Cathleen Black Must Not Get A Waiver To Be NYC Chancellor

NYC Mayor Mike Bloomberg actually made an excellent decision in recommending Cathleen Black for the position of NYC Chancellor. I'll explain my bizarre statement below. However, the bottom line is that Ms. Cathleen Black must never be Chancellor.

SIGN THE PETITION TO STOP THE REGENTS AND COMMISSIONER STEINER FROM GIVING CATHLEEN BLACK A WAIVER SO THAT SHE CAN BE NYC CHANCELLOR

Hundreds of people throughout New York City have been complaining about Joel Klein's actions for seven years (I think that most people did not believe he was truly a disaster until about a year into his alleged 'chancellorship'). See the articles below and the thousands of other articles about his errors and blunders. We, the outspoken public, somewhat slowly realized that Mike Bloomberg has total disdain for the common folk, the middle class, the disadvantaged people who try to make a living in his city. He wants us all to leave. He does not care what 'we' say or do, because he knows that whatever he wants, he gets. He got control over the school system. He threw away the vote for school board members by getting rid of the vote by all residents and then eliminating the school boards altogether. He wanted a third term so he got a third term. etc. This is a public policy strategy called "The public be damned!"

Therefore, I want to thank Mr. Bloomberg for showing the world what writers like me can only conclude. He doesn't care about public schools, public school employees, parents, or children.

Ms. Black, Oprah Winfrey, and Mike Bloomberg, 2007

Of course it could have been worse. He could have asked Michelle Rhee to be The One. The only other worse choice would have been a white banker MALE friend without children or with children who had attended NYC private schools. Ms. Black's gender is an acknowledgement by Bloomberg that it is not only time for a woman, but necessary to have a woman at the helm. That's the only plus in his corner. I am very grateful to him for not having the least bit of interest in hiring a woman who had a phD in education management and was African-American, Hispanic, American Indian, or any other minority in origin. We public would have had a serious problem in that case.

Here is the great part: Bloomberg's choice of Ms. Black for Chancellor is proof of his dislike for every voice that has raised any concerns over the past 8 years concerning his public school policies. He is saying, "I don't care what you say" and we hate him for it.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg was elected as "the education mayor", he said, and he would create the biggest overhaul in history of the 'failing' NYC public school system. We, the New York City public school community (and friends and relatives) know exactly what a disaster Bloomberg's control of the largest school system in America has brought, and we've had enough, thank you very much. See my March 2004 article Joel Klein's Performance Review. We have people in NYC who are speaking out, but not being heard.

I'm sure that we all remember the night that three members of the Panel For Educational Policy were fired for not voting along 'party-of-one' [Bloomberg] lines. The Village Voice did a great article about that and about all the other autocratic actions that Bloomberg has taken to get the reform HE wants, HIS way:

Education Mayor Bloomberg Called Out
NYC's head has a serious setback on his way to closing schools
By Nat Hentoff, Village Voice, April 27, 2010
LINK

Michael Bloomberg's ruthless definition of "mayoral control" of the schools became coldly clear on March 16, 2004, when he summarily fired three members of the city's Panel for Education Policy before a vote on the Bloomberg requirement for third-graders' promotions to end "social promotions." Eight of the panel's 13 members had been appointed by His Sovereignty, but there had been prior evidence that at least the disobedient three, and maybe more, would vote against the mayor's ukase.

Said the boss after his triumph: "This is what mayoral control is all about. They are my representatives, and they are going to vote for things that I believe in" (New York Times, March 16, 2004). Or else.

His faithful vassal, Schools Chancellor Joel Klein, dutifully said that the three had resigned. If Bloomberg ever achieves his desired seat in the Oval Office, he will have a trusted press secretary in Mr. Klein.

Education is one of my two main beats; the Constitution is the other. I am opposed to mechanical "social promotion," but the Bloomberg plan—like the now-discredited No Child Left Behind Act—was based on the scores of single city-wide standardized reading and math tests. Ignored was a focus on individual students that will be part of my next book, Is This America? (Cato Institute).

In reaction to the mayor's victory, Robin Brown, the president of United Parents Associations (a city-wide coalition of parents and teachers' groups), said in outrage: "Politics first, children last . . . This is one of the reasons we never supported mayoral control."

Said Natalie Gomez-Velez, the Bronx representative on the Education Policy Panel: "This is not something we should be teaching kids about democracy." Apparently, she hadn't been aware that "democracy" and "Mayor Bloomberg" are not synonymous.

As the years went on, the mayor did relinquish control of the schools only to Police Commissioner Ray Kelly and his School Safety Agents. Both are now defendants in a federal lawsuit on police abuse of students. But otherwise, Bloomberg was solely in charge until this past March 26 when he, Joel Klein, and the rest of his Royal Court were shocked at a decision by Justice Joan Lobis of the State Supreme Court in Manhattan that stopped Bloomberg's closing of 19 schools for poor performance. The judge sharply cited "significant violations" of the unexpected new state law setting rules of mayoral control.

This additional lawsuit was brought against Bloomberg puppets Joel Klein and the Board of Education by, among others, UFT President Michael Mulgrew, the New York State Conference of the NAACP, various parents, and political figures, including City Council member Charles Barron. The latter once invited dictator Robert Mugabe to address the City Council. I'd appreciate Mr. Barron's views of how Robert Mugabe is running the Zimbabwe schools.

In her decision, Judge Lobis charged that the defendants "appear to trivialize the whole notion of community involvement in decisions regarding the closing or phasing out of schools. The new law," she continued, "called for meaningful community involvement," and the "entire legislative scheme must be enforced, and not merely the portion extending mayoral control of the schools." That last zinger was directed at the Royal Mayor.

The Chancellor, obviously with the mayor's imperial approval, had not provided the educational impact statements required by the law. Where, for example, asked the judge, is there "any meaningful information regarding the impact on the students" (in those euthanized schools) or "the ability of the schools in the affected community to accommodate those students"? (Bloomberg is already an expert creator of overcrowded classrooms.)

The response by the rebuked Chancellor Klein (New York Times, March 27, 2010): "The sad thing is that the union [the UFT] would bring a lawsuit to resign kids to failing schools in order to save jobs. And ultimately, that is what this is about."

In another column, I'll provide some of my disagreements with the UFT, but this particular lawsuit is about preventing the mayor of New York and his successors from excluding parents and community organizations concerned with education from any meaningful involvement in the public (and we use that word provisionally) schools.

For further illustration of how Bloomberg and Klein trashed the law, the judge accused them of "completely failing to provide the information about specific programs existing at the schools proposed to be closed or phased out—or where the students would be able to find such programs [elsewhere]." For example, "where the school had a Living for the Young Family through Education (LYFE) Center, no mention was made of the program, or where a similar program existed in other city schools."

But, say the disgruntled defendants, consider all the public meetings we held about the schools to be closed. Answers the judge—giving Bloomberg and Klein a remedial lesson in Madisonian democracy—"although public meetings were held with respect to each school, and members of the respective Community Education Councils and School Leadership Teams were 'invited' to attend those meetings, it cannot be said that those meetings were 'joint' meetings (as required by the law). . . . For the notion of a joint meeting to have any meaning, the members of the Community Educational Councils and School Leadership Teams must be part of the process of structuring those meetings and not merely be told where and when to be present and given a script of what they are to say at the meetings" (emphasis added).

What did Joel Klein say to that—and what does his response reveal about his understanding of democracy?

"I think," said the Chancellor, "the process was robust. We literally met with thousands of people who expressed their views. We heard them, and in the end, we disagreed."

They disagreed because these irreverent views didn't follow the script. Joel Klein once promised me that he would bring civics classes back into schools so that students would know what it has taken in the history of this country to keep securing actual democracy throughout this society. I don't know the extent, if any, of his restorations of civics education. But his faithfulness in following Bloomberg's orders to exclude, as the judge said, any "meaningful community involvement" in the attempted closing of the 19 schools, shows his aversion to essential democratic participation in keeping a number of those schools meaningful to the very students themselves.

In an April 2 editorial, "This Time, Listen," the New York Times advised: "Instead of dismissing the lawsuit as an act of sabotage by the teachers' union, which was party to it, the city officials should be building bridges to the parents, community leaders and the angry state lawmakers who joined this suit out of frustration with the city's tactics."

What would you say are the odds that this autocratic mayor even knows—as the Times reports (March 27, 2010)—that "12 of the schools scheduled to close this year received a grade of 'proficient' in their last city quality review"? Or that many students and parents were stunned at the termination of such effective programs as the one "devised for mothers and pregnant teenagers at [the] Paul Robeson High School that offers day care and teaches parenting skills"? Too bad the resounding Paul Robeson isn't around to help the mayor shape up.

Other reports you should look at are:
Leaving School Empty-Handed: A Report on Graduation and Dropout Rates For Students Who Receive Special Education Services and Losing Our Future available on the Advocates For Children website; the New York Times' To Cut Failure Rate, Schools Shed Students and High School Under Scrutiny For Giving Up On Its Students (August 2003) and NYC DOE and Mayor: Social Promotion For Some, Not Others. Gotta Win the Statistical Game Any Way They Can.

And dont miss Mr. Hentoff's article "For the Children—Klein Should Resign: Where Was the UFT? And the Principals’ Union?" and  the report on "Pushing Out At Risk Kids: An Analysis of High School Discharge Figures" published by Betsy Gotbaum, the NYC Public Advocate (2002).

