Join the GOOGLE +Rubber Room Community

Friday, August 21, 2015

Teacher Jason Duchan Sues LAUSD Over A Fake Facebook Page


The tricks and whims of those people who choose to lie about others is too destructive to allow.
The case of Jason Duchan is an example of this, where a student - who was arrested - destroyed Mr. Duchan's life.

Betsy Combier, Editor
President, ADVOCATZ

Jason Duchan

Post navigation


A teacher at LA Unified filed a lawsuit against the district Wednesday after he was suspended in 2014 over a lewd Facebook page that was created with his name and image on it.
A student was eventually arrested by the LAPD and charged with creating the page, but not before the teacher, Jason Duchan, was suspended from his job as an art instructor at John Francis Polytechnic High School in Sun Valley.
Duchan’s lawsuit, which was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court and seeks unspecified damages, includes allegations of retaliation, harassment, defamation, invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional distress, according to City News Service. Duchan also claims he has suffered panic attacks and other mental health struggles as a result of his suspension and the district’s retaliation.
Duchan spoke to LA School Report in March and he outlined the details of his complaints against the district, which began in November of 2014, when he said he was suddenly suspended without being told why. Duchan said if district officials had asked him about the Facebook page, the matter could have been cleared up in one afternoon without a suspension.
“They should have called me in and showed me the Facebook page,” Duchan said in a phone interview.

Duchan provided screen shots of the Facebook page, which had a total of one friend and three posts that included some mild sexual references. Duchan said the one friend the page had turned out to be the student who was arrested for creating it. Duchan said he had caught the student drawing genitals on a desk — something one of the Facebook posts made a reference to — and reported him to the school’s principal. He said he believes the Facebook page was created as a revenge plot by the student.
The district sent out a letter to all the school’s parents informing them of Duchan’s removal, something that is district policy in the aftermath of the Miramonte Elementary abuse scandal when LA Unified created new procedures to deal with sexual misconduct allegations against district employees.
Duchan said the district eventually offered him his old job back after a few weeks but refused to publicly clear his name. LA School Report confirmed in March that a student had been arrested and charged with creating the page. The student was not publicly identified because he was a minor. Despite the arrest, Jose Cantu, head of the district’s Student Safety Investigative Team, said that an active investigation of Duchan by the district was still underway.
“They were putting me into a hostile environment. They had already sent letters home, and wouldn’t parents be upset to find out a teacher under investigation was back in the classroom?” Duchan said.
Sending him back to the same classroom without clearing his name would invite disrespect and hostility from students, parents and other teachers, put him in physical danger, and “caused plaintiff to develop or exacerbate his mental disability,” the suit alleges, according to City News Service. “Plaintiff suffered a severe panic attack.”
LA Unified communications director Shannon Haber said the district was reviewing the lawsuit and had no comment.
Duchan was given a teaching job at the Cesar E. Chavez Learning Academies, but the lawsuit claims the district continued to retaliate against him through various means, including his sick leave absences being reported as being unexcused, City News Service reported.
navigation


Jessica Millen, Indiana Pre-School Teacher, Writes About Why She Left Teach For America

The scripted talk which Ms. Millen grew to dislike reminds me of the scripts mandated in The Workshop Model. I am not a fan of scripts when children are in the mix because children, and life circumstances, are unpredictable.

Betsy Combier, Editor
President, ADVOCATZ



EDUCATION
The Teach For America Bait and Switch: From 'You’ll Be Making a Difference' to 'You’re Making Excuses'
Idealistic young people are lured by TFA's promises. But what happens once they're placed in classrooms has left some alums questioning the organization's approach.


