 425; 608 N.Y.S.2d 701; 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1956 (1994))

When an educator receives the charges, or specifications, he/she has already been determined by the Department as guilty. The Department pursues the charges as if the 3020-a were a criminal trial, and the educator a convicted criminal. In order to win these proceedings, an educator must fight well, as pro se or with an attorney who knows how random and arbitrary the hearings are. NYSUT is not always willing to do the work to provide an adequate defense, unfortunately.

I have watched and worked in 3020-a hearings for 14 years, and I am fascinated by the Attorneys for the Department. They try, sometimes successfully, and sometimes not, to argue that any administrator can enter a classroom at any time, unannounced, stay for 15 minutes and draw up a report on the teacher which could get him/her fired, based on what was supposedly seen in the classroom. Principals lie, knowing they will never be held accountable for what they say except if they DONT follow the prepared script.

Under the Danielson Rubric, a set of standards where educators must be perfect in all classes, every day, and every minute, anyone can be found guilty of anything if an arbitrator makes the subjective opinions gathered in 15 minutes into "facts". That is the problem.

The defense at 3020-a consists of arguing bad faith, malice, and budgetary concerns as a way to unravel the lies in the observations. This is hard to do, but doable nonetheless. Never resign under any circumstances. And, if you read
"resign in order to retire", ask the DOE what that means before you retire.

Teacher Tenure rights - which in New York State remain public policy - no longer exist if we let this type of "subjective evaluation in order to terminate" to continue.

Why Observation Reports Should Not Be Used To Terminate a Tenured Employee by Betsy Combier


A useful guide on the evaluation process is below:
"Legal Aspects of Evaluation" by James Rapp, 1985.

And see Teacher Discipline by Katharine B. Stevens, PhD.

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Here is the article I posted in 2013:

When a NYC DOE employee is served 3020-a papers, the moment is traumatic. Often, the specifications are false claims of absences which were due to many valid reasons, claims of extreme misconduct and/or incompetency, all created by some attorney at the Gotcha Squad.

For years, Mayor Mike Bloomberg and the NYC DOE he controls, with the full knowledge and consent of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) and New York State United Teachers (NYSUT), have pushed out all teachers with tenure who are disabled, too tall, too black, too outspoken, too....something, with "U" ratings which are meaningless. The DOE will, in fact, change all these "U"s to "S" ratings if you irrevocably resign from the DOE within a very short time.

What they dont tell you, the tenured teacher, is that you are already on the "Ineligible/Inquiry List" or No Hire List, so you will never be hired by anyone anyway, whether or not you take the deal and exchange a fake U for an S on your record.

The city has a secret weapon to rub out incompetent teachers — an eraser.
NYPOST
LINK

If a teacher who is deemed a dud agrees to quit or retire before a termination trial, the Department of Education will wipe out all of her “unsatisfactory” or U ratings and — voilĂ  — change them to S for “satisfactory,” thus helping her land a job elsewhere.

In an e-mail obtained by The Post, a DOE lawyer offers the deal to a teacher with U ratings two years in a row, grounds for dismissal.

“The department will provide, upon request, a neutral letter documenting her employment with the DOE and will convert her U ratings to S ratings in the DOE computer system.”

It adds, “Thus if she were to seek employment outside the DOE, her computer employment records would show only ‘satisfactory.’ ”

The teacher is accused of failing to carry out lessons, sloppy record keeping and poor classroom management, among other charges.

Former Chancellor Rudy Crew once called the shuffling of lousy principals from school to school “the dance of the lemons.”

Some educators share a disgust for a likewise dirty deed — the U whitewash.

“They’re making a mockery of the entire system,” a veteran teacher said. “If someone is found incompetent, it should go on their permanent record. The DOE should not be Monty Hall on ‘Let’s Make a Deal.’ ”

Betty Rosa, a member of the state Board of Regents and a former Bronx superintendent, called the document doctoring “unethical . . . a lie.”

But a hearing officer, who recently oversaw many such deals for suspect teachers idling away in departmental “rubber rooms,” hailed the method.

“It saves time, it saves money, and it gets guaranteed results,” he told The Post. “It’s morally right, because New York kids will not have to suffer with a teacher who’s allegedly incompetent. She’s out. She’s gone.”

Future employers, he said, can probe a teacher’s past.

The debate comes as the DOE and the United Federation of Teachers wrangle over a new evaluation system to rate teachers from “highly effective” to “ineffective.”

If they don’t agree by Jan. 17, the city will forfeit $250 million in state funds, Gov. Cuomo has warned.

In the 2010-11 school year, the DOE charged 78 teachers with incompetence, it says. Hearing officers agreed to terminate 18 after long administrative trials. Other teachers kept their jobs with lesser penalties, such as paying a fine or taking a course

But 49 settled and resigned or retired, bringing the total booted to 67.

Last year, the DOE charged 88 teachers with incompetence. It won just 11 dismissal cases but tossed 39 teachers who quit in settlements.

Betsy Combier, a paralegal who helps defend teachers in discipline cases, blasted the backroom maneuvers.

“It says to teachers, ‘We didn’t mean it when we brought you up on charges. Let someone else worry about how bad or good you are. We just want you out,’” Combier said.

But educators grab the deal to avoid the risk of being found guilty, which becomes public record.