Then of course, there are my articles on the disaster of Joel Klein for taking away the Constitutional rights to procedural and substantive due process from suspended children, parents, and teachers:
Betsy Combier Speaks Out on the Constitutional Mess Created by Mayoral Control of the New York City Board of Education,  New York Senator Reuben Diaz Calls For the Resignation of BOE Chancellor Joel Klein and Deputy Mayor Dennis Walcott (2007), School Funding =School Corruption and Silencing Opposition: The Constitution is Suspended in New York City Until Further Notice (2004), Bloomberg Says He is Doing A Good Job.

Mike Bloomberg never did a good job as a public servant. He doesn't like the public. He has no interest in involving anyone but his most trusted advisors any say at all in any policy decisions. UFT John Elfrank-Dana has posted the "Participation in Government" curriculum as a shining example of what the American government was founded upon several centuries ago, but that a person who follows the Bloomberg participatory democracy model would be sorely challenged to agree with. Elfrank-Dana's government encourages participation as a pre-requisite for democracy, a concept foreign to Bloomberg's administration where there is no possibility of meaningful or effective participation in public policy by any student or member of the general public.


The process of choosing Ms. Black is an example of Bloomberg's autocratic rule (he did not let anyone in on his decision until it was made):

November 10, 2010
Bloomberg Took Secret Path to a New Schools Chief
By DAVID W. CHEN and MICHAEL BARBARO, NY TIMES
LINK

Shortly after 2 p.m. on Tuesday, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg circulated through his City Hall offices, introducing a tall, blond woman who looked slightly familiar to his top aides. A foreign dignitary, perhaps? Or maybe an ambitious out-of-state politician hoping to impress the mayor? Somebody’s wife whom they were supposed to recognize?

No, it was Cathleen P. Black, and in less than an hour, Mayor Bloomberg would stun New York’s political, business and education establishments by naming her as the city’s schools chancellor, replacing Joel I. Klein.

To a degree unusual even for an administration that relishes keeping its deliberations as private as possible, hardly anyone knew of Mr. Klein’s departure or Ms. Black’s arrival until minutes before the official announcement. While such posts are typically filled after highly publicized national searches that can last months or even a year, there is little evidence that anyone else was seriously vetted or considered — and few of the usual suspects, including members of the mayor’s inner circle, were even consulted.

“I didn’t know Joel was leaving,” said Merryl H. Tisch, the chancellor of the State Board of Regents and a longtime friend of the mayor, who said she was “surprised” when Mr. Bloomberg broke the news to her, around the time of the 3:15 p.m. news conference unveiling Ms. Black as the next chancellor. “It all went down very quickly.”

Even Mr. Klein, who had spent eight years running the nation’s largest school system, did not know who his successor would be until Monday. And not until 30 minutes before the news conference — or just a little before reporters were told, vaguely, of an important announcement — did Mr. Klein inform his leadership team, apologizing for the secrecy of a process over which he said, with resignation, he had no say.

Inexplicable as it may have seemed to outsiders, the secrecy around the search for someone to run the schools crystallized two tenets of the Bloomberg era: the mayor’s faith in the ability of business leaders to fix the ills of government, and his keen dislike of drawn-out public debates that might derail his agenda.

And, in what has become a Bloomberg hallmark, the mayor relied on someone he knew through business and social networks, someone squarely in his comfort zone of wealthy and socially prominent Upper East Side residents, someone with whom he has shared many friends and colleagues, dinners and drinks.

Stu Loeser, a spokesman for Mr. Bloomberg, declined to discuss details of the search process, who else was interviewed for the job, precisely how the mayor made his decision or even when he first met Ms. Black, chairwoman of Hearst Magazines, saying only that the mayor “spoke to many individuals about the position and chose the best.”

But Eric Nadelstern, the deputy chancellor for school support and instruction and a respected 39-year veteran of the city school system, said that if he was a candidate for the chancellorship, he did not know about it. “I’ve never actually had a conversation with anyone either asking me to consider it or, from my perspective, expressing interest in the position,” he said.

Michelle Rhee, the education reformer who recently departed as chief of the Washington schools, did not respond to an e-mail on Wednesday, but several people close to her and Mr. Klein said she had not been interviewed.

Ms. Black spent much of Wednesday in her office on the 43rd floor of the Hearst Tower in Midtown, fielding congratulations. A call placed her office was returned by a spokeswoman for the Education Department, who said the chancellor-in-waiting would not be doing any interviews until after she begins in December. Mr. Loeser also declined to make the mayor or First Deputy Mayor Patricia E. Harris, who was said by many to be crucial in the selection, available to discuss the choice.

On Monday, Ms. Black was seen at the Hearst Tower with a thick stack of materials concerning public education. One City Hall insider, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he did not want to risk offending Mayor Bloomberg, said that key City Hall officials had spent hours briefing Ms. Black this week on education issues.

If many education stakeholders were hurt to be left out of the process, Howard Wolfson, the deputy mayor for intergovernmental affairs, defended the approach as crucial to avoid making Mr. Klein a lame duck.

“The mayor felt strongly that had Joel announced he was leaving and engaged in a search at that point, the school system would have been destabilized,” he said. “You would have had a situation in which there was a lot of uncertainty. He doesn’t think you find the best people, when they are paraded in for interviews.”

Instead, Mr. Bloomberg turned to someone he has known for many years, if not particularly well, a fellow media mogul whose social life and business interests cross-pollinate neatly with his own.

Ms. Black and her husband, Thomas E. Harvey, a lawyer and avid Republican donor, are known for hosting Christmas parties in their exclusive Park Avenue building, where apartments go for at least $10 million, and current and former neighbors include Tom Brokaw and Lloyd C. Blankfein. Mr. Bloomberg and his girlfriend, Diana L. Taylor, are regulars at those soirees.

In 2007, Ms. Taylor, a former state banking commissioner, was among several people who hosted an event to celebrate the publication of Ms. Black’s book “Basic Black” at the Hearst Tower. One other prominent co-host was Gayle King, a close friend of Oprah Winfrey, and the editor at large of O, The Oprah Magazine. (Mr. Bloomberg, Ms. Black and Ms. Winfrey were photographed together at the 2006 opening of the new Hearst Tower.) But Ms. King, too, was out of the loop on Ms. Black’s career change, according to someone who was with her when the announcement occurred.

Exactly when Mr. Bloomberg began courting Ms. Black for the job is not clear. Michael Mulgrew, president of the United Federation of Teachers, said that when he arrived at a diner for breakfast with the mayor on Oct. 19, he ran into Ms. Black, who appeared to have just met with Mr. Bloomberg. The mayor introduced her to the union chief but made no mention of her having interest in or connection to the schools.

Mr. Bloomberg and Ms. Black, along with Mr. Klein and Rupert Murdoch, the chairman of News Corporation, are regular attendees of the New York investment bank Allen & Company’s annual conference in Sun Valley, Idaho, the exclusive gathering each July of the country’s publishing elite.

Mr. Murdoch, who provided Mr. Klein with a job as a new executive vice president of News Corporation, was also apparently unaware of the mayor’s choice of Ms. Black until the day of the announcement, according to two people who spoke anonymously so as not to jeopardize access to Mr. Murdoch. These two people said Mr. Murdoch, who has grown more interested in education, had for months been discussing a possible job with Mr. Klein, over meals and at industry events. Mr. Klein said the two met on Sunday to hammer out the details.

For her part, Ms. Tisch, the Board of Regents chancellor, said she could not recall meeting Ms. Black. Asked about the choice, she was circumspect, saying, “I don’t know her, so I don’t like to talk about things I don’t know.”
Reporting was contributed by Tim Arango, Charles V. Bagli, David Carr, Elissa Gootman, Christine Haughney, Javier C. Hernandez, Sharon Otterman, Noah Rosenberg and Jeremy W. Peters.
  

Joel Klein Resigns as Attorney For The New York City Board Of Education

As Joel Klein had no contract, he was not actually, pursuant to Education Law 2590-h, "chancellor", so I'm not sure what his resignation from the job means.

According to Attorney Matthew Leighton over at the Corporation Counsel, Joel Klein is the Attorney for the NYC Board/Department of Education, and I have this in his own writing (email) to a teacher who sued Klein and wanted to depose him. Leighton told the teacher/Plaintiff that he could not depose Joel Klein, named individually and officially as a Defendant in his case, because, as Attorney for the NYC BOE, Klein could not be deposed as this would be a break of the "attorney-client privilege."

Ms. Black: what role will Joel Klein play in your administration, assuming you get the waiver from New York State to become NYC's next chancellor?

Thank you for a prompt reply to: betsy.combier@gmail.com

Betsy Combier

City’s New Schools Chief Has Much in Common With Boss
By JEREMY W. PETERS, NY TIMES, Nov. 9, 2010
LINK

Cathleen P. Black (see below as well) earned a reputation in publishing as a tough-minded chief executive who never left her employees guessing what she wanted. A student of management, she wrote a book about strategies for success in the corporate world. She thrived as head of a large media company, showing little interest in politics or a public-service job — until, it seems, a big one suddenly opened up.

In other words, she is a lot like Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who on Tuesday tapped Ms. Black, 66, the chairwoman of Hearst Magazines, to be the next chancellor of the New York City school system.
Mr. Bloomberg, of course, also built his fortune in media and wrote a book about how he did it. And no one would ever accuse the mayor of being ambiguous when it comes to conveying his expectations of his staff. Ms. Black, at the news conference on Tuesday where she was introduced, made no pretense of having any experience in education. Similarly, Mr. Bloomberg was a political novice when he ran for mayor in 2001. His explanation for picking her sounded a lot like his original pitch for himself: “Cathie is a world-class manager.”