Editor's note: In the decade and a half of its existence, Teach For America has trained upwards of 50,000 individuals to enter classrooms nationwide and "make a difference" in the lives of children -- usually those living in poverty. But the question of how prepared these individuals are to deal with the realities faced by the children they teach and meet their educational needs has long been in question.
In the following excerpt, taken from an essay in the newly published book,Teach For America Counter-Narratives: Alumni Speak Up and Speak Out,one former TFA corps member shares her account of her time with the organization, alleging that TFA both "preyed on [her] naïveté of the lived realities of urban schooling" and "exploited [her] desire to 'make a difference.'" Her disillusionment with the organization and its educational philosophy grew so deep, in fact, that she resigned after just 6 months.
The Bait
On the urging of a friend and campus recruiter, I applied to join TFA in October of my senior year at the University of Notre Dame. After a multipart interview process, I was accepted into the program’s Greater New Orleans region. Soon afterwards, TFA began to effectively use social networks to bolster my desire to join. Former classmates and undergraduate campus recruiters reached out and stressed how wonderful it was that I had gotten into such a selective organization. My interviewer called to congratulate me on a job well done. After being bombarded with so many congratulations, I couldn’t help but feel proud that I had passed through such a selective hiring process.
The official TFA recruiter on my campus held events for accepted corps members after each hiring deadline, offering free drinks and appetizers at an on-campus restaurant. I found it strange how much money TFA, a nonprofit organization, spent on us. We wore name tags, ate food, and discussed our excitement about the upcoming school year. Our recruiter, like the other TFA corps members and staff who had reached out to me, stressed the “prestige” of the program and how much TFA would help us in the future. He himself was a former TFA corps member who taught for 3 years before joining the recruiting arm of the organization. I found his enthusiasm for TFA contagious as he pointed out TFA’s connections with graduate schools and the numerous opportunities that would be afforded to us post-TFA.
At the time, I was impressed by how many corps members were still involved in public education. According to TFA, more than 775 alumni were in school leadership positions at schools across the country (Teach For America, 2012a). I was glad to hear that TFA wasn’t always just used as a stepping stone to more lucrative careers; information on the TFA website boasted that as of August 2013, 78% of alumni from the Greater New Orleans region were still in education (Teach For America, 2012b). I didn’t bother to look up the evidence behind TFA’s claims. I trusted that the information from this professional organization that seemed to care so much about children was ethically collected, compiled, and reported. I now know that the organization’s assertion that “Teach For America corps members help their students achieve academic gains equal to or larger than teachers from other preparation programs, according to the most recent and rigorous studies on teacher effectiveness” (Teach For America, 2012c) is, at best, extremely misleading. Reviews of the research cited by TFA to back its claims of corps member effectiveness ultimately reveal a less favorable picture; the majority of studies listed by TFA are not peer-reviewed, are problematic, and/or produced mixed results (Kovacs & Slate-Young, 2013; Vasquez Heilig & Jez, 2014).
But taking TFA’s claims of effectiveness at face value, I continued to be wooed by the organization. Besides the free events hosted by the campus recruiter, TFA offered additional financial incentives to make the bait even sweeter. I remember gushing to my parents that I would not only receive a full teacher’s salary, but also get funding to cover the transitional costs of moving and living during the summer before I began teaching. As an indebted college student, it seemed that, on top of using my skills and education to serve in public education, I was making a solid financial decision in joining TFA. Such tantalizing benefits convinced me that not only was I making a strong move for my future, but I would also be “making a difference” in the lives of low-income and minority students. As a young, well-educated, idealistic student, I took the bait—hook, line and sinker.
The “Training”
After a 7-hour drive to TFA’s summer training Institute in Atlanta, I was excited to begin. Although I had been warned that Institute could be an overwhelming experience, the intensity of our schedule was still surprising. Breakfast at 5:30 am, followed by a full day at our school sites, a quick dinner, additional training sessions in the evening, and then trying to complete the next day’s lesson plans was the perfect recipe for sleep deprivation, and left little time to process all this new information.
During this training, the organization’s “you’ll be making a difference” message became more insistent. Each morning, after being bused to our school site in the early morning, we were greeted by our school director. After signing in, we all gathered in our school site’s library to begin our morning with an inspirational video. Over the course of those 5 weeks we watched what seemed to be every single well-known, inspirational education video on YouTube. We saw Kid President’s “Pep Talk to Teachers and Students!”, listened to Taylor Mali tell us “What Teachers Make,” watched Sir Ken Robinson’s animation video “Changing Education Paradigms,” and many, many more.
Their model was working! At the time, I was inspired and eager to be in the classroom. Here I was, part of this great movement that was going to make a difference! So swept up in the staff members’ fervor, I did not stop to think about why we were being shown all these inspirational and emotionally charged messages, or what they would ultimately contribute to my ability to be a competent, caring, and effective teacher.