A teacher who recently quit in exchange for erasing her two U ratings was accused of weak instruction, a lack of lesson plans and a disorganized classroom.

“She’s looking for work right now — anywhere. She’s going on interviews,” Combier said.

The DOE did not answer repeated requests for comment.

susan.edelman@nypost.com

COMMENTS

Betsy Combier · Advocate/Paralegal at Advocatz · 405 subscribers
The Bloomberg process was set up so that a Supervisor could "observe" a staff member, say he/she is not competent, not "effective", not (blank), and give him or her an unsatisfactory rating without any accountability for whether it is true or not. Then the so-called 'incompetent' is brought to 3020-a, where the same observations are accepted as facts, and boom the teacher is fired. The Gotcha Squad doesn't want to spend time and money giving these people due process, so they dreamed up the settlements in order to get them out faster, while still keeping total control. The goal is to get people out, not evaluate.

Jeff Kaufman · 89 years old
You have only a part of the story. What about supposed "U" rated teachers who are hired back to the DOE under different licenses? Or teachers who agree to transfer to becoming an ATR in exchange for the removal or guarantee that a U rating will disappear. In a large system you would always expect to find anecdotal evidence of wheeling and dealing but a large part of the U rating system is institutionally corrupt. When you can be given a U rating for reasons other than being unsatisfactory you can see how deep the corruption is. I fear whatever new evaluation system is in place as the hidden schemes will be more deeply embeded.

Joel Moss · Top Commenter
You constantly write about a teacher evaluation system by Jan.17 or all that state funding will be lost. So what, N.Y. won the ridiculous Race to The Top funding a couple of years ago and no one really knows what happened to the money nor is there any evidence it improved education in any way.You constantly blame the UFT for wanting a fair evaluation system, but the mayor and his cronies want a system which relies on state test scores when many teachers in the system are not involved in state wide testing in language and math. How are they to be judged?
In a system in which your mayor, supposedly in charge of education, compares the UFT to the NRA there is no real chance for fair agreement on anything.

Carol Wolf · Mason Gross School of the Arts
It takes two years of full-time study to earn a teaching credential, at a cost of about $20K, and then there's that year of teaching for no pay under a mentor. So, during that time no one notices that the teacher isn't competent? And can you promise that this evaluation system won't be used simply to cashier a teacher (say, the ones that have made it to the top of the pay scale)? That's what the tenure system was created for: to keep administrators (who make three times the salary, by the way) from firing experienced teachers because they now cost more money to pay. Or simply because they were annoyed by them. Schools full of cowed teachers, wow, who thinks that is a good idea?

Got a teacher you don't like? Load her class with all the worst kids (it's called a "loaded class") and then charge her with not keeping order, and being incompetent because she doesn't teach them anything. This system is ripe for abuse. Guess why tenure was such a good idea when it was put in place?

So, okay, if this is such a good idea, where is the equivalent evaluation system for doctors, lawyers and other professionals? Police, for example? Or, hey, I know, how about school administrators, and Congressmen? I know there's some kind of secret law these days that you can't even look at evaluating bankers, not even when they commit egregious fraud. But hey, we sure can beat up on the teachers!

So, under this kind of system, what kind of people are going to enter this former "profession" now?

Vincent Powell · Top Commenter
It's the system set up by teachers unions. if in fact incompetency was fired at will....like so many other jobs, then no rubber rooms, no administrative trials. Money spent on this foolishness would go toward educating our youth. And as the unions have always said..."its for the children".

Doreen Meyer · Top Commenter · Servite HS Detroit, MI
I've seen this happen not in schools, but in hospitals...where subpar nurses and doctors get shuffled around and edged out with the promise of an 'adequate' rating...and this was in an 'open shop'. It really has nothing to do with unions, but with the incompetence of supervisors, administrators (and their supporting boards of directors) who have neither a clue about how to examine workers nor how to document problems so that they'll 'stick' at termination. Without that, litigation begins...union or not. What we need is more training and 'gumption' in the upper echelons, which would get them out without 'bargains'.

Michael Reed · Top Commenter · Owner/ President at Self-Employed Consultant/Writer
Doreen - Doesn't make sense. Why would "open-shop", at-will employers (incompetent or not) shuffle around subpar med-pros? If there's no penalty for firing, what is their motivation - cash bribes or something? It seems they would be doubly motivated to fire because of potential legal liability to their business/employer and being held personally responsible & liable too? Please explain.

Doreen Meyer · Top Commenter · Servite HS Detroit, MI
Despite having an 'open-shop' hospitals are risk-averse. Physicians, particularly, will litigate terminations or 'lockouts' as being damaging to their 'good name' or as a 'trade restriction.' It takes a tremendous amount of documentation; most hospitals don't want this information to potentially end up in an open court, as it may also open them up to liability for continuing an MD whose practice has been known to be subpar. Nurses will also litigate, and often know where institutional secrets are 'buried', giving them leverage. It does sound as if they should be able to terminate at will, but they don't.
Good administrators--ones who know how to handle the process with little to no 'fallout'--are few and far between. Such actions are also usually highly 'political' and require a high level of skill and commitment to pull off.

Peter Goodman · Indiana University
Between 80-90% of cases in the civil and criminal courts are resolved through a plea bargain, why should teacher discipline cases differ... accusations do not mean a finding of guilt...