Ms. Black, who was displaced this summer as president of Hearst Magazines, said that she was “very excited about this incredible opportunity to make a difference in the lives of our young people.”

She will be the first woman to head the nation’s largest school system — as she was the first woman to lead the Hearst Corporation’s magazine division and, way back in 1979, the first female publisher of a weekly consumer magazine, New York. In the 1980s, she was publisher of USA Today, charged with finding advertisers for what was then a radically new product.

“Without her, USA Today would likely have failed,” said Allen H. Neuharth, the newspaper’s founder, who described Ms. Black’s management style as “aggressively diplomatic.”

He added, “She was very careful to outline what was expected of people and then try to help them live up to that expectation.”

At Hearst, she helped convince Oprah Winfrey it was time to extend her brand to publishing, personally visiting the talk-show host with a mockup of what was to become O, the Oprah Magazine — one of the biggest success stories in the industry. When it became clear that Talk magazine, a joint venture with Miramax edited by Tina Brown, was unlikely to succeed, she shut it down despite loud objections from Miramax and its brash co-chairman Harvey Weinstein.

“If the stockroom has to be cleaned out and there’s no one to do it, Cathie will roll up her sleeves and do it,” said Valerie Salembier, publisher of Harper’s Bazaar, a Hearst magazine. “The best thing about Cathie, after working with her all these years, is that you know exactly where you stand. She is very straightforward about what you could be doing or doing better.”

Having grown up on the South Side of Chicago, where she attended Catholic schools, Ms. Black moved to New York — she said Tuesday that was her “American dream” — in 1966, after graduating from Trinity College in Washington. She has homes on Park Avenue and in Connecticut, where her children attended private boarding schools. She is married to Thomas E. Harvey, a longtime lawyer for the Institute of International Education, which promotes exchange programs, and a regular donor to Republican candidates and causes.

In a 2005 interview in The New York Times, Ms. Black, the youngest of three children, said: “A lot of the studies would say generally the oldest child is the most ambitious, but for some reason I sort of got those genes.”

In her 2007 book, “Basic Black,” she recalls photocopying her résumé at the office of a job she was eager to move on from. An executive from the company later called her at home and said, “Next time you’re duplicating your résumé, Miss Black, I suggest you remember to take the original off the copier.”

After 15 years at Hearst, Ms. Black suffered her first major and highly public setback this summer when David Carey, a rival from Condé Nast, was brought in to replace her as president of the magazine division.

Her departure apparently came as a surprise to colleagues at Hearst, as her appointment did to senior officials in the Department of Education. One senior education official, who asked not to be identified because he was not authorized to talk to reporters, said many of the department’s leaders learned of Ms. Black’s selection right before it was announced, and few of them seemed to know anything about her.

At Hearst, Frank A. Bennack Jr., the chief executive, said in a memo to the staff that Ms. Black “goes with my blessing,” but suggested he had expected her to stick around longer. “Cathie’s handling of the transition with David, which admittedly we expected to take place over a longer period of time, has been exemplary,” Mr. Bennack wrote.

One asset she brings to her new job: knowing how to deal with strong personalities.

“I’ve joked that if you can work for Rupert Murdoch and Al Neuharth, you can work for anybody,” Ms. Black told The Times in 2005. Now she can add another media mogul to that list — Mayor Bloomberg.

David Carr and Javier C. Hernandez contributed reporting.


Mayor Bloomberg Appoints Cathie Black - History-Making Business Leader with Proven Expertise Making Great Organizations Even Better - Chancellor of New York City Public Schools
11/09/2010
LINK

Joel Klein – City’s Longest-Serving Chancellor and First to be Directly Accountable for Schools’ Performance – Departs to Tackle Challenges Outside Government After Eight Years of Unprecedented Gains

Black’s 15 Years Leading Hearst Magazines, 8 Years Building USA Today and 4 As the First Woman Publisher of a Major Weekly – New York – Key Preparation for One of the Toughest Management Jobs at Any Level of Government

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg today appointed Cathleen P. Black, a highly-respected leader in one of New York City’s central industries as the next Chancellor of New York City’s Schools and charged her with building on Chancellor Joel Klein’s historic success turning around the nation’s largest school system. Over the past eight years, longer than any other Schools Chancellor has served, Klein transformed New York City’s long-dysfunctional public school system into one that the Obama administration has hailed as a national model, with higher graduation rates, a narrowed achievement gap between black and Hispanic students and their white and Asian peers, significant progress on National Assessment of Educational Progress test results and lower crime. The Mayor selected Black to follow Klein as Chancellor because of her unique experience building on successes and leading teams to even greater achievements, including her stewardship of Hearst Magazines for the last decade and a half. Black is also widely credited with building USA Today into an unprecedented success in her eight years there, and broke through an important gender barrier in 1979 when she became the first publisher of a weekly consumer magazine, New York. New York City has never had a female Schools Chancellor.

“Joel Klein’s extraordinary service to the 1.1 million children and young adults who attend our public schools has secured him a place as a landmark, transformational civic leader in our City’s long history – but for some time now, I’ve known that he was ready to move on. I asked Joel to stay until we could identify a successor – someone with the ability and experience to build on his success, and help take our schools to the next level – and I couldn’t be happier to say that we have found someone who is superlatively qualified to do that,” said Mayor Bloomberg. “Cathie Black is a superstar manager who has succeeded spectacularly in the private sector. She is brilliant, she is innovative, she is driven – and there is virtually nobody who knows more about the needs of the 21st century workforce for which we need to prepare our kids.”

“Our schools are vastly better than they were just eight years ago when the Mayor took office and Chancellor Klein joined his Administration,” said Ms. Black. “Their passion for improving the educational opportunities of our students has lifted the bar higher than anyone could ever have imagined, and my main goal will be to build on the work that has been accomplished during the Bloomberg Administration, and Chancellor Klein’s tenure. I want to thank the Mayor for the privilege of joining his Administration and the great team of people who carry out the City’s mission each and every day.”

“I want to thank Mayor Bloomberg for giving me the best job of my life and for being there every step of the way in the effort to improve education for our students,” said Chancellor Klein. “Public schools in New York City changed my own life and it has been a rare privilege to serve the kids and families of this city during the past eight years. I am thrilled that the Mayor has selected Cathie Black, a distinguished leader, to move this work forward.”

When Chancellor Klein accepted the job as the first New York City schools Chancellor to be directly accountable for improving New York City public schools, he committed to the Mayor that he would stay for up to two terms. Under Chancellor Klein’s leadership New York City ended social promotion, and the City’s graduation rate has increased for eight straight years, reaching a historic high of 63 percent in 2009. New York City students also out-gained students in the rest of the State and the nation on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Scores for City students increased by 11 points in fourth-grade reading, 11 points in fourth-grade math, and 7 points in eighth-grade math. On the NAEP exam, ten points represents a full year of additional learning. Chancellor Klein also developed a robust accountability system centered on annual Progress Reports that award letter grades to schools based on students’ academic achievement and progress, implemented Fair Student Funding to bring long-overdue transparency and equity to school budgets, and eliminated the so-called Rubber Rooms.

Since 2002, the New York City Department of Education has created 474 new schools and created 113,000 public school seats to reduce overcrowding, while investing billions of dollars to improve existing school facilities. This year alone, 17,656 additional seats came online – the largest number created for a single school year since the creation of the School Construction Authority. And between 2001 and 2009, major crime in schools fell 44 percent and violent crime in schools fell 32 percent. As of June 2010, violent crime in schools was down nearly 8 percent and major crime was down 6 percent compared with the prior year.

The Mayor also credited Deputy Mayor Dennis Walcott, Department of Education Chief Operating Officer Sharon Greenberger, and the many talented and committed educators at the Department of Education including Deputy Chancellors Laura Rodriguez, Shael Suransky, and Eric Nadelstern for these gains. This appointment is pending a waiver by State Education Commissioner David Steiner.

First as President, and then as Chairman of Hearst Magazines, Black led a team of some 2,000 employees producing more than 200 local editions of 14 magazines in more than 100 countries. Under her leadership, Hearst had record-breaking years – they built on decades of success with titles like Cosmopolitan, Esquire, Good Housekeeping, Harper's Bazaar, Marie Claire, Popular Mechanics, Redbook, and Town & Country, introduced highly-acclaimed new titles like O, The Oprah Magazine and created digital platforms that were inconceivable in 1995. As the media industry has tackled digital changes, Hearst Magazines has been widely-regarded as being at the forefront of that evolution.

While at Hearst, Black was a member of the team that oversaw the construction of the 46-story Hearst Tower that was erected on the six-story base near Columbus Circle that Randolph Hearst had built in 1928. The Hearst Tower, which was the first skyscraper to break ground in New York City after September 11, 2001, won several awards and was New York City's first LEED Gold skyscraper.

For eight years beginning in 1983, Black served as President and Publisher of USA Today, and then Executive Vice President of the paper’s parent company, helping personnel from Gannett publications coast to coast and from across the publishing industry build a nationwide newspaper that few expected to last. Black started her career in advertising sales with Holiday and the then-new Ms. Magazine, and broke new ground when she became the first female publisher of a weekly consumer magazine, New York, in 1979.

From 1991 to 1996, Black served as President and Chief Executive Officer of the Newspaper Association of America, merging two disparate organizations into one non-profit that represented the needs of thousands of publishers before the Federal government and the American people.