It didn’t end with just morning bursts of “let’s change the world.” Throughout our training sessions, we were often shown videos of real TFA teachers working in their classrooms. They were always uplifting clips, showing well-behaved students and enthusiastic teachers. We were told they had started just like us at one point in time, although the teachers’ educational backgrounds were never divulged. We were never shown any videos of “bad” teachers or teachers who were struggling, nor did we see how teachers deal with students who are challenging behaviorally, or even defiant. And we were certainly never shown how to handle students’ physical altercations or emotional breakdowns.
I had expected more hands-on training throughout the program. But with only a half hour to an hour and half in front of students each day, I found that we spent more time talking about how we were going to be make a difference rather than learning how to be effective teachers who could ultimately “make a difference.”
In addition to watching inspirational videos, we listened to many TFA staff members give talks about the rewarding nature of teaching. They showed us pictures of themselves and their students and told stories of how they had impacted their students’ lives. These peppy speakers were extremely positive, only occasionally using vague phrasing to describe teaching as “the hardest thing you’ll ever do.” There was no delving into why it was the “hardest thing I would ever do.” nor was there space to ask the speakers to elaborate. While I recognize that it might be difficult to convey the specific challenges that come with the first year of teaching, when such uplifting testimony is paired with only examples of successful TFA teachers, it was easy and safe for me to assume that I would soon begin “making a difference” once I entered the classroom on my own.
The “making a difference” message was not limited to our sessions in classroom management and pedagogy. During our training, we attended two huge pep rallies, one at the beginning and one at the end of Institute. As the Atlanta Institute hosted multiple TFA regions, the auditorium was packed. At the opening rally we were greeted by a huge PowerPoint slide declaring “One Day,” highlighting TFA’s mantra that “One day all children will have access to an excellent education.” The title of the evening’s program was “Your Role in the Movement for Educational Equity.” After listening to speakers thank us for undertaking the journey we were about to begin, I felt excited. It seemed like TFA was an organization that was actually making a tangible difference in communities across the United States.
Before the closing pep rally, each school site’s corps members created a chant to be shared with the full assembly. Most corps members had purchased t-shirts for their school sites, and as we filed in to our assigned school site spaces, the chanting began. Huge groups of matching corps members were on their feet, yelling at the top of their lungs the cheers they had written. Soon, the TFA staff running the rally began to moderate the cheering, shouting each school site’s name and encouraging each group to be louder than the rest. After more peppy speakers, a student brass band played the corps members out, matching the same frenzied enthusiasm that the hundreds of young, soon-to-be teachers had displayed. In retrospect, the techniques used at these rallies made it feel more like a multilevel marketing convention than a gathering of thoughtful educators. It is strange that TFA felt the need to use such manipulative methods of drumming up enthusiasm on a group of well-educated individuals already committed to their organization.
The Switch
After those 5 weeks of training, I was alone in a classroom with 27 eight- and nine-year-olds. I had no idea what to do with the rigorous and inflexible curriculum modalities that dictated what I taught and when. There was nothing in our training that indicated our teaching lives would be so scripted and controlled. Moreover, I was confused by strict administrative policies that were completely developmentally inappropriate; for instance, my third graders were allowed only 20 minutes of recess, once a week. Again, there was no mention of what to do when school-wide policies were completely incongruent with what I knew at this point to be developmentally appropriate practices.
Trying to balance the demands and expectations of both my school and TFA was challenging, especially when both parties were extremely focused on data and standardized testing to the detriment of what my young students needed. This made it difficult for me to realize my vision of schooling. While I understood the necessity of assessment and its usefulness in gauging how much students know, and therefore in future lesson planning, both my school and TFA’s focus on testing overshadowed my legitimate concerns for students’ emotional and social well-being and academic growth beyond what could be measured in omnipresent assessments. I had to prepare my students for weekly and quarterly testing, on top of looming state-mandated tests that would also measure my success as a teacher. The pressure from both the state and district to raise student test scores manifested in my administration’s extreme concern with test scores and maximizing instructional time not only in specific subjects but also to specific isolated skill sets, always to the detriment of exploring other important areas of elementary education, such as exposure to culture, creative and scientific thinking, music, and art.
Armed only with TFA’s strictly behaviorist methods of classroom management, I was unprepared for many of the issues I faced, and my classroom quickly spiraled out of control. From my 5 weeks of training, I was knowledgeable only about behaviorist management methods that focused on giving clear directions, narrating student behavior when they were following directions, and then giving consequences to those students not complying. These management methods were presented as best practices during our training; no other alternatives were mentioned.