Ron Archetti · Top Commenter
Peter Goodman - The difference is that I'm not paying the defendants in civil and criminal courts to educate my children nor do I trust them with my child's care. It is exactly that kind of twisted mentality which you display with that ignorant comment that is the problem.

Park Windsor · Top Commenter
Can't wait till Bloomberg is over his ill gotten 3d term.

Glenda Barker · Top Commenter
As if this is the first lie told by these people... just get rid of them. They do more harm, then good.

Denise Fryburg · Top Commenter · Hunter College
Teachers are being given U ratings for just that reason, to make them resign. It has little to do, in most cases, with performance, but how much they make. No one should buy into this.

Robert Dunn · Top Commenter · Fordham University
This is just like the Catholic Church recycling pedophiles. If a teacher is not proficient, passing them off to another district is a disservice to the families of the next school.

Michael Reed · Top Commenter · Owner/ President at Self-Employed Consultant/Writer
Catholic Church and Peds? How about the NEA/AFT Peds with Teaching Certificates who get passed on by Schools to others? I've seen it twice that I'm certain of, and probably more often when it was better covered-up. News is full of both male and female teachers who've abused their students in mulltiple districts for years.

Ron Archetti · Top Commenter
As an employer, I would now be suspect of ANY applicant that listed the DOE under previous employment on their résumé. Hiring any one of them would be like buying a pig-in-a-poke.

William Lee · Top Commenter
What a system. These "unsatisfactory" teachers can now go somewhere else to "teach". This is what's wrong with unions - always protect the bad members.

Paul Girgenti · Top Commenter
we need to start firing them for failing our children.

Baz Clark · Works at University of Pikeville
Too bad common sense isn't!

Pua Tokumoto
As a retired school principal I can honestly say that an excellent teacher is the biggest indicator of a child's success in school. We are with a child at least 6 hours a day, five days a week, in a structured environment. This is powerful and a great teacher can influence a child sometimes much more than a parent.
Unfortunately, poor teachers hurt not only children but good teachers as well. I've had experience with the union trying so hard to get rid of really poor and incompetent teachers to no avail. Teachers who were passed around from school to school. Teachers who took up a good chunk of my resources when trying to change behavior by sending them to workshops, had mentor teachers work with them, etc. The school districts know this to be so true yet strong unions are there to back them up. We need teachers unions to work for the child as well as for the teacher. The unions must realize that the public is sick and tired of incompetent teachers who are still allowed to "teach" and yet students are not learning. We are headed for disaster as a country unless the unions work with the school district in upgrading the caliber of teachers. Most teachers want to teach and play a strong role in the lives of children.
Work with the school district to keep great teachers and kick out the poor teachers. Our kids deserve no less.

Michael Reed · Top Commenter · Owner/ President at Self-Employed Consultant/Writer
Gotta' love this! NYC is chicagoing! They bribe Education Professionals (NEA/AFT members) into leaving with a promise of passing them on to some other unsuspecting sucker school district with falsified documentation. How nice, how professional and who is being held accountable for this fraud?

Peter Hirsch · Port Washington, New York
I'm sure this was a concession to the Teacher's Union, the most Evil Union On The Planet. Creates the most waste and disfunction of any organization known to Man.

Scott Manlin · Subscribe · Managing Member at Bonvivino Capital, LLC
Gotta love government

Abul Rahman · Rutgers University - College Avenue Campus
Sick

Cindy Right · Subscribe · Top Commenter
They'll just get a job at another school.....just passing the buck again. Libtards will never let anyone fix a problem.....evil butt holes.

Jan Snipes · Las Vegas, Nevada
Doesn't this just perpetuate the problem? This is why good administrators who work to change poor teachers are made out to be the bad guys.

Valerie Hofheins · University of Phoenix
...and then those teachers apply to CCSD..

Katherine Walden · Works at I'm retired
I'm one of those teachers, Val. I had a terrible eval my very first year in Prospect, and I was terrible. When I got hired I told them that it was my first year and that I would need help. I got nothing but a bad evaluation. They changed it to a satisfactory one after I agreed to not return. So when CCSD hired me, I was that teacher. But, I got better. I had help--Vandolah, Christine Jannette, Jan Snipes, even you, Val. Teachers need help being better.

Charlie Riley · Top Commenter · Electronics Supervisor at Uncle Sam
They will qualified to teach honors classes in Chicago or Detroit.

Thursday, February 16, 2017

Why Observation Reports Should Not Be Used To Terminate a Tenured Employee by Betsy Combier

re-posted from Parentadvocates.org           

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials



In New York City, teacher tenure is public policy. Tenure gives an employee the right to a due process arbitration hearing on his/her job before anyone can terminate or discipline him/her. A tenured person is not an employee at will, nor is a tenured position protected "for life", as opponents to tenure rights say. Tenured educators get terminated at 3020-a. Alot. Especially if you have a NYSUT Attorney, or a private attorney who does not have extensive experience with the NYC Panel, which is full of bizarre arbitrators and unethical DOE Attorneys.


Just yesterday I was at the 3020-a hearing offices for a new case I was hired to work on, and I wanted to say hello to teacher starting a 3020-a for incompetency who had called me to get some pointers on how to win his case. His NYSUT Attorney, Lori Smith, was sooooo concerned that I might have told him something useful, like about Elentuck v Green, that when she saw me near the room where the Respondent teacher was standing, she immediately went in and closed the door so that I could not say anything to the teacher. So sad. I would like to think that defenders of teachers are all warm and friendly, but unfortunately this is not the case with NYSUT. Lori - there is always the telephone!!!