Black serves on the Advisory Council of the Harlem Village Academy, is a longtime Trustee of The University of Notre Dame and is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Last December, Mayor Bloomberg appointed Black to the host committee for the 2010 National Conference on Volunteering and Service, the world’s largest gathering o service and volunteer leaders that he chaired in June 2010. In May 2010, Black travelled to Detroit with First lady Michelle Obama as part of the White House’s programs to promote youth leadership and mentoring. Black is a prominent participant in The Glow Project, a philanthropy and documentary film project aimed at empowering women and helping them overcome seemingly-insurmountable goals. She has worked with the Literacy Partners and with American Legacy Foundation designing a public service campaign to encourage women to quit smoking. In 2009, the Preservation Resource Center of New Orleans presented its New Orleans Citizenship Award to Black for her leadership in donating time, resources, and volunteers to help New Orleans recover and rebuild post-Katrina.

Black is a graduate of Trinity College, Washington, D.C., and holds nine honorary degrees. Black grew up in Chicago and attended Catholic schools. She and her husband, the lawyer Tom Harvey, are longtime residents of Manhattan, where they raised their two sons and daughter.

New York Schools Chancellor Ends 8-Year Run
By SHARON OTTERMAN and JENNIFER MEDINA, NY TIMES, Nov. 9, 2010
LINK

Joel I. Klein, who presided over a radical reorganization of the New York City school system and drew praise and criticism for efforts to raise test scores and hold teachers accountable for them, resigned on Tuesday as chancellor after eight years in the job.

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg appointed Cathleen P. Black, the chairwoman of Hearst Magazines, as Mr. Klein’s successor. Ms. Black will be the first woman to head the nation’s largest school system, with a $23 billion budget, 135,000 employees and one million students.

The decision was also noteworthy for the fact that Ms. Black, 66, has no educational background, in keeping with Mr. Bloomberg’s preference for executives from the business world. Because of that, she will need a waiver from the State Education Department; Mr. Klein, who had also been a media executive, was granted one when he took over, in 2002.

Mr. Klein, who had long planned to serve only through two mayoral terms, mulled the decision for the last few months and in the past week landed a job as an executive vice president at News Corporation.

“The decision was whether to stay to the end or to give somebody else a chance,” he said in an interview. “I’m 64 years old now and want to have the opportunity to do something new.”

Mr. Klein can make many claims about the successes of his tenure, including rising test scores and graduation rates, and the initial makings of an objective system to evaluate teachers and schools.

The truth of those claims, and their chances of having a lasting impact, will be debated in the months and years to come. His detractors argue that the test scores were inflated, that parents went unheeded and that teachers were derided and marginalized.

But the very robustness of the debate is testament to the fact that Mr. Klein did deliver on a central promise: to challenge orthodoxies, shake up the status quo and risk dislike in the name of progress.

“Did he stir things up?” Mr. Bloomberg said Tuesday. “You betcha. That was the job, and the great beneficiaries of that stirring were our children.”

Mr. Klein benefited from two historic conditions. He was the first chancellor appointed by the mayor and, as such, was answerable only to him, which gave him power and security. And he was part of — and widely considered a leader in — a national effort for greater accountability in public education shared across partisan lines.

Mr. Klein said he made a final decision to join News Corporation in the last week, a hire that puts a respected official with Democratic credentials — he was a top antitrust lawyer in President Bill Clinton’s Justice Department — in the executive suite at Rupert Murdoch’s conservative-leaning news media giant. A person familiar with the negotiations at News Corporation said Mr. Klein would be charged with pursuing “entrepreneurial ventures” that cater to the educational marketplace.

Despite the mayor’s praise and an apparent deep admiration for Mr. Klein, one former senior Bloomberg administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he did not want to jeopardize his relationship with City Hall, said that many people in the mayor's bullpen were dissatisfied with Mr. Klein because “he’s been a political load for a while.”

One of the first concrete signs that Mr. Klein was not long for the job was the appointment of Sharon L. Greenberger as the Education Department’s chief operating officer in April — something that, according to the official, “was imposed over Joel’s objection.”

Mr. Klein will remain with the city until the end of the year to help with Ms. Black’s transition. In an interview Tuesday, Mr. Klein was clear about his accomplishments as chancellor. When he accepted the job, he was part of a rising educational reform movement that drew lessons from the corporate world, like increasing parent choice through innovations like charter schools, weakening traditional union protections like tenure and bringing numbers-based accountability to schools to evaluate and rank them and to improve teaching.

“It’s a much more performance-driven system, and a much more professional system, and less politicized than when I started,” Mr. Klein said.

With the mayor, he dismantled the unwieldy system of local control that created 32 school districts. Power was centralized in the central Department of Education office, relocated from Brooklyn next to City Hall to emphasize its importance. The city’s 1,000-plus principals were given unprecedented authority over large sections of their school budgets.

From nearly the day he started, Mr. Klein attacked the union’s core principles — seniority, tenure and a set pay scale. During the 2005 contract negotiations, he was able to end the long-standing practice of giving teachers with seniority the ability to select which schools to work in. But that decision created a pool of floating veteran teachers who received full salaries without a permanent position, costing the city tens of millions of dollars annually.

Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers and former head of the city’s teachers’ union, said that while she believed Mr. Klein was sincere in his efforts to improve student achievement, he had difficulty garnering support for his changes, both from educators as well as political leaders.

“Joel has a great intellect and did not suffer fools,” Ms. Weingarten said. “Sometimes what was lost was the ability to lead a great system in a way that you win the hearts and minds of the people who work in it and parents who send their kids there.”

In 2006, he introduced a system of A-to-F report cards, which rank most schools nearly exclusively on their progress on test scores. He chipped away at teacher pay based only on seniority, getting the union to agree to bonuses for schools that showed strong progress.

Some advocates and policy analysts said that Mr. Klein was a transformative force, turning the city’s public education system into something that people who had given up on it could believe in again. They said he welcomed talented educators to the back office and schools alike.

Joe Williams, executive director of Democrats for Education Reform, an advocacy group that supports charter schools and that has been often aligned with Mr. Klein, put it this way: “Joel Klein made public education sexy again.”

But Mr. Klein stumbled along the way, as when he adopted a reading curriculum of questionable efficacy early in his tenure only to reverse course after it did not produce good results.

Merryl Tisch, the chancellor of the State Board of Regents, frequently sparred with Mr. Klein — though largely privately — about his style of forcing change in the city. But Ms. Tisch said Mr. Klein successfully took a “dysfunctional system and gave it some management credibility.”

The city also benefited from Mr. Klein’s role as a national symbol of school reform, Ms. Tisch said, with private donors giving millions of dollars to help create new projects and experiments, like teacher performance bonuses and cash rewards for students who did well on exams.

“Joel will go down as one of the great urban educational reformers of this century,” Ms. Tisch said. “Not just because he fought hard fights, but he did it in New York City, which people had really written off.”

Yet, at every turn there was controversy. Schools were put under tremendous pressure to raise graduation rates or face closings. There was widespread concern that principals were inflating their numbers by granting credits to undeserving students.

“He is leaving us with a legacy of classroom overcrowding, communities fighting over co-located schools, kindergarten waiting lists, unreliable school grades based on bad data, substandard credit recovery programs and our children starved of art, music and science — all replaced with test prep,” said Leonie Haimson, the head of Class Size Matters, an advocacy group and a critic of Mr. Klein’s.

The opposition was further emboldened when the state announced this summer that the test scores on which Mr. Klein’s accountability system hinged were inflated because the exams had grown too easy to pass.

A correction brought test scores nearly back to the starting levels of the mayor’s tenure, replacing a narrative of historic gains with one of slow progress.

While Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Klein said their achievements — opening 470 new schools, and raising graduation rates by 20 percent, for example — were beyond question, they acknowledged that there was much more to be done.

Asked whether he will be remembered as a divisive leader, Mr. Klein said, “I didn’t think you could make big changes to a $22 billion system — close down schools, hold people accountable, reward excellence — without pushback and controversy.”

“People will remember me differently,” he added. “They will remember me as a man who was committed to changing an educational system that was failing vast numbers of people. This was the most comprehensive school reform that has happened in this country.”

Reporting was contributed by Jack Begg, David W. Chen, Javier C. Hernandez, Fernanda Santos and Brian Stelter.

The American Arbitration Association and NYC Bar Association Present a Panel of Diverse Arbitrators

....some of whom have been chosen to work on 3020-a hearings in New York City: Gaines, Rosario, and Watanabe.

AAA-NYC Bar Program Focused on New, Diverse Arbitrators
LINK


June 14, 2010 -- The American Arbitration Association and the Association of the Bar of the City of New York recently presented a program that introduced new and diverse arbitrators to the labor and employment community.

Meet & Greet

The program, held May 24th in New York, drew about 200 advocates and arbitrators. "Our goal was to showcase the expertise of new women and minority arbitrators," said Jeffrey T. Zaino, vice president, AAA Labor, Employment, and Elections Division. He is also chair of the Increasing Diversity Among Arbitrators Subcommittee of the Labor and Employment Committee of the New York City Bar.
The program presented a unique panel discussion featuring six new neutrals:

* Deborah Gaines (arbitrator, mediator, fact finder)

* William F. Hempfling (arbitrator, mediator)

* Ruth M. Moskovitch (arbitrator, fact finder, and adjunct professor at Baruch College and City University of New York) [Ms. Moskovich quit the NYC 3020-a panel spring, 2010]

* Wendy G. Phillips (arbitrator, attorney, and administrative law judge at the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance)

* Haydee Rosario (arbitrator, mediator)

* Roy N. Watanabe (arbitrator, mediator)

All but one of the panelists belong to the AAA roster, with five years or less of experience as neutrals. They all specialize in the labor field. Richard Adelman, a labor and employment arbitrator with over 40 years of experience, moderated the program.