After attempting to use TFA’s preferred classroom management system in my own classroom, I realized that the behaviorist theory of management was not working for my students or for me. When I expressed these feelings to TFA staff members, however, my concerns were ignored and brushed aside. In one meeting with my real-time coach from TFA, who had 4 years of teaching experience, I expressed how uncomfortable I was with forcing my students to remain seated all the time. My coach insisted that students learn best when they are seated. He then noticed that, according to the scripted conversation template from TFA, we had gone over the allotted time for this portion of our meeting. Rather than continuing a conversation that could have helped me understand TFA’s position, he decided that following the prescribed conversation model was more important and ended the discussion. Looking back, it is easy to see why I felt that I was not being supported or listened to by TFA staff. Suddenly, I found myself hearing a different story than the one I was told during the application and training process. Now, instead of “making a difference,” I was told I was “making excuses,” by not believing in myself enough and not being the leader of my classroom.
I met with my TFA manager of teacher leadership development (MTLD) every so often for a check-in. It is interesting to note here that corps members are “managed” by TFA, as if they were commodities, rather than “guided” or “mentored.” At one of these meetings, my MTLD told me she wanted me to have lunch with all my students, so that I could work on “building relationships.” I had already begun to have lunch with small groups of students occasionally, but I was having trouble finding the time to eat with students every day, given the other demands on my time as a new educator. When I brought up what I thought were legitimate concerns—the fact that I had only 25 minutes for lunch, which included dropping off/picking up my students at the cafeteria, and that my administration had concerns about me “rewarding” students who often were not following school rules (eating with students was seen as a reward, not simply a good practice to develop relationships)—my TFA manager told me, “I’m hearing a lot of excuses from you.”
In addition to telling me that I was making excuses, my manager also said that I did not believe in myself enough. As a confident young woman who had had a successful experience at Institute, where I was told, “Your students are going to be so lucky to have you” and “You’re doing so well,” I knew I could be an excellent teacher. I believed in my students and their potential, and had a wealth of knowledge about education, children, and learning, largely from my undergraduate studies. My end-of-Institute award was for “believing in your students.” To be told I didn’t believe in my students or myself was insulting, and not the type of support I expected to receive from TFA staff members.
TFA staff members repeatedly told me that I was not being the leader of my classroom, in the sense that I did not have strict control over my students’ bodily movements. Within TFA’s model of behavioral control, I was expected to have all of my students sitting in their seats at all times, and to accomplish this particular aspect of classroom management by consistently giving consequences. On an intellectual level, I recognized that giving consequences was a necessary part of their management system. It was not that I was incapable of giving my students consequences; the problem was that my vision of schooling did not include a classroom where the teacher is all-powerful, all-knowledgeable, and in strict control at all times. What I was beginning to understand was that there was no room in their model for my vision; in fact, my vision was completely contrary to their understanding of how schooling should be conducted and why. TFA’s Teaching as Leadership model is based upon the idea that teachers are responsible for everything that happens inside of the classroom, regardless of whether or not you agree with the techniques and content you are being forced to adopt (Farr, 2010).
My frustration deepened when TFA staff ignored the fact that there were other factors at work in and out of my classroom that affected student behavior and achievement. I was unable to choose curriculum or what was taught when. TFA’s model of behavioral control and TFA staff instructed me to use extremely scripted sets of phrases, limiting my freedom to develop my own style of classroom instruction that suited my unique context. In addition to this, TFA staff ignored the life circumstances of many of my students. I could not change the circumstances that led Jerome to bring a roach-infested notebook to school, or the fact that Peter’s mother told him to “get his lick back,” meaning that if someone hits him, he should hit back. Whenever I tried to bring up the lived realities of my students’ lives and the real challenges they faced, once again, I was told I was “making excuses.” Despite my having personal knowledge of my students and their families, my voice and ultimately my potential to use alternative methods and ideas for creating a more learner-centered, productive environment was repeatedly pushed aside, as it contradicted TFA talking points.
In the end, I decided to leave. I could not, in good conscience, continue to work for an organization whose guiding educational philosophy varied so greatly from my own. It was not a decision I made lightly, leaving the very students I was trying to love and teach. But after I decided to leave, there came a small moment when I knew I had made the right choice. As I was waiting on duty for the last of the buses to arrive, Sarah caught my eye. She and her younger brother were role-playing the teacher-student relationship and the words coming out of Sarah’s mouth broke my heart: “You’re receiving a consequence! You have earned a lunch detention. You get a consequence!” These are the words and phrases she had heard me use repeatedly, again and again, over and over, as I strove to enact my MTLD’s mandate to give lots of consequences. I had spent 3 months with this child and all I taught her about what it means to be a teacher is that a teacher gives consequences. This was devastating to me, and it was then that I realized that the bait and switch was complete.
For more of this essay, and many other perspectives on the Teach For America experience, you can purchase the complete book of essays here.
Jessica Millen graduated from the University of Notre Dame in 2013, majoring in sociology with a minor in education, schooling, and society. She was a 2013 Teach For America (TFA) corps member in New Orleans, where she taught third grade. She currently works as a preschool teacher in South Bend, Indiana.