I believe in tenure rights and that Tenure matters. In all parts of the world right now there are people, good people, who should be in the classroom teaching but are not, because an administrator, parent, child, or other person has lied about the character or job performance of the teacher in order to get the employee fired or removed from his/her job. This is harmful to the children (especially in pre-k to grade 3), who need to know that their teacher is there, ready to be with them all day, every day. Children need to trust this relationship and the person who will replace their parent or guardian. That's why tenure matters.

The first tenure statute in New York state was enacted in 1897 — 70 years before public-sector unions had a right to bargain here — in recognition of society’s deep interest in safeguarding its teachers from unfair firing and political pressure. But current trends in employment in the United States dictate a very different approach to hiring/firing in educational settings. The current trend is to apply a business model of education, where the employer must get rid of 10% of the weakest links in the production line in order to stay viable. This line of reasoning was promoted by GE CEO Jack Welsh, in his book “Winning”:
"To attract the right personnel, Welch instituted a strategy that earned him the moniker "Neutron Jack" and made him a favorite ally of Mike Bloomberg and former Chancellor Joel Klein. Walsh had GE cut all businesses in which the company could not dominate the market in first or second positions. Next, he had managers fire the bottom 10% of GE employees, while he fired the bottom 10% of management. Welch's housecleaning cleared away layers of bureaucracy that had built up at the organization and made way for a quicker flow of ideas."

So, some administrator/CEO, or Human Resources Manager believes an an employee is in the lowest 10% of the workforce, and goes after his/her termination - based on what? Some kind of data? What kind? How does the manager know that the employee is in the lowest 10%? This is the key problem with current human resources policy and procedure for any Department employee. The Department decides that someone is no good based upon whether or not he/she is a snooper, saw some AP or principal taking money that wasn't theirs, saw an administrator hurting a child, reported the administrator for not having service providers for special education children, etc. Rarely is anyone's career destroyed for a valid reason. Getting removed from your job does not have anything to do with your actual performance in the classroom. Trust me on this, I've tried my best to research every case in 3020a or the Courts since 2000.


I see harm in this approach because under the umbrella of getting rid of 10% of the workforce, every employee fears for his/her job on a daily basis, thinking that he/she will "be next". Mayor Mike Bloomberg believed in this and tried to implement this management strategy in 3020-a proceedings, and that is where we are at now. I believe that fear should not be used in any workplace to keep employees in line and under control. Vigilance, yes. Fear, no.

The New York City Department of Education has given administrators the right to go after anyone who they feel is subpar, or slows down the assembly line of the widgets' education. (students = products). This approach lends itself to a generalized feeling by teachers that they cannot be creative. Teachers are mindful that they have limited time to get the curriculum done and learned, and if they don't do this, their jobs will be terminated. But many education scholars urge educators to be creative.


The New York City gives educators no room for individual initiative, and this is a key problem. All educators feel that their expertise is not respected, and are further insulted by observers who know less than they do, or nothing at all about the subjects taught, and yet write/say that the pedagogy is terrible. What an insult to an educator, especially one who is tenured and has spent more than 10 years successfully doing the job?

Bloomberg was frustratingly blocked from his goal of getting any and all teachers, Guidance Counselors and school staff considered subpar for any reason by a member of the administration, out of his/her job. However, the general public and certainly those who work on 3020-a arbitration hearing have, over the past few years, become concerned that the pendulum has begun to swing in the direction of the Department in their effort to get teachers out of their schools and their jobs despite public policy and the mandate of tenure law to have a fair hearing and make sure the charged employee has due process. 


These proceedings are controlled by Education Law3020-a, and employees charged under this law must be given a full hearing if requested, so arbitrators must - at least are supposed to -seek the facts in a case, not simply the opinions of the administrators, in order to honor and protect tenure rights of the accused. But arbitrators on the NYC Panel often do not listen to the facts, and terminate because an administrator looks good and talks well. If the DOE witness is credible, and the charged employee does not use the arguments cited in this post, does not testify, or  does not present wrong-doing by the DOE witnesses, there is a good chance that termination will be the decision. The DOE gives their witnesses a script to testify to, and some witnesses are very good at testifying to the script, and others are not so good. A good defense team for the charged employee can win nonetheless, with a good argument and/or facts to prove the DOE witnesses lied.

A decision at employment arbitration must not rest on malicious prosecution alone. But the NYC Department of Education would like you to think that observations, which are subjective nonfinal opinions, can, indeed, be the sole basis for removing an employee from his/her job due to the nebulous concept known as "incompetence". How does an observation prove incompetence? Sorry, it doesn't work for me. I don't get it. If a principal, assistant principal, peer validator, Field Supervisor has the job of finding you, a teacher, incompetent or abusive to children, their perception of everything and anything that you do is bad, "proof" of wrong-doing/ineffective pedagogy, or whatever they need to bolster their pre-determined decision to get you removed from the school or your job, permanently.