During the program, four arbitration-case scenarios involving termination and other labor and employment issues were presented. At the end of each scenario, the arbitrators were asked whether they would uphold the termination or grant the grievance. They then displayed either a "yes" or a "no" card, and explained their rulings. The program also included a networking reception.

"We were thrilled with such a large turnout. There is certainly an interest in seeing the next generation of arbitrators," said Zaino. The AAA and the New York City Bar plan to present more programs highlighting the skills and expertise of new arbitrators. Programs in New York or New Jersey are being planned for later this year and 2011.

The 3020-a Arbitration Process: FAQs

Teacher Tenure Hearing (3020a)

1. Are hearings held before a hearing officer or a panel?
Disciplinary charges brought by an employing board against a tenured employee are heard by a single hearing officer except when the charges concern pedagogical incompetence or issues involving pedagogical judgement. In these cases only, the employee may choose to have the charges heard by either a single hearing officer or a three-member panel.

2. What types of changes are considered pedagogical?
While the term "pedagogical" is not defined in either the statute or the Commissioner's Regulations, charges that fall into that category include inability to control a class, failure to prepare required lesson plans, failure to maintain certification, and other matters that directly pertain to teaching techniques and issues of this nature. Go to top

3. Who provides the list of Hearing Officers?
The American Arbitration Association (AAA) maintains the panel of potential hearing officers for Section 3020-a proceedings. This association also provides a list for each individual proceeding.

4. Is there a fee associated with requesting a hearing?
The AAA is a non profit organization which relies on administrative fees to continue providing services. Commissioner's Regulations as amended by the Board of Regents in September 1994 stipulate that the fee for providing the list of potential hearing officers for Section 3020-a proceedings is to be paid by the School District preferring the charges. This fee is $150.00. If the parties are unable to mutually select a hearing officer and request that the AAA make the selection, an additional fee of $50.00 will be required. Go to top

5. When is a hearing commenced?
Under the law, a hearing is commenced when the State Education Department submits a request to AAA for a list of potential hearing officers.

6. As a taxpayer, don't I have the right to know if a teacher in our school has been brought up on charges?
Section 3020-a provides an avenue for resolving disciplinary issues between an employer and an employing board. Until an individual has been found guilty by a hearing officer or hearing panel, all aspects of the disciplinary proceeding are strictly confidential. If the employee is found to be guilty of one or more of the charges, the record is then available pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law.

7. What if I don't want anyone on the list of hearing officers that was provided by AAA?
A list of potential hearing officers is compiled by the American Arbitration Association and forwarded to the attorneys representing the employing board and the employee, or to the employee if he or she is not so represented. A fee of $100 is paid by the board for such list. The list consists of fifteen individuals who are qualified to serve as hearing officers under the law.

In the interests of expediting these proceedings, it has been determined that one list will be provided per case. If the parties are unable to mutually select an arbitrator, AAA will make the selection from the list of fifteen that has been provided.

8. How do I get to be on the list?
The American Arbitration Association maintains the list of individuals who are qualified to serve as hearing officers. Contact the Syracuse office of AAA at (315) 472-5483 for information.

Qualification Criteria for Employment Arbitrators (AAA)
 
Employment Arbitration Rules and Mediation
 
Delaying Tactics in Arbitration
 
Labor, Employment and Elections Update
 

Judicial Independence Question: 3 Judges In Iowa Voted Out Of Office

Most disturbing results of election 2010

LINK

In one of Tuesday's most disturbing election results, the losing candidates didn't even have opponents.

Three justices of the Iowa Supreme Court lost what is ordinarily a pro forma election to retain their seats. Not coincidentally, these justices were part of last year's unanimous ruling to strike down a state law defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Outside groups opposed to same-sex marriage, including the National Organization for Marriage and the American Family Association, poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into television ads and other efforts to deny them a new term.

"Activist judges on Iowa's Supreme Court have become political, ignoring the will of voters and imposing same-sex marriage on Iowa," said one commercial. "Liberal, out-of-control judges ignoring our traditional values and legislating from the bench.... Send them a message. Vote no on retention of Supreme Court justices."

Well, message sent -- and that is the problem. The Iowa vote is part of a larger phenomenon of the increasing politicization of judicial elections: more money, more attack ads, more intervention by outside groups, from trial lawyers to business interests.

This is an unavoidable result of states' decisions to give voters a say in judicial selection, whether through direct election of judges or retention votes. In 22 states, judges on the highest state court are chosen through elections and then either stand for re-election or face retention votes.

In another 16 states, high court judges are chosen in some other way, but voters weigh in on keeping them. Some of the most prominent champions of judicial independence, including retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, have pointed to this approach -- merit selection coupled with retention election -- as a model for insulating the judiciary for undue political influence.

But the 2010 campaign illustrates the downside of judicial accountability and the threat of growing politicization of retention elections. In Illinois, where Supreme Court justices are chosen through elections and then subject to a retention vote, the decision about whether to keep incumbent Chief Justice Thomas Kilbride turned into a multimillion-dollar battle in the wake of Kilbride's vote to overturn a state law limiting damages in medical malpractice suits. Kilbride won.

You might look at the Iowa results as a reasonable illustration of accountability in action. After all, what's the point of building in accountability unless you're willing to let voters hold judges accountable? But there is also a difference between giving voters the opportunity to remove judges who behave in inappropriate or unethical ways and letting retention elections turn into referendums on unpopular rulings. The courts may follow the election returns, but I don't want judges making rulings with an eye on their own electoral fortunes.

I happen to agree with the Iowa court's same-sex marriage decision, but I hope I'd feel the same way if the court had ruled in the opposite direction and gay rights groups fought to remove them. I vehemently disagree with the U.S. Supreme Court's campaign finance ruling in the Citizens United case, but those who suggest the impeachment of Chief Justice John Roberts for that decision are even more off-base than the critics of the Iowa justices. Oregon Democratic Rep. Peter DeFazio told The Huffington Post that he was "investigating articles of impeachment against Justice Roberts for perjuring during his Senate hearings, where he said he wouldn't be a judicial activist." DeFazio can't be serious.

There is an inherent tension between independence and accountability. When it comes to the judges -- and when judicial activism is in the eye of the beholder -- the system needs to be rigged, as the founders wisely did, in favor of independence.

Conservatives love "results oriented judges" they agree with

The UFT Dies By Its' Own Hand

Note from Betsy Combier:

I worked for the UFT for three years as an advocate for members. I tried to stop the decline of this powerful entity, but I was never 'accepted' by the chiefs of the Union as one of "them" and tortured after Randi's departure to Washington.

 The April 15 agreement signed by Mike Mulgrew and Joel Klein is a fake, published to keep the public quiet about how $millions of dollars of public money are being spent on an absurd process of removing employees from the New York public school system that is not based on fact or law.

Indeed, the day of the announcement I received a call at home from the principal of a rubber room (each of the 8 'rubber rooms' had a 'principal' who watched over the room(s) at that location for the NYC DOE) at 8:15AM and he told me to get to a rubber room quickly, as the UFT was making an announcement about closing the rooms. Not one representative of the UFT told me about this agreement or the press conference announcing the so-called "end of the rubber rooms" (which everyone knew was not true). This was strange as I was specifically hired to work with the members placed into re-assignment centers ( as well as still working in their schools). Later that day we had our monthly meeting at the UFT with all the reps., liaisons from all the rubber rooms and district offices, and Co-Staff Director (and Secretary of the Unity Caucus) Leroy Barr told me that he "forgot" to tell me about the agreement, sorry.

So, what did I do then? I read the agreement and was alarmed  enough to start asking questions about how the rights of members to due process were protected. I was told that I was a great advocate, but the UFT didnt need me anymore. Bye.

They were right. The UFT does not need, nor do they want, someone helping members if it means going against the NYC Board of Education in any way. I think its time to look more closely at the people who take members' dues out of every paycheck. Full disclosure: I am not bitter at all that I no longer work at the UFT, thus I will write about the staff as information, not as revenge. I write what I see. I will start profiling staff members on this blog very soon.

I might suggest that each member consider calling the UFT Welfare Fund and removing your payment of dues to the UFT - not to your welfare/benefits - from your paycheck. You can still keep your benefits, but why keep paying dues if the people who are getting paid megabucks dont do anything to help you?

Here is the April 15 press release of the UFT, with another copy of the April 15 agreement:

City and UFT reach breakthrough agreement to eliminate “rubber rooms”



Streamlined disciplinary process to return good teachers to the classroom and provide for efficient removal of others from payroll
LINK
For immediate release
published April 15, 2010

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein and UFT President Michael Mulgrew on April 15 announced a landmark agreement to eliminate temporary reassignment centers, or “rubber rooms,” where teachers accused of misconduct or incompetence are assigned pending resolution of their cases. Under the new agreement, most teachers accused of misconduct or incompetence will be assigned to perform administrative work in Department of Education offices or given non-classroom duties in their schools while their cases are resolved.



“Despite everything we've accomplished together to improve our City's public schools, we still have major reforms and improvements to tackle — and that is exactly what we are doing,” Mayor Bloomberg said. “Fixing this broken process gets us all back to what we want to be doing, giving our kids the education the need and deserve.”