Thursday, August 20, 2015

SB 725 Passes In The California Assembly Appropriations Committee Allowing 5,000 High School Seniors To Graduate

The abrupt cancellation of the CAHSEE in July shows what little support students have within the California Education Department.


Thanks, California Assembly for making a ridiculous situation right!

Betsy Combier
Add caption

Assembly panel approves bill to exempt students missing key test


The California Assembly Appropriations Committee yesterday approved a bill that eliminates a graduation requirement that has prevented as many as 5,000 high school seniors from graduating through no fault of their own.
SB 725 will eliminate the requirement that class of 2015 seniors pass the California High School Exit Exam, known as the CAHSEE.
The state abruptly cancelled the final administration of the exam in July, leaving the students, including 492 in LA Unified, unable to graduate despite having completed all the necessary coursework.
Many of the students had been accepted into college but cannot start fall classes without a diploma
The original version of State Bill 725 had been focused on visual and performing arts content standards. However given the crisis for the students, it was gutted and amended by Sen. Loni Hancock, an Oakland Democrat, who authored it.
The new language exempts the students from the requirement to pass the exam.
Speed was of the essence, said Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins, Democrat from San Diego. “We need to help as quickly as possible these students who were innocent victims of a bureaucratic snafu,” she said.
The legislation is scheduled to be voted on by the full Assembly today and immediately sent to the Senate, Atkins said.
There has been no public opposition to the bill, which is expected to pass the Senate and reach Gov. Jerry Brown as early as Monday.
“The cancelled exit exam won’t be an obstacle blocking any student’s path in 2015,” said Atkins.

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

August 20 3020-a for Jonathan Hinesley Has Been Cancelled

The August 20, 2015 3020-a Arbitration before Arbitrator Elliott Shaller has been cancelled.

Johnathan Hinesley is a teacher and Chapter Leader who wants the public to watch his 3020-a arbitration.

He asked for an open and public hearing.

His hearing begins August 19 at 10:00AM. His attorney is NYSUT attorney Wendy Star, and his arbitrator is Elliott Shaller.

Location:
100 Gold Street, 3rd floor room 3400. Please plan to arrive early at 100 Gold, because you have to go through security and be in the waiting room no later than 9:45 so that chairs can be placed into the hearing room for the public.

Be mindful that during the hearing you cannot speak, whisper or have any contact with Johnathan or anyone at the table. You can write notes. Do not tape.

Sunday, August 16, 2015

UFT President Says That the Just-Released Test Scores Are Good News

My comment:

Who wrote this for him?
Michael Mulgrew

The press office of the UFT spews out nonsense and gets a lot of money to do it. They of course ignore the huge amount of scrubbing in New York City and the current grade-fixing/"credit recovery" scandal going on, as well as the on-going waterfall of UFT members brought to 3020-a and given no defense by their NYSUT attorneys. Teachers, and ATRs, are front-line. They see and are given the directive to graduate all the students, no matter what. If they stand up to these directives, they are re-assigned, sent to 3020-a. NYSUT continues to bring termination decisions from the panel of arbitrators, based upon the omission of objective data.