But there is nothing objective about a perception. What you see is filtered through your opinion of someone. If you do not like someone, or you are told horrible things about a person before you meet him/her, and your opinion is clouded by this information, whether or not you are aware of it. This is called Implicit Bias, and I have posted articles about this phenomenon:


Implicit Bias. Everyone Has It


An observation by an administrator is supposed to be a helpful part of the evaluation of a teacher's performance and intervention and remediation should not come as an afterthought. From a historical perspective, teachers/administrators have helped teachers before anyone asked them. It was called collegial support and camaraderie. Today, the buzzwords are different, and classrooms are hostile arenas filled with misinformation from administrators of pedagogical errors and with hidden agendas from administration, peers, and parents.

Elentuck v Green

Even the most elaborate procedural safeguards in a statutory or contractual disciplinary system are useless if a teacher's conduct is measured against subjective standards, as done in an observation.

Thus, observations are meaningless for purposes of discipline. Any observation report basically informs an arbitrator of nothing except that an administrator/evaluator liked/did not like what he/she saw. If there is any bad faith then the subjective views must be discarded as invalid. What a person, let's say a principal, filled with malice "sees" can be far different from the reality of what the student or teacher is actually doing.

Facts matter, and according to the kings County Supreme Court and the Second Department Appellate Division, there are no facts or statistical data in observations, only nonfinal opinions. (See Elentuck v Green, 202 A.D.2d 425; 608 N.Y.S.2d 701; 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1956, 1994)

Observation reports are not public or business records and cannot be the sole evidence used to support any penalty at an employment arbitration hearing dealing with incompetency. I have written about this and my team uses this at all of our incompetency hearings. Opinions of a person whose goal is to get an employee terminated cannot be validated without student outcomes, results, data. A claim of “incompetency” must have supporting information that proves students in Respondent’s class did not learn what they were supposed to learn.

Yet in NYC, the Department of Education attorneys ignore this, and state that any student outcomes are "irrelevant". The only information an arbitrator needs, these attorneys say, is what they see in the observation, and whether or not the teacher had a good lesson plan (or a Guidance Counselor wrote a timely assessment of the child(ren)).

Any school administrator who sees that an employee is, according to what they "see", subpar, is given the right to create whatever papers they need to terminate this employee. It's a simple straight line: you don't like an employee and believe this employee to be a nuisance, so you use observations to create a paper trail and get the employee terminated. What is so frightening is that no one holds the administrators accountable for making up "fake news", and the UFT/NYSUT does not stop this from occurring, either.. In fact, the rubber rooms were invented to keep those "subpar" employees out of their schools so that the administration and the Department's legal services could create the necessary paperwork to "prove" that the employee is guilty of incompetent service. In this scenario the employee is guilty and must prove his/her innocence - exactly the opposite of the law and due process.This is not tenure support, folks, this is employment at will.

The opinions of an administrator who wants the Respondent removed from the school cannot be the only determining factor in any termination hearing nor in handing down penalty. As Arbitrator Joel Douglas wrote in Matter of Great Neck U.F.S.D. v M.H. (SED #5,043, July 20, 2008, Hearing Officer Joel Douglas):

“The record demonstrates that for a teacher to be charged with incompetence, and for the Specifications to be sustained, the teacher must fall below the minimum level of the competency expected of a reasonable teacher…That the Respondent did not live up to (her Supervisor’s] expectations does not de facto establish a degree of incompetency…."

Arbitrators must not decide 3020-a cases only on hearsay, either. N.Y.C.
Arbitrator Josh Javits ruled in a decision
“It would be unacceptable to accept the hearsay evidence of an individual as conclusive proof of an allegation over the live testimony of a teacher with fourteen (14) years of teaching. The Respondent has the right to confront and challenge the testimony of her accuser, and to have the accuser’s credibility tested. Absent this right, the Hearing Officer cannot accept that hearsay evidence alone satisfies the Department’s burden of proof with respect to this issue.”

In DOE v. Rykman, SED File No. 17,731 (Bluth, 2012), at 49, Arbitrator Bluth wrote:
“It is well established that a disciplinary charge pursuant to Education Law 3020-a cannot be sustained when the only evidence to support a charge is uncorroborated hearsay.”

Certainly any of the phrases such as "failures in the nature of incompetent and inefficient service, neglect of duty, unwillingness and/or inability to follow procedures and carry out normal duties, and engaging in misconduct" do not define the word "incompetency" itself, although some forms of "misconduct", "unwillingness", "insubordination", etc., can be classified into categories of "unprofessional" or "improper" behavior within a properly made argument and context.

The above cited vague definitions used to clarify standards of conduct have been applied to other vague concepts such as maintaining "professionalism", and providing an "environment conducive to student learning". These subjective-relative ideas have no standard upon which to rely, leaving a void as to what penalty, if any, should be given which would be "adequate" under the circumstances presented.

Elentuck makes clear that that lesson observations are not “statistical or factual tabulations of data".
Significantly, if material such as lesson observations is non-factual, as Elentuck specifically held, observations are of little value to a 3020-a hearing on incompetency.

Observations are solely subjective and must be considered as such at 3020-a hearings. These reports are not proof of anything.