“The rubber rooms are a symptom of a disciplinary process that has not worked for anyone — not the kids, not the schools, and not the teachers,” UFT President Mulgrew said. “This agreement is designed to get teachers out of the rubber rooms and to ensure that they do not have to wait for months or years to have their cases heard.”


“The rubber rooms were the result of a broken and protracted teacher discipline process. This deal goes a long way in improving the way the union and the department deal with teachers accused of and charged with wrongdoings,” Chancellor Klein said. “We are committed to adhering to the timetables outlined in the new agreement and confident that in the end our kids will benefit from this better process.”


There currently are some 550 teachers assigned to these rubber rooms, costing the city $30 million each year. Using this new process, cases that once may have lasted several years will now be resolved within a few months. After removing a teacher from the classroom, the department will have 10 days to file incompetence charges or 60 days to file misconduct charges depending on the nature of the case.


If reassigned teachers investigated for misconduct are not charged within the 60-day window, they will be returned to their classrooms. Similarly, teachers accused of incompetence who are not charged within 10 days of reassignment will also return to their schools. Investigations can continue after a teacher is back in the classroom, however, and the teacher may still face charges.


In some “non-termination” cases where the department is seeking a suspension at reduced or no pay, the agreement allows the department to use an expedited, three-day disciplinary process.


Additionally, the agreement expands the list of charges for which the department can suspend teachers without pay following a probable cause hearing to include violent felony crimes. When charges are not substantiated against educators, they will be entitled to back pay.


Under the new agreement, the number of arbitrators will increase from 23 to 39, and arbitrators will now hear incompetence charges seven days a month rather than five. Additional arbitrators will be hired to hear non-termination cases in the expedited disciplinary process.


While the agreement will not take effect until September at the start of the 2010-2011 school year, the department and UFT have agreed to begin immediately addressing the backlog of cases of teachers now in rubber rooms, with the goal of resolving all current cases by December.


The provisions of this agreement will be enforceable under the grievance procedures of the UFT contract. Read the full agreement.
Support for United Federation of Teachers eroding as once-mighty union forced to make concessions

BY Meredith Kolodner and Rachel Monahan, DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS
Monday, November 1st 2010, 5:13 AM
LINK

Michael Mulgrew and John Liu, NYC Comptroller

In the recent blowup over the release of teacher ratings, the United Federation of Teachers couldn't even rely on the Democratic White House for support.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan sided with the city - the latest blow to the once-mighty union, which has seen public support dwindle and has been forced to make concessions unthinkable just a few years ago.

Teachers unions were painted as villains in the high-profile education documentary "Waiting for Superman."

And the competition for millions of dollars in federal Race to the Top funds promoted reforms traditionally opposed by the unions, like charter schools and teacher evaluations linked to test scores.

"Public sentiment clearly has shifted in favor of reform and accountability, and the union has had to adjust," said Schools Chancellor Joel Klein.

Although some observers applaud the UFT for changing with the times, others suggest the compromises are eating away at its power.

"Definitely, the union is much weaker," said Sol Stern of the Manhattan Institute, often a critic of both the union and the Bloomberg administration. "It's a fad - the union is the obstacle to school reform."

Other critics say the union hasn't necessarily lost power but is under attack.

"I think it's a more controversial force. I don't think it's less of a force," said Kathy Wylde, CEO of the Partnership for New York City and a supporter of merit pay and eliminating tenure. "Is there a demonization of the teachers union? Yes."

Education expert Diane Ravitch points to a nationwide movement against the unions, starting at the White House, which supported the firing of the entire staff of a Rhode Island high school.

"President Obama and Secretary Duncan have undercut the political power of teachers unions and made common cause with their critics, to the point of demoralizing many, many teachers, not just their unions, across the nation," she said.

Union supporters note that the UFT has won 43% raises since the mayor was elected - a substantial victory.

UFT President Michael Mulgrew argues the Bloomberg administration's approach to reform has strengthened the union by aligning teachers with parents and community groups.

"Education's at a major crossroads," he said.

"It is our belief that teachers should be the ones leading the change. Our battle is to make sure schools don't get turned into test prep factories."

And he insists the union is still politically powerful, with candidates seeking endorsements and advocates asking for help in securing policy changes. Mulgrew also said that he got a good deal for teachers in the Race to the Top legislation.

Although other states made test scores count for 50% of teacher evaluations, New York State test results account for 25% of evaluations, thanks to UFT clout.

Even some of teachers unions' fiercest critics agree it's much too early to write their epitaph.

"Having witnessed the defeat of [D.C.] Mayor Adrian Fenty and the successful lawsuit against school closings in New York City, it's crystal-clear that the union is still plenty powerful," said Eva Moskowitz, founder and chief executive officer of the Success Charter Network.

mkolodner@nydailynews.com

FAQs About The New Teacher and Principal Evaluation Law (Education Law 3012-c)

From: Michael Mulgrew mmulgrew@uft.org
To:
Sent: Tue, May 11, 2010 8:21 pm
Subject: Union and state create new teacher evaluation and improvement plan

Dear Colleague,

On Monday, the UFT, NYSUT and the State Education Department reached a new agreement — subject to legislative approval — to create a teacher evaluation and improvement plan.

As we all know, the current evaluation system is too subjective and too dependent on the whims of administrators. We also know many so-called reformers have long fought to base evaluations solely on test scores, something that we have adamantly opposed.

We have long sought an evaluation process based on multiple measures. We were emphatic on that point, as well as the necessity of teacher voice in the process.

Under the new agreement, which would take effect in September 2011, the majority of an individual’s evaluation is based on qualitative measures that may include observations, student portfolios and projects.

If a teacher is identified as ineffective, there will now be a genuine teacher improvement process to support his or her professional growth before any disciplinary action is taken. This is an unprecedented requirement in an evaluation system.

This new process will allow the rest of the state to follow the rubber room agreement we recently reached for those facing incompetence charges.

Here’s what you need to know:

This process is much more objective than the current process.
This process includes much more teacher voice.
This process includes a true teacher improvement plan.
This process limits the emphasis on standardized tests.

Michael Mulgrew
United Federation of Teachers • A Union of Professionals
52 Broadway, New York, NY 10004 • 1-212-777-7500 
 
Questions and Answers Related to Collective Bargaining Agreements and the New Comprehensive Teacher and Principal Evaluation Law (Education law §3012-c as added by Chapter 103 of the Laws of 2010)
LINK


1. Q. What is the effective date of Education Law §3012-c?

A. Education Law §3012-c, which establishes a new statewide comprehensive evaluation system for classroom teachers and building principals based on multiple measures of effectiveness, takes effect July 1, 2010. However, the law provides for a phase-in of the new comprehensive evaluation system, including prescribed student achievement measures, beginning with the 2011-2012 school year.

2. Q. What is the phase-in schedule under the law?

A. The law provides for a phase-in of the new evaluation system and percentage of student achievement measures as follows:

2011-2012 school year

The system will apply to classroom teachers in the common branch subjects or ELA and math in grades 4-8 and to school principals in buildings in which these teachers are employed. 20 percent of the evaluation shall be based upon student growth data on State assessments or comparable measures, and 20 percent shall be based on other locally-selected measures that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms in accordance with standards prescribed by the Commissioner.

2012-2013 school year and subsequent years before the Board of Regents approval of a value-added model:

The new evaluation system will apply to all classroom teachers and building principals. 20 percent of the evaluation shall be based upon student growth data on State assessments or comparable measures, and 20 percent shall be based on other locally-selected measures that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms in accordance with standards prescribed by the Commissioner.

Subsequent years following Regents approval of a value-added model for all classroom teachers and principals:

Upon adoption of a value-added model, all classroom teachers and building principals will be required to be evaluated in accordance with the following: 25 percent of the evaluation shall be based upon student growth data on State assessments or comparable measures, and 15 percent on other locally selected measures that are rigorous and comparable across classrooms in accordance with standards prescribed by the Commissioner.

The remaining 60 percent of the evaluations and ratings would be based on locally developed measures that meet standards prescribed by the Commissioner.

Relationship of the New Law to Existing Agreements

3. Q. What is the relationship of the new law to evaluation provisions contained in existing collective bargaining agreements? What are the immediate obligations of school districts and BOCES?

A. Education Law §3012-c requires that all collective bargaining agreements for teachers and building principals entered into after July 1, 2010 be consistent with its provisions. It further provides that any conflicting provisions of collective bargaining agreements in effect on July 1, 2010 are not abrogated and remain in effect until there is a successor agreement. In such case, upon entry into a successor agreement, the provisions of Education Law §3012-c apply and the successor agreement must be consistent with the provisions of this section. For example, a successor agreement cannot require that only 15% of all classroom teachers’ evaluations be based on student growth on State assessments. This would be inconsistent with Education Law §3012-c.

4. Q. What if my district’s or BOCES’ collective bargaining agreement is effective for three more years? Does the law permit us to modify the evaluation provisions of our contract sooner?

A. Yes. The law specifically permits districts, BOCES and their local collective bargaining agents to re-negotiate the evaluation provisions in their collective bargaining agreements at any time. It is also possible for a school district or BOCES and their respective teachers’ or principals’ union to enter into agreements outside their collective bargaining contract to re-negotiate their evaluation process to be consistent with the provisions of Education Law §3012-c. The Department strongly encourages parties with ongoing contracts to consider re-negotiating any inconsistent provisions in their agreements as soon as possible to hasten statewide implementation of the new evaluation system.

Incorporating the Provisions of the New Law Into Agreements

5. Q. If a school district or BOCES’ collective bargaining agreement expires after July 1, 2010, how should the provisions of the new law be incorporated, particularly when implementing regulations have not yet been developed?

A. As noted above, any new collective bargaining agreements must be consistent with the provisions of the new law.

6. Q. Do new contracts need to reference all the provisions of the new law, i.e., percentages relating to teacher and principal effectiveness and student growth?

A. No. New collective bargaining agreements do not need to reference all the provisions of the new law. The new agreements and any evaluation system for teachers and principals, however, shall not be inconsistent with the provisions of Education Law 3012-c.

7. Q. Must agreements negotiated after July 1, 2010, include provisions linking teacher and principal evaluations and ratings to supplemental compensation?

A. Pursuant to Education Law section 3012-c all collective bargaining agreements applicable to classroom teachers and building principals entered into after July 1, 2010 shall be consistent with the new law. The law requires that the new evaluations be a significant factor for employment decisions, including, but not limited to promotion, retention, tenure determination, termination and supplemental compensation as well as teacher and principal professional development. What this means is that any new agreements entered into after this date must allow for the new teacher and principal evaluations to be a significant factor in employment decisions, including, but not limited to, supplemental compensation, in accordance with the phase in schedule required by the law.

8. Q. What happens if my district’s or BOCES’ collective bargaining agreement expires after July 1, 2010, but contract negotiations are stalled and a new agreement cannot be reached?

A. Education Law §3012-c provides that any inconsistent provisions in an agreement in effect on July 1, 2010 continue until entry into a successor agreement. While contractprovisions may not be abrogated during this period, districts and BOCES must continue to abide by the applicable provisions of the APPR regulation (see below).

Interplay Between New Law (Education Law §3012-c) and Existing APPR Regulation (8 NYCRR §100.2[o])

9. Q. How does the new law relate to §100.2(o) of the Commissioner’s regulations governing the Annual Professional Performance Review (APPR) of teachers? Are school districts and BOCES required to comply with §100.2(o) of the Commissioner’s regulations governing the APPR of teachers for the 2010-2011 school year?

A. The new statewide evaluation system established by section 3012-c builds on, not eliminates, the existing APPR regulations. Specifically, Education Law §3012-c(3) provides:

Nothing in this section shall be construed to excuse school districts or boards of cooperative educational services from complying with the standards set forth in the regulations of the commissioner for conducting annual professional performance reviews of classroom teachers or principals, including but not limited to required quality rating categories, in conducting evaluations prior to July first, two thousand eleven, or, for classroom teachers or principals subject to paragraph (c) of subdivision two of this section, prior to July 1, two thousand twelve.

Therefore, school districts and BOCES must comply with the requirements in §100.2(o) of the Commissioner’s regulations for all classroom teachers prior to July 1, 2011 and thereafter as the provisions of the new law phase in. In other words, even during the first year of the new comprehensive statewide system (i.e. 2011-2012), school districts and BOCES must comply with the applicable provisions of §100.2(o) for all classroom teachers, even for those whom the new statutory system has not yet phased in. In effect, during the phase-in of the new system, districts and BOCES will be operating a dual system of evaluations.

Recent amendments to §100.2(o) apply to all classroom teacher evaluations conducted on or after July 1, 2011. Among other things, the revised APPR regulations require that annual evaluations incorporate student growth and use four prescribed rating categories (highly effective, effective, developing and ineffective). As noted above, these provisions will be effective for all classroom teachers beginning July 1, 2011 as the new law phases in. Companion regulations for principals are currently under consideration.

Additional amendments to the Commissioner’s regulations to incorporate the new statutory system will be required following a process which will consider input from a newly formed teacher and principal effectiveness advisory committee (Regents Task Force on Teacher and Principal Effectiveness). It is anticipated that those amendments will be considered by the Board of Regents in early spring 2011.

10. Q. Can a school district or BOCES still seek a variance from the requirements set forth in §100.2(o) of the Commissioner’s regulations?

A. Yes, limited variances continue to be available. Section 100.2(o)(2)(vi) of the Commissioner’s regulations provide:

1. A variance shall be granted from a requirement of this paragraph, upon a finding by the commissioner that a school district or BOCES has executed prior to May 1, 2010, an agreement negotiated pursuant to article 14 of the Civil Service Law whose terms continue in effect and are inconsistent with such requirement.

2. A variance shall be granted from the criteria for the evaluation of teachers providing instructional services, prescribed in subclause (iv)(b)(1) of this paragraph, upon a finding by the commissioner that the school district or BOCES has demonstrated that a local model for the evaluation of such teachers has produced successful results.

Therefore, a school district or BOCES may be granted a variance from certain provisions of §100.2(o) if the Commissioner finds that a provision in a collective bargaining agreement executed prior to May 1, 2010 is inconsistent with a requirement in the regulation. Any such variance would only be effective until the school district or BOCES enters into a successor agreement. As noted above, all agreements entered into after July 1, 2010 must be consistent with the new law and incorporate its provisions.

A variance permitting a local model for the evaluation of teachers will continue to be available up through June 30, 2011. At that point, as the new law phases in, variances will need to be restricted to situations that are not inconsistent with the provisions of the law. It is anticipated that the variance provisions in §100.2(o) may be further revised in future regulatory amendments.

Teaching Standards and Evaluation Resources

Shocking Statistics On U.S. Education

10 Shocking Stats on the State of U.S. Education

November 1st, 2010
LINK

Like everything created and operated by fallible humans, the American education system boasts some impressive strengths but lags behind with some rather egregious offenses. Studies persistently become available that shed light on the positives and the negatives, allowing teachers, administrators and parents a look at what factors need some serious tweaking. Ignoring the issues means compromising students’ abilities to succeed in college (should they elect to attend) and careers alike. By no means comprehensive, this list points out some of the more surprising statistics available – so be sure to explore other research for a much broader glimpse at what goes down in the nation’s schools; not to mention the impact on society on the whole.

1. Twenty-two percent of American adults are considered illiterate: Intensive testing by the National Center for Education Statistics in 2003 revealed that 22% of American adults displayed "below basic" literacy. The study did not include those with Alzheimer’s or other cognitive or learning disorders, and they noted discrepancies based on sex, race and education level. Adults with a high school education or higher understandably scored higher than those who ended in elementary or middle school. Theories abound over why this is allowed to happen, and many attribute it to apathetic teachers passing kids with inadequate reading comprehension skills just to get them out of their classrooms. Many believe that parents form the first line of defense against illiteracy and shoulder the responsibility of teaching their children to read. Others blame internet and text message-speak for the degradation of the English language. Whatever the source, which likely varies from case to case, the citizens of the United States must work harder to ensure that every child leaves the education system capable of basic reading and comprehension skills.

2. Forty-three percent and 53% of eighth graders receive inadequate music and visual arts educations, respectively: For most Americans, knowing that on an NAEP from 0 to 300, students scored between 105 and 194 on music assessments and between 104 and 193 on the visual art equivalent seems like a trifle. After all, schools tend to emphasize math, science and athletics at the expense of most other subjects. When institutions need to scale back their budgets, the visual and performing arts usually take the heaviest hits. In reality, a well-rounded education means balancing logical, analytic and objective disciplines with the creative, abstract and subjective. Music and its mathematical constructs make for an especially viable bridge between the two. Ignoring the importance of all arts means students graduate with incomplete skill sets — certainly a handicap when searching for colleges and employers who value creativity and improvisation. So yes, these statistics should be extremely disconcerting to parents and educators alike. Much more horrifying than knowing that the football team won’t be getting shiny new jerseys this year.

3. Around 57% of preschool-aged children are enrolled in center-based daycare programs: Daycare centers and preschools offer harried parents a convenient way to keep their kids safe while they tend to work, but the advantages extend beyond that. Those genuinely concerned with the well-being of their clients provide appropriate educational toys, games and activities as a means of granting them a head start in their academic careers — especially when it comes to reading and math. Considering around 90% of a child’s brain development occurs before the age of 5, this definitely puts this 57% at an advantage once they enroll in kindergarten. In addition to nurturing their educations, daycare providers also facilitate socializing at an early age, teaching children an awareness of and ability to relate with their peers. Certainly skills they need to succeed in school and business!

4. Only 73.2% of students graduate from high school on time: As of the last data aggregation from the class of 2005-06, anyways — though the number has likely fluctuated little in 2010. Every dropout or student who repeats a grade has their own personal reason for their status, and almost all of them possess enough self-awareness to know how their decisions may negatively impact the future. At least half of those who never complete high school made the decision because they felt disengaged and bored with classes, though serious illness, unexpected parenthood, caretaking and failing grades also contribute heavily to the dropout rate as well. There will always be students who either never graduate or take longer than four years, of course, but knowing that so many quit on account of apathy offers up a massive challenge to educators. Finding creative ways to capture student attention without compromising the ultimate lesson can certainly solve a major component of the issue at hand.

5. Forty-seven percent of female and 38% of male teenagers understand proper birth control methods: Said comprehension of practicing safe sex comes either courtesy of parents, school or both. Both sexes seem to equally understand the dangers of contracting an STD or STI, yet young women typically know much more about the proper methods of preventing them — and unwanted pregnancies. Considering worldwide efforts to stop the spread of AIDS and HIV, the fact that only two-thirds of American teenagers know anything about prophylactics whatsoever is beyond jarring. It seems as if abstinence-only approaches and their "Just Say No!" tactics give curious kids an incomplete picture of sex that could lead to irreversible consequences. Yes, abstinence is the only strategy for a 100% avoidance of diseases and babies. But that information won’t help the 38.9% of students who already do not use condoms during intercourse — probably because nobody ever taught them how. Only well-rounded, objective discussions that never purposely circumnavigate certain corners can help prevent such risky behaviors.