I see very often violations of the UFT Collective Bargaining Agreement, and ADVOCATZ fights these violations and wins.

Where is the UFT and why didn't someone over there stop the charges from getting to arbitration in the first place?

Betsy Combier

OPINION: INCREMENTAL TEST SCORE GAINS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE REAL

by Michael Mulgrew
LINK
The incremental gains New York City recently scored on statewide reading and math tests are good news for our schools and children – and a much more positive and credible development than the rapid, but ultimately meaningless, increases in scores touted by Michael Bloomberg during his tenure as mayor.
During the Bloomberg years, state and city test scores exploded, to the point that in 2009 nearly 70 percent of city elementary and middle school students were supposedly proficient in reading, and more than 80 percent were proficient in math – results that Bloomberg and his allies in the “school reform” gang could not stop boasting about.
The UFT and experts warned that these results were smoke and mirrors, and by 2013 those numbers had fallen dramatically – to 26 percent proficiency in reading and 30 percent proficiency in math, thanks to new tests based on the Common Core learning standards, and to the state’s overtly political decision to set the new passing mark very high.
It generally takes students and teachers some time to adapt to new curricula and test approaches, and it has been a slow road back. The 26 percent in reading proficiency in 2013 grew to 28 percent last year and to more than 30 percent in the most recent results. Math proficiency is now up to more than 35 percent. 
An indication of real progress is the fact that the rate of increase for city reading scores this year (1.9 percentage points) was more than twice that of the state’s (0.7 percentage points). Overall, city reading scores are now close to the same level as the state’s, which has traditionally outscored the city by significant amounts in this area.
Schools set aside for special interventions also appear to show real progress. More than half the schools that have been in the UFT’s Community Schools program for more than two years showed increases in reading scores, several of them well above the average citywide increase. 
On average, schools in the PROSE program, which provides schools with wide flexibility to change their instruction based on input from teachers, showed significant reading gains – up 4.8 percentage points (versus 1.9 percentage points citywide).
Despite all the clamor from “reformers” about charter schools, charter reading gains in 2015 (1.3 percentage points) were under the average gain for public schools, and, as usual, overall city charter reading scores remain below the average for public schools (with public schools’ reading proficiency average at 30.4 percent versus the charter school average of 29.3 percent).
The racial achievement gap – the difference in performance between whites/Asian students and black/Hispanic students – is a stubborn and troubling phenomenon, and a feature of local, state and national standardized tests. 
The new scores did not show any major improvement in this category, though “reformers” – who were largely silent when Bloomberg and then-Schools Chancellor Joel Klein were making transparently fictitious claims about progress in this area – seem to have adopted it as a key concern since Bloomberg’s departure.
Unfortunately, a concentration on test scores obscures some important questions about the usefulness of standardized tests as a measure of educational quality. But, to the extent they do reflect reality, their incremental increases are more likely to reflect real progress based on the hard work of teachers and their students.
 
Michael Mulgrew is president of the United Federation of Teachers

Saturday, August 15, 2015

Lenny Isenberg: Will Truth Finally Prevail in Los Angeles About Teacher Jails and the Rubber Room Process?

Lenny Isenberg is a teacher advocate in Los Angeles

Listen - he has important statements to make.