Why Tenure Matters
Teacher tenure is under attack in New York state and nationwide. In July 2014, two lawsuits were filed — Davids v. New York and Wright v. New York — that claim New York's tenure laws deprive students of their right to a sound basic education. The lawsuits specifically attack the tenure process, the use of seniority in layoffs, and the three-year probationary period for new teachers, which they claim is too short. Former news anchor Campbell Brown, fronting for a shadowy group calling itself the Partnership for Educational Justice, is bankrolling the Wright case. Brown, who won’t disclose her financial backers, makes the unsupported claim that tenure is responsible for low student achievement.
The New York state lawsuits were filed after a lower-court ruling in the case of Vergara v. California gutted that state’s tenure laws. NYSUT attorneys believe the California ruling will be overturned on appeal — but meanwhile it has emboldened copycat suits across the country. Bankrolled by the wealthy elite and anti-union forces, these attacks represent an all-out assault on the fundamental labor rights of working people.

NYSUT is mounting an aggressive and vigorous defense of tenure both in the courts and the court of public opinion.

What’s really important

New York state is widely recognized for its exemplary teaching force and has earned high marks for its rigorous standards and credentialing requirements — typically ranking among the nation’s top ten. Tenure is just one of the safeguards New York state has put in place to ensure every student has an effective teacher. A teacher must earn tenure after three years or more of effective teaching, oversight and evaluation. A teacher then is entitled to a fair hearing before being fired — a basic due process right. Focusing on a due process right that is used by a very few is a distraction from what must be our main priority: ensuring every child has an effective teacher. We need to focus on what helps students the most: recruiting and retaining quality teachers and providing the resources to help every child succeed.

Three key points about tenure

New York state’s rigorous teaching standards provide many safeguards that ensure children have good teachers. Tenure is one of them.

Tenure is a safeguard that ensures good teachers can speak up for what students need.
Tenure is a safeguard that protects good teachers from unfair firing — a basic due process right.
Tenure is working in New York state. The process has been reformed to be faster and more cost efficient, with most cases now resolved within five months. Meanwhile, New York state’s many safeguards for teacher quality ensure that its teaching force is among the best credentialed, most effective in the nation.
Tenure is a safeguard that ensures good teachers can speak up for their students.

Tenure helps safeguard children's right to an effective education because it provides teachers freedom to advocate for their students without fear of reprisal. Because tenure exists, teachers in New York state can speak out freely on issues such as over-testing, cuts in academic programs, elimination of art, music and language and inappropriate placements for students with disabilities.
Without tenure, working under the constant threat of arbitrary firing would have a chilling effect on a teacher’s professional judgment and create an environment that would erode, not enhance, educational quality.
There is no evidence that teachers’ employment rights have anything to do with student achievement. Teachers in the wealthiest districts have the identical due process and seniority rights as teachers in the poorest districts — yet students in wealthy districts have much higher graduation and college acceptance rates. The real factor contributing to these differences in achievement is poverty.
Students in our poorer districts have the greatest educational needs but are given the least resources, with our richest districts spending 180 percent as much on education as our poorer districts do.
Tenure is essential in empowering teachers to make the case that all students deserve an effective education — not just those who happen to be the children of hedge-fund millionaires. Attacking tenure, and seeking to make teachers vulnerable to being fired at will is a smokescreen for failing to tackle the real reason why students struggle: poverty.
Blaming tenure for low student performance is as illogical as it is inflammatory.
Student safety is paramount and it is safeguarded under the state’s tenure laws. Teacher-supported changes to the law in 2008 mean that any teacher, tenured or not, will automatically lose both job and teaching license if guilty of certain sexual offenses — without recourse to a hearing.
Blaming low-student achievement on teacher tenure —a meritless claim not supported by any evidence — is like blaming the due process granted to police officers for crime or blaming the due process granted to firefighters for fire.
If the wealthy elite truly cared about advancing student achievement they would partner with parents and teachers to achieve state budgets that provide equitable funding for all schools. They would oppose the state's tax cap, which worsens constraints on local communities. Instead, the wealthy elite and corporate forces are missing-in-action in these critically important battles. Teachers and parents stand together in calling for a renewed focus on learning and for the resources our students need to be prepared for college and career.
Tenure is a safeguard that protects good teachers from unfair firing — a basic due process right

Though it's been on the books for more than a century, New York state's tenure laws remain wildly misunderstood. Tenure, simply put, is a safeguard that protects good teachers from unfair firing. Once a teacher is granted tenure — a right that must be earned after three years or more of service, oversight and evaluation — a teacher cannot be fired without a fair hearing. Tenure does not mean a job for life. It means simply that a teacher has the right to a fair hearing on charges that could end a career. This is fundamental due process — an American value enshrined in our Bill of Rights and one that is not reserved only for the wealthy elite.
Tenure must be earned. It is not automatic. During a teacher’s three-year probation, school officials carefully evaluate that teacher's job performance. Upon completion of that evaluation, the local school board then votes whether to grant tenure — which simply means the teacher cannot be fired without a fair hearing.
Tenure is a safeguard that protects teachers’ civil rights. Tenure ensures good teachers cannot be fired for reasons of race, gender, age, religion, handicapping condition or sexual orientation. It ensures that good teachers cannot be fired because of cronyism or local politics. It ensures they cannot be fired for pregnancy. Before tenure was in place, teachers could — and did — lose their jobs for arbitrary and politically motivated reasons, or for no reason at all.
Seniority rights, which like tenure are a fundamental employment right, ensure that when layoffs are unavoidable, they are conducted fairly and objectively. A system based on seniority guards against abuses by those who would use ‘layoffs’ as another way to fire those who advocate too fiercely for their students or are at the top of the pay scale.
The obscene, profit-motivated attacks on the rights of working people in places like California and New York are why America no longer has the world's largest middle class. Fundamental rights for workers are essential to a decent standard of living in New York state. And fundamental rights for teachers are essential to fairness and defending what students need.

Saturday, March 21, 2015

Chalkbeat States That All ATRs are "Subpar"

Chalkbeat has stopped trying to get both sides to a story. Shame on them!!

I have written about the use of the word "subpar" many times on this blog, and here it comes again:

What is the definition of a "subpar" (or "ineffective") teacher?

Who created these definitions?

And, no matter who defines what "subpar" means, the fact is that there is no Standard of Teacher performance that properly  defines the term, either.

Remember, there are no facts in observations. (Elentuck v Green). Even NYC DOE General Counsel Courtenaye Jackson-Chase adheres to this ruling. What you see is defined by your opinions and belief system.

This story by Chalkbeat below is so biased, it should be rebutted by all ATRs who ever entered that pool of teacher/educators/Guidance Counselors, etc. The spin is astounding, as if the news written in such a way will force the ATRs out of the system....wait! So THAT's why the article was written!! Truthfulness and fair reporting had nothing to do with it.

I see now.

Betsy Combier
Tweed DOE Headquarters

Most ATR teachers who left system since new contract took buyouts, retired

 
In his fight to fend off the education policy proposals being pushed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Mayor Bill de Blasio has said his administration is already cracking down on subpar teachers.
In particular, he has pointed to 290 or so teachers who have left the school system entirely between April 2014 and this February. They left the costly and controversial absent teacher reserve pool, and represent as many exits as the Bloomberg administration saw during the previous two years combined, city officials said.
“My administration is serious about teacher accountability,” de Blasio told state lawmakers last month while defending his plan for struggling schools. “We have moved 289 teachers out of the Absent Teacher Reserve – and out of the system – since April.”
 
New figures released Friday, along with documents obtained by Chalkbeat, offer new insight into why those teachers departed. They show that disciplinary processes, including new ones created by last year’s teacher contract, played a fairly small role, with only 21 of the teachers terminated after missing job interviews or for other reasons.
De Blasio has said recently that his administration prefers different strategies. Nearly 200 of those 289 teachers — who lost their permanent positions and couldn’t find new ones, but remained on the city’s payroll as substitutes — took buyouts last summer or retired this school year. Another 18 resigned, and 53 agreed to leave while facing charges of misconduct or incompetence.
In addition, no teachers had faced charges under a new, expedited termination process as of December 2014, according to a department document obtained by Chalkbeat. (That process requires a teacher to have logged formal complaints from two separate principals, something that could be unlikely to happen in the first months of the school year.)
The new figures brought renewed calls from advocates of Cuomo’s plans to change to state law that sets out the procedures for teacher termination.
“Instead of being part of the solution, this administration has thrown its hands up and resigned itself to working around a broken system,” said Jenny Sedlis, executive director of StudentsFirstNY.
But the absent teacher reserve has shrunk under de Blasio, in part because he did not close any schools last year. Under former Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the pool ballooned with teachers excessed from closing schools, costing the city an estimated $105 million in 2013.
City officials says the pool had about 1,000 teachers this February. More than 500 teachers were hired for full-time positions in the fall, according to the department document, and the pool had 280 fewer members at the start of this school year than last.
Now, the de Blasio administration is facing the same complicated process of removing the pool’s longtime members that has frustrated city leaders for years.
Testimony given in 2013 by Lawrence Becker, the department’s CEO of human resources, illustrates some the challenges. More than 300 teachers in the pool then had incompetence or misconduct charges against them substantiated, but were not allowed to be terminated. More than 200 had recently received an unsatisfactory rating, and more than 150 were licensed to teach “esoteric” subjects, making them difficult to place in schools. Formal disciplinary proceedings can last months and sometimes years.
On Thursday, de Blasio said that the best way to get around those problems is by avoiding formal procedures altogether. Instead, principals and department officials should focus on counseling subpar teachers to leave on their own, a strategy that Chancellor Carmen Fariña told Capital gives them an “opportunity to leave gracefully.” Some of the recent retirements and resignations were likely the result of that kind of strategic pressure, officials said.
“If you can counsel someone out voluntarily, skip all that process — ‘You don’t belong here anymore, you’re a good human being but you don’t belong here anymore, you’re not into it, you’re burned out, you can’t do what we need you to do in this day and age,’ whatever it is — if that person goes along willingly, that is the most efficient way to resolve the problem,” de Blasio said.
United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew, a close ally of de Blasio’s, has also acknowledged that the process for matching excessed teachers to schools that need them still needs work.
“The entire ATR process was so mismanaged by the Bloomberg administration that it will take years to sort out,” Mulgrew said.
Carmen Farina

The Fariña method of purging bad teachers

Carmen Fariña has been talking a lot about bad teachers recently.
The schools chancellor, who defined her first year on the job as a mission to restore “joy” and “respect” to the classroom, has, of late, been encouraging hundreds of city principals to identify and get rid of their weakest teachers.
“The teachers who are not up to the job, you’ve got to get them out the door,” Fariña said to a large group of high school principals at a conference in late February.
“Who are the teachers, if you had this wonderful grandchild, you would not want to see your grandchild in that teachers’ classroom,” Fariña told an audience of elementary school principals a few days earlier.
In an interview with Capital last week, Fariña said asking principals to weed out their weakest teachers has been her “first statement when I get into any school visit. ... I repeat it over and over again."
Removing ineffective teachers has been one of the Department of Education’s most intractable problems, and decades of mayors and chancellors have advanced their own reforms on how to get it done with the looming presence of the United Federation of Teachers.
Fariña has repeatedly said she believes new provisions in the U.F.T. contract will help get weak teachers out of the classroom, including moving teachers out of the Absent Teacher Reserve (A.T.R.), a controversial pool of teachers who have been removed from the classroom but remain on the payroll. Separately, the U.F.T. contract includes a new definition of sexual misconduct aimed at getting potentially dangerous teachers fired.
She’s also repeatedly reminded principals that teachers with two “ineffective” ratings can be removed from teaching more quickly.
But she’s also been promoting her own tried and true method for getting rid of bad teachers—relentless monitoring of problem teachers and rounds of conversations convincing teachers they are in the wrong profession. The desired result is settling on inventive alternatives for teachers willing to be cajoled, or forcing out the ones who aren't.
"There is an opportunity to leave gracefully or not so gracefully," Fariña told Capital. 
According to Fariña, and to well-documented Upper East folklore, that method was effective at P.S. 6, the Manhattan school Fariña ran in the 1990s, which has long been considered one of the city’s best public schools.
Now, she’s telling principals it can work for the city’s roughly 1,799 other public schools, too.
“I had three teachers who I went for total removal with,” Fariña told Capital of her tenure at P.S. 6.
She rattled off examples of other teachers for whom she found creative solutions.
She managed to get a six-month suspension for one of her weakest teachers, she remembered, and then won another suspension with a series of letters about the teacher’s performance.
“Then I got her out of the system,” Fariña said.
Another problem teacher struggled with every subject except for science, so Fariña secured her a job as a science teacher at a middle school. And still another teacher was good with children but not moving the needle for them academically, so Fariña convinced her to retire, then hired her back to work two days a week.
Asked to describe the Fariña method for pushing out bad teachers, the chancellor said, “It means you, as an administrator, have to be in that teachers’ classroom on a regular basis, keeping records, taking notes.”
Fariña has appointed a D.O.E. official whose primary role is instructing principals on how to properly write letters about certain teachers to keep in their files.
“I don’t think most ineffective teachers want to fail,” Fariña said, adding that principals should try “being blunt with them and saying ‘we don’t think this is your career.’”
Fariña has brought her P.S. 6 tips and tricks to the chancellorship, picking out struggling teachers during her frequent school visits and advising her principals on how to remove them.
Referencing a recent school visit, Fariña said, “I literally told the principal, ‘I will be back at the end of April, and so-and-so better not be here.’”
Another principal invited Fariña back to her school to show that a teacher Fariña was worried about had recently resigned.
But Fariña’s critics have said that despite her rhetoric, the chancellor has not done enough to ensure that ineffective and dangerous teachers are removed quickly.
"If chancellor Fariña and Mayor de Blasio are serious about getting bad teachers out of city classrooms, there is a simple solution: support Governor [Andrew] Cuomo's proposed education reforms,” Jenny Sedlis, executive director of the group StudentsFirst, one of the administration’s most frequent critics, said in a statement on Monday. “Instead they are bowing to special interest pressures, which is why they need to use empty rhetoric instead of taking real action."
Cuomo has proposed an expedited process for 3020-a cases, the legal forums for teachers accused of ineffectiveness or misconduct to plead their side. The governor has called the 3020-a process "broken." In some instances, a single case can drag on for years and cost tens of thousands of dollars. Of the three teachers she had to force out of the profession, Fariña admitted, “that took a lot of time.”
The new U.F.T. contract does not contain any substantive changes to the 3020-a process. 
Reform and pro-charter groups have accused the administration of being too accommodating of the U.F.T.; Fariña insisted the union was not interfering with her plans for firing ineffective teachers. “We have worked very collaboratively with the U.F.T.,” she said, adding, “If I’m getting pushback from the U.F.T. [on individual teachers] I or someone on my team is going to get involved.”
“We know that our relationship is partners when necessary, adversaries when necessary,” she said of the union.
At the three recent conferences, Fariña plied principals with some creative ways of moving weak teachers into new roles. “For those of you who are at large middle schools, consider giving up a full-time teaching position, and get a part-time reading specialist or specialist on organizational skills,” she said.
Fariña asked principals to play to teachers’ strengths, and suggested one way to get inventive with U.F.T. work rules. “Teachers have to work six hours and twenty minutes, but no one says what those hours have to be,” she told the middle school principals. “If you have teachers that are particularly good at helping struggling kids, having some of them come in earlier for the kids start their school day and having them leave earlier is perfectly okay.” Fariña added that she had five teachers use flexible scheduling at P.S. 6.
But she has been blunt about the end goal. Speaking before elementary school principals in February, she said, “we’re working very hard to make sure that two “ineffectives” in a row move teachers in a different direction. But it's your paperwork that’s going to make that happen, because you don’t want to say five years from now ‘I wish I had done that then.’”