6. Nineteen-point-nine percent of students are bullied on campus: The CDC’s survey on risky youth behavior reveals that 19.9% of American high school students have been forced to deal with bullying at school. While educational institutions may not always have the resources for addressing cyberbullying, they can make a better effort to prevent and stop it on campus. This does place many schools at an impasse, though, especially considering the spate of GLBTQIA teens unfairly mocked for their gender identity or sexual orientation. Unfortunately, local parents who distort religion in order to promote hate make it difficult for administrators to promote the tolerance and harmony needed to seriously cut back on verbal, physical, emotional and mental abuse. Stricter policies for dealing with perpetrators and the avoidance of victim-blaming need implementing, but this does put the poor kid on the receiving end at the risk of escalated torture. Faculty and staff members must also keep a sharper eye out for suspicious behavior and direct both the bullies and the bullied towards the proper mental health channels.

7. Thirteen-point-eight percent of students have seriously considered suicide: Ten-point-nine percent of them went through with making the preparations, 6.3% actually attempted and 1.9% needed medical treatment as a result. Not all of these instances necessarily stemmed from bullying, either. An estimated 20% of teenagers suffer from depression before entering adulthood. Most schools do offer counseling services for students, but prevailing social stigmas against pursuing psychological help prevent them from receiving the intervention they desperately need. Some states provide outreach to educational institutions with free materials on caring for mentally ill teenagers — regardless of whether or not they experience suicidal thoughts. Concerned parents, faculty, staff and students should work towards encouraging teenagers who need help to schedule a meeting with their school counselor or psychologist. Despite what the vocal ignorant dictate, strength lay in admitting weakness and actively pursuing treatment; not in denying its existence and allowing issues to fester forever until they boil over.

8. An average of 5% of students want to avoid school for fear of violence: Race, socioeconomic bracket, gender, sexual identity and placement in a public or private school all factor into a students’ reticence to show up for class, though the total 2007 average sat at 5%. This is an improvement over the 12% surveyed between 1995 and 2007, but no percentage of children should consider a house of education a frightful place. An average of 7% of students did not hope to avoid school altogether, but they made it a point to stay away from specific classes or areas where they felt unsafe. Many of them suffer from the persistent threat of general violence, whether from gang activity, ignorant bullies, shootings or some other source — though females especially have to guard themselves against the threat of sexual assault and rape.

9. Six percent of high school students have possessed weapons on campus: Unfortunately, the National Center for Education Statistics did not include survey questions on motivation for carrying weaponry to school. Eighteen percent of high school students, however, confessed to the habit of always keeping something on their person at all times. Regardless of whether or not they lug around a gun or a knife for self-defense or far more sinister purposes, there’s really no place for them on school grounds. If most bring them on campus in order to protect themselves from harm, then faculty and staff members have to seriously contemplate solutions to quell the violent, aggressive behavior. Some of the more dangerous ones out there have taken to installing metal detectors and security cameras, but not all of them can afford such measures. Others perform random or routine bag searches in order to catch any contraband. Unfortunately, such things do not entirely deter violence — the only way to really end such things is to chip away at the broader systemic functions that allow it to occur. Not exactly a realistic undertaking.

10. Thirty-five percent of students have seen hate-related graffiti at school: And 10% have reported hearing some sort of hateful slur hurled in their direction. Such actions certainly fall under the heading of bullying, and the same solutions apply — though eradicating hate and ignorance is about as easy as curing AIDS and widespread hunger. In 2007, 5% of students answered that the harmful words spewed on them specifically targeted their race, 3% their ethnicity, 2% their religion or gender and 1% their sexual orientation or disability. Females were more likely to receive gender-based insults, whereas males were slapped with more racial and ethnic slurs.

3020-a, NYSUT, and NYS Social Services Law 419

In the discussion of wrong-doing by Mike Bloomberg, Joel Klein, and Mike Mulgrew (and, of course, not keeping me at the UFT to pursue the Teacher Advocacy Initiative that I presented to you), there has not been adequate discussion of the malpractice of NYSUT as the Attorneys do not adequately defend their clients, at least in the New York City 3020-a.

Full disclosure: over the past 7 years I have attended 3020-a hearings as a member of the public, and I have met several NYSUT Attorneys who I like personally. My reporting on the process that is used at 3020-a should not be seen as a personal attack on any NYSUT Attorney, as many of the NYSUT Attorneys are very nice people. My writing about the 3020-a process focuses on injustice, wherever and whoever carries this forward. In some instances I specifically point to what I consider a pattern and practice of 'misconduct', as in the cases of Melinda Gordon and Mitch Rubenstein, and I will continue to report on what I consider inappropriate behavior of any hired person, NYSUT, NYC DOE, CSA member, it doesn't matter. Hey, this is my blog, after all. I document what I see, hear and read.

One of the reasons why I have volunteered seven years of my life to observing 3020-a hearings (teachers brought to 3020-a are entitled to an open and public hearing under the contract) is to see what defense NYSUT provides to random and arbitrary charges against tenured personnel. The defense is seldom adequate.

I'll give you an example of what I mean:
Teachers often are charged with misconduct that stems from their whistleblowing some act of a principal, such as abuse of a student in the school, theft of PTA money, etc. The cases of David Pakter and Hipolito Colon are clearly whistleblower retaliation cases.

NYSUT attorneys do not bring up all the misconduct of a principal/assistant principal but defend the client based upon the act charged, not what else may be going on, like child abuse, theft, etc. by the principal/AP. This leaves the arbitrator to rule that the principal has no motive to target the teacher/respondent, and then will substantiate the charge against the teacher/respondent. I do not know of an instance where the assigned NYSUT Attorney defended the actions of the client in reporting a principal by using New York State Social Services Law 419.

 Here is the relevant clause in NYS Social Services Law 419:

"Legal Protections for Mandated Reporters: What Protection or Liability Do I Have?

Source Confidentiality

The Social Service Law provides confidentiality for mandated reporters and all sources of child abuse and maltreatment reports. OCFS and local CPS are not permitted to release to the subject of the report any data that would identify the source of a report unless the source has given written permission to do so. Information regarding the source of the report may be shared with court officials, police, and district attorneys but only in certain circumstances.


Immunity from Liability


If a mandated reporter makes a report with earnest concern for the welfare of a child, he or she is immune from any criminal or civil liability that might result. This is referred to a making a report in "good faith".


Penalties for Failure to Report


Anyone who is mandated to report suspected child abuse or maltreatment - and fails to do so - could be charged with a Class A misdemeanor and subject to criminal penalties. Further, mandated reporters can be sued in a civil court for monetary damages for any harm caused by the mandated reporter's failure to make the report to the SCR.

Therefore if you are a mandated reporter and you know of misconduct of a principal/AP, report it, but NOT to OSI or SCI, the two agencies that will charge you for revealing what is going on at the school and cover up what you have reported. If you see child abuse or suspect it, report this to your principal as you are mandated to do, but also secretly report this to the State Agencies cited above.

Document your report with all the information sent by email, hard copy, or recorded by you (if it is a telephone call). You should tape all your conversations with the DOE or OSI, SCI investigators. In New York State you can secretly record anyone with whom you are in a conversation. Keep copies of everything.

Hope I've scared you enough.

Happy Halloween everybody!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Betsy Combier

No Teacher Data For Re-assigned Teachers

Hola Mr. Klein!

On friday I was contacted by a teacher who was recently re-assigned and will be charged under 3020-a for incompetence. He made the mistake of signing up for PIP+, so he is now on the termination track.

He asked me why he could not get any evaluation data on his performance from the New York City Board of Education, and why he could not get the data from ARIS on how his students did on their tests. He cares about his students, and is a tenured teacher who has been given satisfactory ratings for many years, until be became a voice of wrong-doing by the principal of his school.

He has not been 'convicted' of incompetence yet, and therefore he should be able to obtain his data, I think.

I heard from the NYC BOE that any teacher suspended from his/her teaching position for any reason, is blocked from seeing his/her performance data or the scores of his/her students on tests from the date of removal from his/her classroom. As you may know, tenured teachers accused of misconduct or incompetency are now being told to stay in the office of the school or district while he/she awaits charges, "secret'' rubber rooms, so that the public doesn't get angry with Mayor Bloomberg for using public money to pay for two teachers for the same job.

When a teacher is re-assigned suddenly because a principal doesn't like/want him/her in that position any longer, someone else has to be placed in the original teacher's position. This is why the public should be outraged at the random and arbitrary removal process, and this is why this process will be the ball and chain of the Bloomberg administration.....and the UFT, namely Mike Mulgrew, as I report on how Bloomberg and Mulgrew know that they are committing public funds to the violation of public policy, Social Services Law  and due process rights of not only UFT members, but parents, children and anyone else who gets in their way. Policy questions are not allowed by the two Mikes.

I know, because I was let go from the UFT because while I was hired to 'assist members', but this was not what I was hired to do at all. My articles on the death to teacher rights as the foundation of PIP+ has enraged the UFT administration, I hear. Sunlight on corruption and fraud works. In a few days I will be profiling some UFT staff members, and you will see that my advocacy is not what 'they' wanted, but 'they' could not get rid of me unless the rubber rooms were 'closed'  (which still has not happened). Smoke and mirrors only need fresh air to get cleaned up.

Well, you know what I mean.

Betsy