Betsy Combier



ARE WE FINALLY GETTING CLOSER TO LAUSD'S JUDGMENT DAY?
LINK
David Holmquist

Ramon Cortines

 
On Thursday August 13, 2015 the law firm of Geragos & Geragos filed a detailed 91 page cause of action on behalf of nationally acclaimed Hobart Elementary school teacher Rafe Esquith against the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD). Esquith Complaint (Conformed).pdf . More specifically, and in addition to suing LAUSD as a legal entity, the lawsuit also names as individual defendants Superintendent Ramon C. Cortines, Chief Legal Officer David R. Holmquist, and 50 John Does to be subsequently named after they are identified through the discovery process- a process now open to the plaintiffs to finally compell LAUSD administrators and others to tell the truth or face serious and costly- both financial and personal- legal consequencess for failing to do so.
In filing this lawsuit, the Geragos firm is in for a pleasant surprise, since it will soon find as the case unfolds that LAUSD and its corrupt and long bullying administration have literally made no attempt to cover up any of their reprehensible behavior toward Esquith or any of its other unjustly targeted employees. And that literally nobody in LAUSD administration has every had any good faith belief that the vast majority of teachers they have targeted have done anything wrong. Rather, to quote Marlon Brando's Vito Coreleone in The Godfather, what will become perfectly clear is that, "It's just business."
As the trial progresses and LAUSD's usual stall tactics- that have served them so well against defenseless teachers abandon by their union United Teachers of Los Angeles (UTLA)- fail against a Geragos lawfirm with the bank to go against them toe to toe for the long run, what will become abundantly clear in this first neutral forum to dispassionately exam LAUSD's claims against its senior teaching staff is that the charges in the vast majority of cases are completely fabricated and based exclusively on the totally illegal motive of targeting teachers at the top of the salary scale, and/or about to vest in expensive lifetime health benefits, and/or disabled, and/or teachers like Esquith who stood up against ill-conceived and often downright illegal programs.
Simply stated, LAUSD's witch hunt has been about money and has had nothing to do with "child safety" as claimed by both Superintendent Cortines and his predecessor and now Broad Foundation employee John Deasey. And I can not help but wondering if John Deasey might also be one of the to be named John Does 1-50 in this lawsuit.
Furthermore, as more evidence is gathered in the Esquith case, a class action suit is likely to be filed or at the very least many more lawsuits like Esquith's, since a pattern and practice of illegal behavior will clearly emerge. What it will shows is literally thousands of other certificated or classified staff that bullying LAUSD administrators and their coerced subordinates either forced into early retirement or brought up on knowingly false charges. Where this case is likely to break wide open is when some of the coerced administrators, who at the behest or threat of their superiors finally speak up to save themselves about knowingly and with malice aforethought going after completely innocent teachers. Some candidates that the Geragos firm might choose take depositions from are those presently being fired by Superintendent Cortines.
Already in the pleading filed by Geragos & Geragos on behalf of Rafe Esquith, clearly illegal activity has been alleged that literally thousands of targeted teachers can substantiate and which LAUSD has no evidence to counter. In fact, the evidence clearly and convincingly substantiates what the Esquith lawsuit states:
1. No exculpatory evidence of teacher innocence or good behavior was allowed to remain in the teacher's file in a one-sided process only designed to ultimately get rid of the teacher;
2. Teachers were systematically submitted to "psychological torture" in longterm "teacher jail" incarceration that not only had no reason to exist in a purposefully protracted "investigation process," which was ultimately dispensed with even before LAUSD decided to resurrect it against Rafe Esquith;
3. In complete derogation of the legal standard establish in the tragic Mc Martin Preschool case, where all teachers and administrators were ultmately found to be completely innocent of any wrongdoing, rules were established as to what permission needed to be obtained from parents prior to student questioning, who was qualified to question impressionable students, and neutrality of questions to not lead highly impressionable youth into a preconceived result. In the Esquith case and in literally thousands like it, LAUSD administrators purposefully chose to ignore these legal standards in interrogating students without parents permission, where questions suggested the predetermined answers sought by people- principals- who were completely unqualified to question the students that they improperly and illegally manipulated.

4. And in typical bully behavior, any attempt by Esquith or other targeted teachers to defend themselves against clearly fabricated and disproven charges only seems to inspire LAUSD in a long established and verifiable practice to just pile on more and more serious charges that inexplicably were never brought until the teacher tried to defend themselves.

But there might just be a silver lining to the regrettable situation in which LAUSD now finds itself. When one looks at the likely astronomical damages in the billions that LAUSD faces in the Esquith case and the thousands likely to follow, maybe LAUSD can take a page from the City of Detroit bankruptcy in making lemonade out of its lemons. If LAUSD is ultimately forced into bankruptcy, they might just get out of ALL their contractual liability for wages, benefits, and retirement programs, which after all seems to have been the reason they started the witch hunt against senior certificated and classified employees in the first place back in 2006.
If you or someone you know has been targeted and are in the process of being dismissed and need legal defense, get in touch: